County Commissioner Regular Meeting
Live stream not working in Chrome or Edge?
Troubleshooting steps
In your browser: open Menu (three dots) → Settings → System → turn off “Use graphics acceleration when available.” Then restart the browser.
Bookmark list
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Loading...
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Loading...
Transcript
| All right, we'll go ahead and now convene with the regularly scheduled Board of County Commissioners meeting. It is again April | 00:00:01 | |
| 22nd, 2024. Five out of five commissioners are here and present. Minutes. Approval of minutes, April 8th, 2024, second. Motion by | 00:00:09 | |
| Commissioner Buck for approval of the minutes, second by Commissioner James. Further discussion. | 00:00:17 | |
| Done. All in favor signify by saying aye aye, all opposed, same sign and minutes approves 50 read ordinance by audio. Read code | 00:00:25 | |
| ordinance 2024-04 by audio. Mr. Chair, move to read code ordinance 2024-04 by audio. Got a motion by Commissioner James to read | 00:00:33 | |
| code ordinance 2024-04 by audio. Second by Commissioner Freeman. Further discussion hearing none All in favor signify by saying | 00:00:40 | |
| aye aye, all opposed, same sign. | 00:00:48 | |
| And that rose passes 5 to 0 amendments to the agenda. Any amendments to today's agenda, Mr. Chairman, moved to a resolution to | 00:00:55 | |
| fully fund the Sheriff's Office. | 00:01:01 | |
| I'm going to pass that out for us, please. | 00:01:08 | |
| Mr. Chair, I will second that motion only as a way to show support, that I support the overall intent of fully funding the | 00:01:12 | |
| sheriff's staffing proposals that we previously reviewed, but as you know, resolution is the incorrect method for funding the | 00:01:18 | |
| budgetary changes. | 00:01:24 | |
| So I am scheduling an ordinance reading for Wednesday meeting to properly take action for funding of the Sheriff's Office needs | 00:01:31 | |
| those changes to be effective on July 1st 2024 if approved by a 2/3 majority. All right there's a motion on the floor for | 00:01:38 | |
| resolution expression of support for fully funding Will County Sheriff's Office immediately for the sheriff's request from | 00:01:46 | |
| commissioner saying second by Commissioner Buck further discussion. | 00:01:54 | |
| Mr. Chair, so it an ordinance is a proper document because it shows our intent, because we've had other departments come forward | 00:02:01 | |
| and ask for funding. I want to make sure that we prioritize what we need to be doing first, which is the role of county | 00:02:08 | |
| government, the primary role of county government. Obviously there's a couple things we need to do first. One is. | 00:02:15 | |
| Law enforcement, that's one of the most important things we can do. If we were gonna do a night watchman, government, law | 00:02:22 | |
| enforcement, this would be the number one priority. So this puts our our priorities out there. I would urge a yes vote on this | 00:02:28 | |
| because we've had funding come in. We need to do what the sheriff has asked us to do and fully fund his office. And we don't need | 00:02:34 | |
| to do that by ordinance. We can just put funding into the budget first. | 00:02:41 | |
| Mr. James, thank you. Mr. Chair, we all took a oath to uphold the uphold the charter and the ordinance of this county in the | 00:02:48 | |
| charter section 1423. It indicates that we will amend and pass a budget by ordinance, a resolution. While well-intentioned and I | 00:02:56 | |
| certainly agree with the sentiment, I'm on record as wanting to give Share Freedom the funds he needs to be a law enforcement | 00:03:03 | |
| agency of choice in the state of Colorado. I respect sentiment I do not respect. | 00:03:11 | |
| It Simply put it out of order. | 00:03:20 | |
| Ordinance is the proper way to amend the agenda and I believe that we should discuss that as we move forward in the next few days. | 00:03:21 | |
| So therefore, I will be a no on what I believe to be an improper mechanism of resolution. | 00:03:27 | |
| Any other discussion, Mr. Freeman? We've all said that. In fact, we've had the conversation with all our staff looking into it. We | 00:03:34 | |
| we've actually already agreed to fund the part of part of the commissioner, I mean the Sheriff Range's request for his deputized | 00:03:41 | |
| officer and we've agreed to look into the 2025 budget on the rest. I'm more than happy to move that up. | 00:03:49 | |
| In a process if that's what we need to do, but it absolutely needs to be in an ordinance, not a resolution. I agree it's this is | 00:03:57 | |
| an improper resolution and so I will also be a no longer resolution. | 00:04:02 | |
| Mr. Chair, just a second, Miss, saying I'm gonna go ahead and make comment. | 00:04:07 | |
| I too, fully support law enforcement, the intent that we have let the sheriff know through conversations with him and his staff. | 00:04:13 | |
| That's why we so briefly move forward on his deputized staff and we didn't let him know the intent to get everybody else taken | 00:04:22 | |
| care of as well. I'm happy to. | 00:04:27 | |
| Prioritize that further and get that speed up, but I agree this resolution would be the improper vehicle for that. It would need | 00:04:33 | |
| to come the term of an ordinance. But so that's why I'll probably be at no on this motion for the amendment to the agenda missing | 00:04:40 | |
| have further comment. Yes, I'm so glad this conversation initiated by a resolution. This discussion prompted funding for the | 00:04:46 | |
| sheriff. However that mechanism is. | 00:04:53 | |
| All right, all right. Any other comment? | 00:05:01 | |
| Hearing none, all those in favor of amending the agenda to add the resolution as presented by Miss saying we'll have a roll call. | 00:05:06 | |
| Vote please. | 00:05:12 | |
| Mike Freeman, No. Scott Dream? No. Lori saying Perry back? Kevin Ross? No. Let the record reflect that that amendment to the | 00:05:19 | |
| agenda fails on A32 vote. | 00:05:25 | |
| With the nails coming from Freeman, James and Ross, any other women's Today's agenda? | 00:05:32 | |
| Hearing that approval of consent agenda Move to approve second a motion from Commissioner Freeman for approval consent agenda | 00:05:39 | |
| second from Commissioner James. Any further discussion? | 00:05:45 | |
| Hearing none all in favor signify by saying aye aye. All opposed. Same sign and consent. Agenda passes 5 to 0. | 00:05:51 | |
| Presentations. | 00:06:00 | |
| Number one, recognition of services workforce development or Jill Eaton still here today. | 00:06:03 | |
| Jill. | 00:06:50 | |
| Item number two, recognition of Services Planning Commission and Board of Adjustments for Shannon Morgan. Is she here today? | 00:06:53 | |
| All right, she gets 2. She's an overachiever. | 00:07:01 | |
| The second one is for Shannon. | 00:07:34 | |
| That concludes presentations on 2 wards. Item number one. General warrants April 19th, 2024. Move to approve second motion from | 00:08:08 | |
| Commissioner James for approval of General Warren, second by Commissioner Buck. Further discussion hearing none. All those in | 00:08:14 | |
| favor signify by saying aye aye. | 00:08:21 | |
| All of pose same sign. General warrants passes 5 to 0. Item number two, Commissioner Warren's Kevin D Ross, April 19th, 2024. | 00:08:27 | |
| Motion by Commissioner Buck for approval, second by Commissioner James. Roll call vote, please. | 00:08:35 | |
| Mike Freeman, Yes. Scott James, Yes. What are you saying? | 00:08:43 | |
| Yes, payback. | 00:08:48 | |
| Let the record reflect that passes 4 to 0, with Commissioner Ross recusing. | 00:08:53 | |
| Bids item number one present their B 24,065 chase building 822 7th St. Greeley Chili Replacement Facilities department Good | 00:08:59 | |
| morning Toby. Good morning Toby Taylor with purchasing. 4 vendors have replied to the solicitation. The facilities department are | 00:09:06 | |
| reviewing those replies and anticipates bringing an approval recommendation to the board on May 5th, 2024. Anybody have any | 00:09:13 | |
| questions for Toby regarding that bin? | 00:09:20 | |
| So, right, that was pretty easy this morning. Thank you, Toby. | 00:09:29 | |
| New business. | 00:09:35 | |
| Item number one, consider contract ID 8007 amendment #2 to professional services agreement for inmate medical services emergency | 00:09:37 | |
| bid number B 23,144 and authorized chair to sign well path, LLC Good morning Sonia, good morning for the commissioners for the | 00:09:45 | |
| records on your program, World County Sheriff's Office Finance manager. I'm here this morning with Lieutenant me presenting | 00:09:53 | |
| contract 8007, the Second Amendment to well passed contract for inmate medical services. | 00:10:02 | |
| And request the shares approval and signature. The Second Amendment to this contract includes an increase of $224,559.65 to the | 00:10:10 | |
| original contract covering additional math services for the inmates. | 00:10:20 | |
| The original contract covers up to 50 inmates with assisted treatment. From that this number has been exceeded and averages | 00:10:30 | |
| currently about 80. The increase in price will cover up to 150 inmates. Format services A portion of this map services cost will | 00:10:38 | |
| be offset with Wealth County Regional Opioid Council funds. The County Attorney's Office has reviewed and approved the language of | 00:10:45 | |
| the amendment. | 00:10:53 | |
| Signed by all 5 Commissioners on the 1st of April 2024. | 00:11:02 | |
| All right, do you have anything to add? No, I don't, Sir. All right, you need to approve second motion by Commissioner Freeman for | 00:11:08 | |
| approval of contract ID 8007 Second by Commissioner Buck. Further discussion. | 00:11:15 | |
| All right, hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye aye. All opposed same sign and contract ID 8007 passes 5 to 0. | 00:11:22 | |
| Thank you guys very much. Have a good day. | 00:11:26 | |
| Item number two, consider temporary closure of County Road 4 between county Roads 41 and 45. Good morning, Good morning. | 00:11:33 | |
| Commissioners. Kevin Hettinger, Will County Public Works. Oak County Public Works is requesting permission to close County Road 4 | 00:11:39 | |
| between County Road 41 and 45. | 00:11:45 | |
| From April 29th through June 6th for a bridge redeck the detours, all paved roads and message boards will be put in place as soon | 00:11:51 | |
| as it is approved. Any questions for Kevin? | 00:11:58 | |
| Move to prove the temporary closure. Second, motion by Commissioner James for approval of temporary closure County Road 4 between | 00:12:06 | |
| county Roads 41 and 45. Second by Commissioner Buck, further discussion hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying aye, | 00:12:12 | |
| aye, all opposed. Same sign. And that temporary closure passes 5 to 0 Thanksgiving. Thank you. | 00:12:18 | |
| Item number three, consider appointment to Workforce Development Board. | 00:12:25 | |
| I move to approve Megan Green to the Workforce Development Board. Second, motion by Commissioner Freeman to approve Megan Green to | 00:12:30 | |
| the Workforce Development Board. Second by Commissioner James, further discussion. | 00:12:36 | |
| Hearing none all in favor signify by saying aye aye all opposed same sign and Megan Green is approved 5 to 0 for the Workforce | 00:12:42 | |
| Development Board Item number 4 Second reading of Code Ordinance 2024-01 in the matter of repealing and reenacting with amendments | 00:12:50 | |
| Chapter Eight, Public Works of the well County Code Appendix 8 through OA functional classification map. This is rescheduled from | 00:12:58 | |
| March 13th, 2024. Move to read by title only second. | 00:13:05 | |
| Commissioner James by to read by title only, second by Commissioner Freeman. All in favor signify by saying aye aye. All opposed | 00:13:14 | |
| same sign and read by title only. Does approve 5 to 0. | 00:13:20 | |
| 24-01 in the matter of repealing and reenacting with amendments, Chapter Eight, Public Works of the Law, Attorney Code, Appendix | 00:13:28 | |
| 8, O Functional classification map. | 00:13:34 | |
| All right, Evan. Good morning, Good morning, Commissioners. Evan Pinkham with the Department of Planning Services. Here we are on | 00:13:41 | |
| second reading of this item. This is the functional classification map. | 00:13:47 | |
| Which is used as the official roadway plan, roadway plan for Weld County and is referred to in the not only the code, but in our | 00:13:53 | |
| Weld County transportation plan, our 2045 plan as you can see on the screen there. So looking at roadway classification | 00:14:01 | |
| definitions that are within this functional classification map, we basically have 3 classifications for roadways. We have arterial | 00:14:08 | |
| roadways. | 00:14:16 | |
| Collector roadways and local roadways. These arterial roadways are, as you can imagine, long and distance, have high continuity, | 00:14:24 | |
| They serve large population centers and they are typically higher volumes of traffic on these roadways. | 00:14:35 | |
| And we we typically do not have these roadways more than a closer than one mile apart collector roadways. These are shorter and | 00:14:47 | |
| distance typically than arterial roadways. They serve less densely populated areas and typically traffic volumes on, on these are | 00:14:54 | |
| less than arterial roadways but higher than local roadways. | 00:15:02 | |
| Local roadways are short to moderate and distance. Typically they serve low, low population density and have low traffic volume on | 00:15:10 | |
| those roadways. So basically when we're looking at these classifications, what it really comes down to is the type of Rd. the type | 00:15:18 | |
| of right of way that we're looking at, at, at these different classifications. So as you can see for local roadways, we just have | 00:15:25 | |
| that 60 feet of right of way on the on the road. | 00:15:33 | |
| The with collector designation, we are looking at an additional 10 feet of future right of way on either side of that 60 foot | 00:15:41 | |
| right of way and that would be for a total of 80 feet of future right of way on on the road that we would have in those locations. | 00:15:50 | |
| For arterial roadways, the right of ways considerably higher with 140 feet of total future right of way, but existing right of way | 00:15:59 | |
| would typically still be like 60 feet of right of way that we use to maintain the roadway. Setbacks for structures are measured | 00:16:06 | |
| from these distances on a functional classification map based on these classifications and typically setbacks are 20 feet from the | 00:16:13 | |
| future right away. | 00:16:20 | |
| For structures. | 00:16:28 | |
| So looking at our code Section 88-10, we're looking at the functional classification map and our transportation plan. And in that | 00:16:31 | |
| portion of the code, it's recommended that we update our functional classification map every two years. And the last time that we | 00:16:41 | |
| updated this map was actually in 2020, so a little bit overdue. So we see these changes that we're looking at approach looking to. | 00:16:50 | |
| Consider here important to ensuring that we're we're keeping this document up to date. | 00:17:00 | |
| So getting into the updates that we're looking at on our 2024 functional classification map, here we are looking at first. | 00:17:09 | |
| And upgrade, you know, would be a future realignment of World Canada 13 and this is for a future arterial roadway. You can see it | 00:17:20 | |
| in the dotted red outlined by yellow there on the screen. | 00:17:27 | |
| But essentially this is a project just northwest of Johnstown that we're looking at constructing in the next couple of years, next | 00:17:35 | |
| few years. We're partnering on this project with Laramie County and Johnstown and this would realign Wealth County Road 13. | 00:17:42 | |
| At 12:50 and shift the alignment to basically the western alignment that was paved within the last few years. So definitely needed | 00:17:50 | |
| improvement and we're looking to update our maps to show this future improvement. And then once the improvements completed, we | 00:17:57 | |
| would it would just be an arterial roadway in that location then. | 00:18:05 | |
| So then moving along, the next upgrade we're looking at to the map would be the Web County Way. This is just east of our location. | 00:18:14 | |
| Now this is a roadway that was constructed in the last few years and serves quite a bit of traffic on that roadway. We just | 00:18:22 | |
| haven't had a chance yet to upgrade this because of the last update was in 2020 and this was constructed since that time. So we're | 00:18:29 | |
| looking to just upgrade this from local to collector. | 00:18:37 | |
| In this location and this would be between Hwy. 85 and O street there. | 00:18:44 | |
| On the world Kenny way. | 00:18:51 | |
| So they're moving along. The next upgrade we're looking at here is on Kenya Road seven. This would just be basically east of | 00:18:53 | |
| Longmont. | 00:18:57 | |
| Northwest of Firestone or West of Firestone and South of Meade. This is a 12/7 at just north of Weld County Road 26. | 00:19:03 | |
| So it's currently a collector roadway and we're looking to upgrade this to an arterial roadway. This would match the | 00:19:15 | |
| classification of Web County Road 7 all along the way. And it would, as these municipalities annex, it would benefit them to have | 00:19:23 | |
| this have us showing this larger classification in this location. | 00:19:30 | |
| So then moving along, the next one we're looking at here is World County Road 90. This would be between Web Kenya 13 and Web Kenya | 00:19:40 | |
| 29. | 00:19:44 | |
| You're looking at upgrading from a local roadway to a collector roadway. There's a portion that was annexed by 7th in the middle | 00:19:50 | |
| you'll see there and they maintain that roadway. So that's why there's a part missing there and on the screen. But looking at this | 00:19:58 | |
| upgrade because this is a key connection between the town of Pierce and Lynnwood County over to Wellington and Fort Fort Collins | 00:20:06 | |
| as well. So again, looking at upgrading from local to collector on this road. | 00:20:14 | |
| Next we have an upgrade of Web camera 21 from local to collector. This would be between Hwy. 66 and just South of Canada 34. So | 00:20:24 | |
| this oddly enough was a section of roadway that was local roadway, but with the classification of roadways surrounding it just | 00:20:34 | |
| makes a lot more sense having it as a collector roadway. It functions as a collector roadway and just. | 00:20:44 | |
| Identifying it as such in this location. | 00:20:55 | |
| Is what we're we're looking at here so. | 00:21:00 | |
| That runs up the updates that we're looking at this round of functional classification updates. And this is just an image of the | 00:21:03 | |
| PDF of the updated document that we're looking to adopt through this process. And then next we have just that adoption timeline | 00:21:13 | |
| and here we are in the second reading. Third reading would be May 13th, 2024 and. | 00:21:23 | |
| Yeah, that would be all that I have for my presentation, but I'd be happy to answer any questions. Excellent. Thank you. Have any | 00:21:33 | |
| questions for Evan? | 00:21:37 | |
| All right, I just want to make a comment. Thanks for all your hard work. Again, thank you for the town hall bringing in the | 00:21:43 | |
| residents so that we could get their input on this and and get to a better map for what we need right now. So I appreciate that. | 00:21:49 | |
| And with that, I would entertain a motion. Mr. Mayor, I'm going to be a no vote for today. I received some complaints from some | 00:21:54 | |
| constituents about maybe a private property takings with the law. | 00:22:00 | |
| So I'm gonna look into that. Alright, roll call. I need a motion first. | 00:22:06 | |
| Oh, yeah. Thank you very much. This is a public hearing. Thank you, Mr. James. | 00:22:12 | |
| If anybody from the public wishes to come forth, express any concerns or comments that they'd like to share with us regarding this | 00:22:17 | |
| functional classification map and this code ordinance, please come forward to the podium, state your name, your address, and keep | 00:22:22 | |
| your comments to 3 minutes, please. | 00:22:27 | |
| Anybody wish to make any comments on this today? | 00:22:33 | |
| All right, seeing none, I'll go ahead and close public comment. Again, thank you, Mr. James. And with that and I'll now entertain | 00:22:37 | |
| a motion. | 00:22:40 | |
| Move to approve second motion from Commissioner Freeman for approval of Code Ordinance 2024, Dash 01 second by Commissioner James. | 00:22:45 | |
| Further discussion. | 00:22:50 | |
| Hearing none. Roll call. Vote please. | 00:22:56 | |
| Mike Freeman, yes. Scott Kane, yes. What are you saying? No payback. Kevin Ross, yes, let the record reflect Code Ordinance | 00:22:59 | |
| 2024-01 passes on second reading 4 to one with commissioner saying being Lenovo. That concludes new business. Thank you, Evan. | 00:23:07 | |
| Thank you. Brings us to planning item number one, first reading of code Ordinance 2024-04 in the matter of repealing and | 00:23:15 | |
| reenacting with amendments Chapter 23, zoning of the World County Code. | 00:23:22 | |
| Accessory dwelling units in R1 revisions. | 00:23:31 | |
| All right, guys. | 00:23:37 | |
| Yours. | 00:23:39 | |
| All right. Good morning, Commissioners, Maximated department planning services. | 00:23:42 | |
| In front of you today is Ordinance 20/24/04. The purpose of this audience is revised several sections of Chapter 23 of the Well | 00:23:46 | |
| County Code. Certain changes in minor cleanup items. Other changes bringing out Well County Code and compliance with House Bill | 00:23:52 | |
| 24-1007 which is related to residential occupancy limits in House Bill 24-1152 related to accessory dwelling units and the | 00:23:59 | |
| proposed changes will assist with streamlining processes and helping further refine what could be considered in urban, rural | 00:24:05 | |
| transitional zone. | 00:24:11 | |
| Staff has not received any correspondence from general public or other municipalities following Planning Commission. | 00:24:48 | |
| The ordinance will do the following changes to the definitions so they remove the definition on zero quarters. These will fall | 00:24:56 | |
| under accessory dwelling units. Provide the definition of dwelling duplex and dwelling multifamily to allow these dwellings to be | 00:25:02 | |
| pre manufactured in a factory same as a single family and remove the limit of occupied by one living unit. In other words allowing | 00:25:08 | |
| these dwellings to be manufactured homes. Revise the definition of doing single family to simply a building containing 1 dwelling | 00:25:14 | |
| unit. | 00:25:20 | |
| I'm going to lose the definition of family unit to match House Bill 24-1152. Remove the definitions of family foster care home and | 00:25:27 | |
| living unit needs with the limit on the number of unrelated residents and a dwelling unit which will be in compliance with House | 00:25:33 | |
| Bill 24 Dash 01107. | 00:25:40 | |
| Updates Updates to definition on commercial junkyard to clarify the screening requirement. Updates the definition of screening to | 00:25:50 | |
| remove this sentence above about pre approval of a screening plan by the planning department prior to installation. Updates to the | 00:25:55 | |
| definitions will assist being in line with certain house bills and will simplify code and in turn make it easier to understand for | 00:26:00 | |
| the public and staff. | 00:26:06 | |
| Next slides breakdown these own districts and the changes happening and each staff is proposing following changes to the | 00:26:12 | |
| agricultural zone district which is replaced auxiliary quarters and second single family drawings with accessory drawing units AD | 00:26:19 | |
| use update non commercial junk car provisions which removes requirement for pre approval of screening. | 00:26:25 | |
| Staffs proposing from chances of state zoning district which is to allow the ability to have one accessory dwelling unit just to | 00:26:33 | |
| know currently the state zone allows us to recorders, so this will allow essentially a second home as well. | 00:26:39 | |
| Staff proposing the following changes to the residential zone Districts General cleanup in Section 23-3-100. Allowing one car | 00:26:48 | |
| container per lot on online properties as long as they're screened. Allowing property owners to store belongings outdoors, not | 00:26:53 | |
| commercial junk yards on R1 properties as long as they're screened. | 00:26:59 | |
| Allowing the ability to have one accessory doing it on R1R2R5 properties as long as they're accessory to single family home. | 00:27:06 | |
| Allowing the ability to apply for use by special review permit for more than the number of in units allowed in section 23-3160H1, | 00:27:15 | |
| which does not apply to household pets. | 00:27:20 | |
| Here's just a visual reminder of the aliens are currently allowed in Arlington District. So does code change still allows you to | 00:27:26 | |
| have two in units per lot, but with the ability to apply for USR? | 00:27:31 | |
| To have more. | 00:27:37 | |
| Going back to the R1 residential zone district uses, we wanted to show the breakdown of the current uses, accessory uses and used | 00:27:40 | |
| by special review uses. | 00:27:45 | |
| So as you can see this is a current usage and revisions being requested for this. | 00:27:50 | |
| Here's the current accessory uses and the proposed accessory uses which is the one car container, the building for a non | 00:27:56 | |
| commercial junkyard and accessory dawn unit. Just comparing the two. | 00:28:01 | |
| Then here is the existing newspaper special review permit uses and then the addition of the more than allowed animal units. | 00:28:08 | |
| So as Richard produced in the new term accessory drawing unit, Adu would replace like another quarters and second single family | 00:28:18 | |
| homes. This new term in use will not require zoning permit or USR, but would be considered use by right with certain standards and | 00:28:25 | |
| would only require a building permit in the agricultural estate R1R2 and R5 zoom districts. This suggested change in lines with | 00:28:31 | |
| House Bill 24-1152. And to clarify, House Bill 24 Dash 1152 does not allow the ability to deny Adus and zones that allow single | 00:28:37 | |
| family dwellings. | 00:28:44 | |
| But you still must meet certain criteria and standards. | 00:28:50 | |
| More information regarding it on our web page. More information regarding those notices of the ordinance could be found at the | 00:30:04 | |
| Legal and Public Notice webpage. And then of course, you can watch these hearings for the ordinances by going to the BOCC web | 00:30:08 | |
| page. | 00:30:12 | |
| Again, the purpose of this ordinance is the following reasons, which is revised several sections of Chapter 23 of the World County | 00:30:19 | |
| Code. Certain changes and minor cleanup bring codes into compliance with House Bill 24-1007 and House Bill 24-1152, help further | 00:30:27 | |
| refine or define the Urban Rural Transition Zone and assist and streamline certain processes. | 00:30:34 | |
| Planning Commission recommended that the Board of County Commissioner Commissioners approve Ordinance 2024 of four. In addition to | 00:30:44 | |
| this recommendation recommendation, staff is recommending a cleanup item to help clarify the septic requirements for an accessory | 00:30:50 | |
| going unit, which is refining where septic permits allowed to serve a dwelling. A new septic permit may be required for an Adu. | 00:30:56 | |
| This change has been reflected in the draft ordinance in front of you today. | 00:31:02 | |
| And again, just this came from a question regarding septics being allowed in the residential zone districts, which staff is not | 00:31:09 | |
| supportive and supports requiring public water and sewer for 80 use in the residential zone districts. With that, I'm happy to | 00:31:15 | |
| answer any questions, see if we have any questions for Max. Yes, Mr. Chair. | 00:31:21 | |
| I just want to double make sure on this because we heard foster home is care home is being taken out. We know foster. | 00:31:28 | |
| Is occurring in homes, is the group home kind of the definition that falls under now since we're leaving that in? | 00:31:37 | |
| So essentially, yeah, we're really the definitions because it's becoming less defined and it's just essentially being allowed. | 00:31:45 | |
| We're we're loosening the new House bill essentially changed the definition to where you didn't need to differentiate the foster | 00:31:54 | |
| home from a family. So we are essentially amending the code to be in compliance with that House bill. OK, I just want to make sure | 00:32:00 | |
| that was clear so people didn't hear that and say, Oh my gosh, I'm not selling foster care so. | 00:32:06 | |
| Thank you. | 00:32:13 | |
| Any other questions for staff? | 00:32:14 | |
| All right. At this time, this is a public hearing, so if anybody wishes to have any comments regarding Code Ordinance 2024-04, | 00:32:16 | |
| again, please come forward to the microphone, state your name, your address, and leave your comments to 3 minutes. But now is the | 00:32:22 | |
| time to get those comments on the record. | 00:32:28 | |
| Does anybody wish to make comment? | 00:32:35 | |
| Good morning. | 00:32:44 | |
| Bob Walters, Did you want my address, please? 2144 Bluebell Ave. Greeley. | 00:32:46 | |
| My question about this and I know that for the sake of time they race through. | 00:32:53 | |
| And read through this stuff. But you had a work session month or so ago and we had, we the public, a few of us were there and we | 00:32:59 | |
| had a lot of questions about the change. But at that meeting, we weren't allowed to speak. So you had it directed the planning | 00:33:06 | |
| director to set up like a town hall meeting, a community meeting. And that never happened, even though we called in many times | 00:33:14 | |
| asking when is the meeting going to be? Where is the meeting going to be? Because we had a lot of questions about this. | 00:33:21 | |
| Is this going to replace our request to change the zoning in East Greeley to AG to match the land usage? We just had a lot of | 00:33:29 | |
| questions and we were waiting for that meeting to happen and it and it never happened. Can you can you comment on that? This does | 00:33:37 | |
| not change the changing of zone that some residents were requesting. | 00:33:44 | |
| At that town hall meeting that we hosted, this is separate from that because when we do a code ordinance, just as I'm sure you're | 00:33:52 | |
| aware about, this affects the whole county, right? So you're talking about a very specific area east of Greeley, I believe is, is | 00:33:59 | |
| what you're referring to with that work session that we hosted these code ordinance changes this week. This changes everything for | 00:34:06 | |
| everybody across the board from from the county right now what we did. | 00:34:13 | |
| Say is reach out to planning, have them answer any questions that you have is they're continuing to work through it as they were | 00:34:22 | |
| getting a gauge of how many people are still wanting to do. | 00:34:27 | |
| Zone change and things to that nature. This may change some people's minds saying that maybe some of their concerns are addressed | 00:34:34 | |
| with this code ordinance change. They may not feel like they they need to go forth with that zone change. I can't answer on their | 00:34:42 | |
| behalf, nor would I ever or ever try to, right. So, but your issue I would say is separate from this. However, this probably has | 00:34:50 | |
| impacts. It has an impact and, and just listening to my neighbors. | 00:34:58 | |
| Again, there was just. | 00:35:06 | |
| There was a lot of questions that I think a town hall meeting or about this topic could have helped out a lot because some people | 00:35:08 | |
| are neither in limbo like well, we don't know, should we just? | 00:35:14 | |
| OK, sign off on this and just be good and go on. Or should we proceed with the change of zoning? So you know, we, we really, we | 00:35:21 | |
| really would have appreciated that meeting that you had requested happen. I think where we're why we haven't done a town hall yet | 00:35:27 | |
| is because everybody's case is individual and specific and we can't get in those specifics at a town hall with the commissioners | 00:35:34 | |
| there because ultimately we're the hearing board on that if they come in front of us. And so that's why we've instructed people to | 00:35:40 | |
| take those individual questions. | 00:35:47 | |
| To our planning staff so that they can get those questions addressed particularly to their matter. And we don't put any case that | 00:35:53 | |
| would come in front of the well county commissioners in jeopardy of of not being able to be heard. OK. And I appreciate that and I | 00:35:59 | |
| think the confusion out there was. | 00:36:05 | |
| Was well, we'll just wait for the meeting to ask our questions and I think a lot of people may not have come forward to ask those | 00:36:11 | |
| questions because they were waiting in lieu of the meeting. See what I mean? I have some questions for Bob just real quick and | 00:36:17 | |
| also just hearing what the chair said I'm I'm a little concerned that I know we have to change via the laws that are being passed | 00:36:23 | |
| but. | 00:36:29 | |
| At the same time, that should not be an end run to what the citizens in East Korea want, which my question to you is, I know | 00:36:35 | |
| you're aware that a change in act and by the way, we have the ability to change everyone who wants to act right now. | 00:36:43 | |
| As a Florida County Commissioner, since it's in our code, my question to you is, I, I know this won't resolve everything, but do | 00:36:52 | |
| you think this will resolve most of the issues that your neighbors are having right now with the violations with the planning | 00:36:57 | |
| department? Well, here's here's what I hear from them. | 00:37:03 | |
| It may it may help. | 00:37:09 | |
| With some of that today. | 00:37:13 | |
| If they just sign off and say OK, we're good with it, we're not gonna, we don't want to move forward with maybe the change of | 00:37:16 | |
| zoning, what does that do to our property value in the future? | 00:37:20 | |
| For even if how we want to use it now, we want to add more animals or you know, there's more about this than just animals and | 00:37:25 | |
| stuff. There's all kinds of farm implement machinery and stuff that are sitting on people's property that they want to keep and | 00:37:31 | |
| there's just a lot of stuff with it I. | 00:37:37 | |
| So again, I just think there's a lot of confusion and they don't know which way to go because they don't understand all of. | 00:37:43 | |
| A fine print of what you just presented. So I just think there's just still a lot of confusion. So sounds like we still need that | 00:37:51 | |
| town hall that the planning director was directed to have and that still hasn't occurred yet. I think it would be tremendously | 00:37:56 | |
| helpful. | 00:38:01 | |
| OK, I'd like to know when that's occurring. | 00:38:07 | |
| Elizabeth Rafferty answered a question. Please, When did you receive a direction from the rest of the board? | 00:39:50 | |
| At a work session Restate. Please restate your question. I'm sorry, when did you you decided yourself you received direction for | 00:39:55 | |
| board not to have the town hall meeting when I did not say that I absolutely did not. | 00:40:00 | |
| What I stated is that at the last work session, the board said they wanted to proceed with first reading and get feedback based on | 00:40:09 | |
| that. I don't know that there has been any determination on whether or not you continue to have another meeting. I'm sure that's | 00:40:15 | |
| not what was on the recording correctly. | 00:40:20 | |
| It was the direction to have a town housing. | 00:40:26 | |
| Max, So this this Town Meeting component concept is to elaborate on the changes being proposed today. | 00:40:30 | |
| I held all those pre op meetings with every applicant that was proposing that changes own and I broke down the changes on process | 00:40:39 | |
| and the changes to the code being proposed. So and they I give them opportunity one-on-one to ask me questions that they felt they | 00:40:46 | |
| needed to ask. Now if there's questions or thoughts that came up following that meeting, I cannot. | 00:40:54 | |
| Control if they want to reach out to me or not regarding that, but I gave everyone who had an opportunity to, you know, that | 00:41:02 | |
| submitted applications, you know, ask questions about the code change and the change zone process. | 00:41:08 | |
| So that's I'm kind of confused in terms of the public meeting, I don't know, I don't think we have a problem holding one of those | 00:41:15 | |
| again to elaborate on what was elaborate on those pre application meetings. | 00:41:20 | |
| They could call you get those questions answered, addressed for their specific situation. And again I want to elaborate, you | 00:42:00 | |
| mentioned this earlier, that is just the East Greeley area. This is for all of this is for all zone change, all zones that are in | 00:42:05 | |
| in this ordinance. | 00:42:11 | |
| And there are other zone districts that are impacted by this ordinance, but specifically speaking to East Greeley area. | 00:42:17 | |
| Yes, I've met with them. I spoke with them. And if I was not? | 00:42:24 | |
| Clear enough to them. I apologize for that. But again, I'm here to help the public so happy to answer any questions. So I did have | 00:42:28 | |
| my meeting and it was tremendously helpful and I appreciate what they did, the steps they took. The problem here is. | 00:42:37 | |
| We went in to a pre app meeting for a change of AG. | 00:42:46 | |
| And then we were told and then then it kind of the topic kind of switched to the R1, the other folks out there who are on the | 00:42:51 | |
| fence of whether they should throw the preap out to go to AG. | 00:42:58 | |
| They aren't aware of this. | 00:43:06 | |
| One change so they wouldn't have, they wouldn't have known to come in. | 00:43:09 | |
| The reason a lot of people didn't feel that pre app out, the biggest question was because you all said that we were, we could | 00:43:16 | |
| split the $3000 application fee, but we would all have to individually pay for a survey. The big question is how much is the | 00:43:23 | |
| survey going to cost? And we haven't been able to figure that out yet. We had a meeting set up with them, then I couldn't make | 00:43:30 | |
| that meeting. So we haven't been able to figure that out yet. But that's one reason why we're only 50 applications. | 00:43:38 | |
| I reminded we had 96% of the people in East Greeley initially signed the petition to change the zoning from residential to AG to | 00:43:46 | |
| match the land usage. That's a lot of people. But then again, a lot of them have not signed that pre application thing because | 00:43:53 | |
| they're just kind of like, OK, now what do we do? We got this R1 thing. Does that take place? There's just a lot of confusion. So | 00:44:01 | |
| I think some type of meeting for a group would have helped out tremendously. | 00:44:08 | |
| I think we need to, I think we'll need to work with staff and figure out how that meeting looks. Obviously because of it's going | 00:44:17 | |
| to get into specific questions. My understanding would be probably not appropriate for commissioners to be there because we could | 00:44:23 | |
| invalidate hearings in front of us. But I think that's something we can work with our planning director and her staff on maybe a | 00:44:29 | |
| work session or whatnot, figure out what that type of meeting looks like. Does that. Would you be willing to to do that, | 00:44:35 | |
| Elizabeth? | 00:44:41 | |
| Behind closed doors, that really bothers me. | 00:45:18 | |
| No, thank you. | 00:45:22 | |
| Does anybody else wish to make comment today? Yes, ma'am. Come on up. Don't forget to state your name and address for the record, | 00:45:25 | |
| please. Good morning. Good morning. My name is Colin, 13617 Elmore Rd. | 00:45:31 | |
| Regarding this zoning, I have a property that was years ago again it was changed over to R1 and in this. | 00:45:38 | |
| Accessory dwelling unit. I have a septic system but now I'm R1. I have just shy of five acres. | 00:45:50 | |
| And in here it states that if I'm R1 I must have septic. | 00:45:58 | |
| And I must have, and then I must have sewer, I must have city water in order to do an accessory dwelling unit. | 00:46:03 | |
| Umm, the changes in the recommendations that he put up on the board. | 00:46:10 | |
| It just says where it's permitted to have a septic system, it doesn't change any of the zoning. So at all one, having a larger | 00:46:18 | |
| property, an accessory dwelling unit would benefit that property, but it has a septic that makes me completely exempt from this. | 00:46:27 | |
| Change. | 00:46:37 | |
| And I think it should be looked at. | 00:46:38 | |
| Is that accurate and how she's interpreting that? Yeah. So currently in the R1 or any residential zone district, you cannot have | 00:46:41 | |
| an accessory drawing unit, whether that's a second single family home or auxiliary quarters, AKA Adu. | 00:46:48 | |
| Would this code change is proposing to allow that? But with that being said, you have to have public water and public sewer | 00:46:57 | |
| because it's all one zone district. They ask from the public is can you look at that for lots that are larger maybe that are zoned | 00:47:05 | |
| R1 or you know, zoned something other than agricultural or state? | 00:47:12 | |
| To allow the septic, the ability for septic, that's the ask, right? Yeah. | 00:47:20 | |
| OK. Thank you for your comments. That's something that we can do. | 00:47:27 | |
| I mean it's per the code, I would recommend staff would recommend against that because the R1 zone district, the residential zone | 00:47:32 | |
| districts are urban in nature and that's the point of them. But the issue being that typically the minimum lot size is 6000 square | 00:47:40 | |
| feet and essentially to get a septic multiple septics on a 6000 square foot lot is is going to be difficult for. | 00:47:49 | |
| Probably the health department being able to allow. | 00:47:59 | |
| But there are, but there are exceptions for larger properties like my own that was AG at one time that you guys changed over to | 00:48:03 | |
| R1. | 00:48:07 | |
| That was zoned R1 in 1961. Yeah, we didn't change anything except for in 1961. Mr. Freeman's correct with that. I don't know what | 00:48:12 | |
| you that took place. Mags was again, this is similar to the East Greeley situation where the zoning just didn't exist and then it | 00:48:18 | |
| was established. OK. | 00:48:24 | |
| Two parcels and the front parcel was our one. That parcel was egg. | 00:48:30 | |
| County came in and changed back parcel to R1. | 00:48:35 | |
| So that makes my 4 1/2 plus acres. | 00:48:39 | |
| Unavailable for this. | 00:48:45 | |
| Opportunity, which it is a good opportunity. | 00:48:48 | |
| I appreciate it. Anything else? No, I'd just like for you to consider it. Thank you. Thank you. | 00:48:53 | |
| Anybody else have public comment that they wish to make? | 00:48:59 | |
| All right. With that, we'll go ahead and close public comment. I'll bring Code Ordinance 2024-04 back to the board. | 00:49:03 | |
| Any discussion, Mr. James? | 00:49:15 | |
| All right, I got a motion for approval of Code Ordinance 2024-04 from Commissioner James. Is there a second? I'll 2nd I'll second | 00:49:51 | |
| it, but I would like to have a work session on. | 00:49:56 | |
| A million with the other all one zone districts have the ability to override things that I think a lot of them built in an all one | 00:51:19 | |
| zone on purpose because they intentionally wanted to be an all one zone. This will not impact them. I will actually support this | 00:51:25 | |
| first reading today. | 00:51:31 | |
| Any other comment? | 00:51:38 | |
| The only thing I that is that I too would come in planning staff for putting this together with all the legislative changes that | 00:51:40 | |
| have coming forward through the planning process. I appreciate you guys getting those worked in and adopted into code so that | 00:51:47 | |
| we're in conformity there. I think you guys have addressed it. I would echo Commissioner Freemans sentiments, understanding how | 00:51:54 | |
| HOA's operate and still protecting neighborhoods that may not wish to have some of this in. They can still do so. | 00:52:01 | |
| And with that, I'll go ahead. We'll do roll call. Vote for it, please. | 00:52:09 | |
| At ctv@weld.gov Or you can always come down in person and chat with us at any time. Does anybody have any public comment today, | 00:52:53 | |
| Mr. Chair? First I I moved to remove the 15 minute, one minute and arbitrary vote from it. | 00:52:59 | |
| How many people do we have wanting to talk in public comments? Did you mind raising your hand? | 00:53:06 | |
| I think we're. | 00:53:12 | |
| So that no second that dies and with that seeing no one wanting to come forward for public comment, we will go ahead, close public | 00:53:14 | |
| comment and adjourn. Thank you everybody. Appreciate your time here. | 00:53:19 |