The Weld County Board of County Commissioners on Monday continued consideration of Code Ordinance 2025-11, a proposed repeal and reenactment of Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code that would revise rules for commercial vehicles, semi‑trailers and home businesses, until a public meeting on Oct. 6. Commissioners said they wanted more time to meet with staff and residents after extensive public comment.

The proposal would narrow the code’s commercial‑vehicle restrictions to vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating over 26,000 pounds (Class 7 and 8 under USDOT classifications), change how semi‑trailers are treated, and consolidate home‑business rules. Jim Flesher, planning services, told the board the ordinance “mainly focuses on commercial vehicles and home businesses.” He said the draft would allow some trucking uses in agricultural areas by administrative permit and would limit heavy trucks and semi‑trailers in residential zones and in agricultural subdivisions under one acre.

Planning staff said the ordinance would also replace the current two home‑occupation classes with a single “home business” category allowed by zoning permit in AG, estate and R‑1 zones. Proposed limits include no more than 10 customers/clients/patients/students or non‑resident employees on site at any one time, public access hours of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., screening and off‑street parking requirements, and a one‑acre minimum if business activities occur outdoors. Staff noted farming would remain a by‑right use and recreational vehicles are excluded from the heavy‑vehicle restriction.

The Planning Commission reviewed the draft on Sept. 2, took testimony from two residents and voted unanimously to recommend adoption, staff said. During Monday’s public hearing, at least eight residents from Elmore Road and nearby rural subdivisions urged the board to limit or remove home‑business permissions in R‑1 subdivisions that they said have narrow roads and are used primarily for single‑family living. Speakers described narrow streets, lack of turn lanes on Highway 66, noise and safety concerns for children and wildlife. Mary Rose Cullen of 13617 Elmore Road said, “Actually, make the whole county commercial. That’s what you’re trying to do,” to illustrate how she perceived the effect of the change. Betty Bailey said, “I just don’t want our street turned into a dirty commercial area.”

Commissioner Scott James said he had heard residents’ concerns and asked staff for more discussion. Max Leonard, Department of Planning Services, noted the county’s intent language for R‑1 allows accessory uses compatible with residential neighborhoods and said staff believes the draft remains accessory in character. Leonard noted a standard traffic planning assumption that the average household round trip is nine trips and said staff used that and other factors in drafting limits.

After public testimony and discussion among commissioners and staff about enforceability and unintended consequences, Commissioner James moved to continue the ordinance for further stakeholder engagement and a public meeting; the board approved the continuance to Oct. 6, 2025, at 9 a.m. by voice vote. No final zoning change was adopted and staff said second‑reading timing will be adjusted accordingly.

The continuation schedules a public meeting and further work‑session style discussion between planning staff, commissioners and community members. The board and staff said they plan to refine numeric limits, clarify enforcement, and consider whether the R‑1 zone should be treated differently from other residential districts.

A second reading of the ordinance had been set for Sept. 29 but will be moved given the continuance. The public may submit written comment before the Oct. 6 meeting and staff said they will prepare revised materials reflecting issues raised by residents and commissioners.