HomeMy WebLinkAbout20122321.tiff • BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Moved by Jordan Jemiola, that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning
Commission. Be it resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the application for:
CASE NUMBER: USR12-0034
APPLICANT: BB COLORADO HOLDINGS LLC
PLANNER: TOM PARK()
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT FOR
AGRICULTURAL SERVICE ESTABLISHMENTS PRIMARILY ENGAGED IN PERFORMING
AGRICULTURAL,ANIMAL HUSBANDRY OR HORTICULTURAL SERVICES ON A FEE OR
CONTRACT BASIS,INCLUDING A LIVESTOCK CONFINEMENT OPERATION(8,000 HEAD
DAIRY) AND ONE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNIT PER LOT OTHER THAN THOSE
PERMITTED UNDER SECTION 23-3-20.A ABOVE (A SECOND SINGLE FAMILY
DWELLING) IN THE A(AGRICULTURAL)ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: NE4 SECTION 22,T2N, R67W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 20 AND WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 21.
be recommended favorably to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons:
1. The submitted materials are in compliance with the application requirements of Section 23-2-260 of the Weld
County Code.
2. It is the opinion of the Planning Commission that the applicant has shown compliance with Section 23-2-220 of
the Weld County Code as follows:
A. Section 23-2-220.A.1 -- The proposed use is consistent with Chapter 22 and any other applicable
•
code provisions or ordinance in effect.
Section 22-2-20 A.Goal 1. states "Respect and encourage the continuation of agricultural land uses
and agricultural operations for purposes which enhance the economic health and sustainability of
agriculture."
Section 22-2-20 A.Goal 2.states: "Continue the commitment to viable agriculture in Weld County
through mitigated protection of established(and potentially expanding) agricultural uses from other
proposed new uses that would hinder the operations of the agricultural enterprises."
The applicant is proposing an 8,000 head dairy on a property that was previously used as a poultry
facility. There is not an existing Use by Special Review Permit (USR) on the site. The applicant is
proposing to demolish the existing poultry facilities and erect a dairy parlor, hospital barn,commodity
barn, shop, hay barns,waste water storage ponds and livestock pens. The Department of Planning
Services is requiring a Landscape and Screening Plan and a Lighting Plan be submitted to address
the impacts from this dairy facility on neighboring properties and rights-of-way.
B. Section 23-2-220.A.2 -- The proposed use is consistent with the intent of the Agricultural (A) Zone
District. Sections 23-3-40.B.16 and 23-3-40.M of the Weld County Code allows for, A Site Specific
Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for Agricultural Service establishments primarily
engaged in performing agricultural, animal husbandry or horticultural services on a fee or contract
basis, including a livestock confinement operation (8,000 head dairy)and one single family dwelling
unit per lot other than those permitted under Section 23-3-20.A above (a second single family
dwelling) in the A(Agricultural) Zone District.
C. Section 23-2-220.A.3 -- The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with the existing
• surrounding land uses.
1 PAri f$ .
aaa- 3al
RESOLUTION USR12-0034
BB COLORADO HOLDINGS LLC
PAGE 2
• The facility is located in an agricultural area on a parcel containing many improvements including
several poultry sheds, many poultry cages(screened houses), some outbuildings and two single
family residences. Surrounding properties to the north, south and west are mainly utilized for
grazing of livestock and irrigated crop production. Adjacent properties to the east are mainly
utilized for residential purposes. Also in the adjacent area are the following Use by Special
Review's: SUP-62 for a Turkey Farm, USR-1184 for an equine breeding, boarding and training
facility and USR-1063 for a 24"gas line. The nearest residence is approximately 33 feet away
from the property in question. The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received
one letter from a surrounding property owner expressing their concerns on the following: odor,
property values declining, dust, and road base for the county roads. As a condition of approval
the applicant is required to submit a screening and lighting plan to help mitigate the neighbors
concerns. The Development Standards will also ensure that this use will be compatible with
surrounding land uses.
D. Section 23-2-220.A.4 -- The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with future
development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zoning and with the future
development as projected by Chapter 22 of the Weld County Code and any other applicable code
provisions or ordinances in effect, or the adopted Master Plans of affected municipalities.
The site is located within the 3-mile referral for the City of Fort Lupton and the Towns of
Firestone, and Frederick. The City of Fort Lupton in their referral dated July 2, 2012 stated,"This
property is within our 2007 Comprehensive Plan and this area is designated as Agriculture. Fort
Lupton is not opposed to the proposed commercial venture but would like to discuss the
possibility of potential annexation and development of the property through the Fort Lupton
process. Thank you for the opportunity to make comment concerning this proposal." The Weld
County Department of Planning Services has not received a referral response from the Towns of
Firestone and Frederick.
• As a condition of approval the applicant will need to attempt to address the concerns of the Town
of Fort Lupton.
E. Section 23-2-220.A.5 -- The application complies with Article V of the Weld County Code. The
existing site is within the County Road Impact Fee Area and the Capital Expansion Impact Fee
and Drainage Impact Fee areas.
Effective April 25, 2011, Building Permits issued on the proposed lots will be required to adhere to
the fee structure of the Weld County Road Impact Program. (Ordinance 2011-2)
Effective April 25,2011, Building Permits issued on the proposed lots,will be required to adhere
to the fee structure of the County Facility Fee and Drainage Impact Fee. (Ordinance 2011-2)
F. Section 23-2-220.A.6 -- The applicant has demonstrated a diligent effort to conserve prime
agricultural land in the locational decision for the proposed use.
The majority of proposed facility is located on soils designated as"Other"the northeast corner of
the property is designated "Prime If They Become Irrigated" per the 1979 Soil Conservation
Service Important Farmlands of Weld County Map. The property was utilized as a poultry facility
and therefore the proposed dairy USR does not take any additional farmland out of production.
G. Section 23-2-220.A.7 -- There is adequate provisions for the protection of health, safety, and
welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood and County.
The Design Standards(Section 23-2-240,Weld County Code), Operation Standards(Section 23-
2-250,Weld County Code), Conditions of Approval and Development Standards can ensure that
•
there are adequate provisions for the protection of health, safety,and welfare of the inhabitants of
the neighborhood and County.
RESOLUTION USR12-0034
BB COLORADO HOLDINGS LLC
PAGE 3
• This recommendation is based, in part, upon a review of the application materials submitted by the applicant,
other relevant information regarding the request, and responses from referral entities.
The Planning Commission recommendation for approval is conditional upon the following:
1. Prior to recording the plat:
A. The applicant shall attempt to address the requirements of the City of Fort Lupton as stated
in their referral received July 2, 2012. Written evidence of such shall be provided to the
Department of Planning Services. (City of Fort Lupton)
B. The applicant shall enter into an Improvements Agreement and Road Maintenance
Agreement according to policy regarding collateral for improvements and post adequate
collateral for all transportation(access drive, parking areas,et cetera)and non-transportation
(fencing, screening, drainage et cetera). The agreement and form of collateral shall be
reviewed by County Staff and accepted by the Board of County Commissioners prior to
recording the USR plat. The applicant may submit evidence that all the work has been
completed and reviewed by the Department of Planning Services and the Department of
Public Work. (Department of Planning Services)
C. The applicant shall apply for and obtain a commercial Individual Sewage Disposal System
(I.S.D.S.) permit for disposal of sanitary wastes from plumbing fixtures for employees and
patrons of the facility. If the applicant intends to use an existing system,the system must be
evaluated and permitted in accordance with Weld County Department of Public Health and
Environment policy and all applicable provisions of the Weld County Code pertaining to
I.S.D.S. (Department of Public Health & Environment)
• D. The applicant shall provide documentation by a Colorado Registered Professional Engineer
demonstrating that the impoundment meets the following requirements of Colorado Water
Quality Control Commission Regulation 81 (6 CCR 1002-81): (1)setback from water wells,
(2) impoundment liner setback from seasonal high groundwater, (3) impoundment liner
seepage rate,and(4)that a manure removal standard operational procedures(SOP)for the
impoundment has been submitted. (Department of Public Health & Environment)
E. The applicant shall address the requirements of the Fort Lupton Fire Protection District as
stated in their referral received July 2,2012.Written evidence of such shall be provided to the
Department of Planning Services. (Fort Lupton Fire Protection District)
F. The applicant shall either submit a copy of an agreement with the property's mineral
owner/operators stipulating that the oil and gas activities have been adequately incorporated
into the design of the site or show evidence that an adequate attempt has been made to
mitigate the concerns of the mineral owner/operators. Drill envelopes can be delineated on
the plat in accordance with the State requirements as an attempt to mitigate concerns. The
plat shall be amended to include any possible future drilling sites. (Department of Planning
Services)
G. If a sign is proposed, the applicant shall submit a detailed signage plan to the Department of
Planning Services, including location and size. Signs shall be in compliance with Chapter 23,
Article IV, Division II and Appendices 23-C, 23-D and 23-E of the Weld County Code.
(Department of Planning Services)
H. The applicant shall submit a Landscape Plan/Screening Plan to the Department of Planning
Services for review and approval. The applicant shall place "plant material" or other
acceptable screening material to mitigate the impacts of the facility from adjacent properties,
more specifically screening the compost area, south pond, east pond and silage piles from
•
adjacent properties owners and public rights of way. Upon approval, the Landscape and
Screening Plan shall be placed on the plat. (Department of Planning Services)
RESOLUTION USR12-0034
BB COLORADO HOLDINGS LLC
PAGE 4
• I. The applicant shall submit a Lighting Plan to the Department of Planning Services for review
and approval. (Department of Planning Services)
J. The plat shall be amended to delineate the following:
1) All sheets of the plat shall be labeled USR12-0034. (Department of Planning
Services)
2) The plat shall be prepared per Section 23-2-260.D of the Weld County Code.
(Department of Planning Services)
3) The attached Development Standards. (Department of Planning Services)
4) Show the approved access points on the plat and label them with the Access Permit
number(will be provided). (Department of Public Works)
5) Access improvements are required and shall include 60 foot radiuses to
accommodate turning trucks and double cattle guards across the main access to
prevent the tracking of mud onto the gravel roadway. (Department of Public Works)
6) County Roads 21 and 20 are designated on the Weld County Road Classification
Plan as local gravel roads, which require 60 feet of right-of-way at full build out. The
applicant shall verify the existing right-of-way and the documents creating the right-
of-way and this information shall be noted on the plat. All setbacks shall be
measured from the edge of future right-of-way. If the right-of-way cannot be verified,
it shall be dedicated. These roads are maintained by Weld County. (Department of
Public Works)
• 7) The approved location of the proposed lighting and signs. (Department of Planning
Services)
8) The approved Landscape and Screening Plan. (Department of Planning Services)
9) The applicant shall delineate the trash collection areas. Section 23-3-350.H of the
Weld County Code addresses the issue of trash collection areas. Areas used for
storage or trash collection shall be screened from adjacent public rights-of-way and
adjacent properties. These areas shall be designed and used in a manner that will
prevent wind or animal scattered trash. (Department of Planning Services)
10) The location of the two existing homes. (Department of Planning Services)
11) The oil and gas location and setback radiuses for existing wellheads and tank
batteries on the site shall be indicated in accordance with Section 23-3-50.E of the
Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
2. Prior to Construction:
A. In the event that 1 or more acres are disturbed during the construction and development of
this site, the applicant shall obtain a stormwater discharge permit from the Water Quality
Control Division of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. (Department
of Public Works)
B. If more than 1 acre is to be disturbed, a grading permit will be required prior to the start of
• construction. The grading permit application must contain: an erosion and sediment control
plan, a grading plan, installation details of all BMPs to be utilized, typical installation and
maintenance notes for all BMPs to be utilized, and a copy of the approved CDPHE
stormwater permit. (Department of Public Works)
RESOLUTION USR12-0034
BB COLORADO HOLDINGS LLC
PAGE 5
• 3. The applicant shall submit three (3) paper copies of the plat for preliminary approval to the Weld
County Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
4. Upon completion of 1. and 2. above the applicant shall submit a Mylar plat along with all other
documentation required as Conditions of Approval. The Mylar plat shall be recorded in the office of
the Weld County Clerk and Recorder by Department of Planning Services' Staff. The plat shall be
prepared in accordance with the requirements of Section 23-2-260.D of the Weld County Code. The
Mylar plat and additional requirements shall be submitted within one hundred twenty(120)days from
the date of the Board of County Commissioners resolution. The applicant shall be responsible for
paying the recording fee. (Department of Planning Services)
5. The Department of Planning Services respectively requests the surveyor provide a digital copy of this
Use by Special Review. Acceptable CAD formats are.dwg, .dxf, and .dgn (Microstation);acceptable
GIS formats are ArcView shapefiles,Arclnfo Coverages and Arclnfo Export files format type is.e00.
The preferred format for Images is.tif(Group 4). (Group 6 is not acceptable). This digital file may be
sent to maps(oco.weld.co.us. (Department of Planning Services)
Motion seconded by Mark Lawley.
VOTE:
For Passage Against Passage Absent
Robert Grand
Bill Hall
Benjamin Hansford
Mark Lawley
• Nick Berryman
Jason Maxey
Jordan Jemiola
Joyce Smock
The Chair declared the resolution passed and ordered that a certified copy be forwarded with the file of this
case to the Board of County Commissioner's for further proceedings.
CERTIFICATION OF COPY
I, Kristine Ranslem, Recording Secretary for the Weld County Planning Commission,do hereby certify that the
above and foregoing resolution is a true copy of the resolution of the Planning Commission of Weld County,
Colorado, adopted on August 22, 2012.
Dated L the of August, 2012.
`r 4 St tilX)¢���avl ✓1
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
•
SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
• BB Colorado Holdings LLC
USR12-0034
1. A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for Agricultural Service
Establishment primarily engaged in performing agricultural,animal husbandry or horticultural services
on a fee or contract basis, including a Livestock Confinement Operation (8,000 head dairy)and one
single family dwelling unit per lot other than those permitted under Section 23-3-20.A above(a second
single family dwelling) in the A(Agricultural) Zone District. (Department of Planning Services)
2. Approval of this plan may create a vested property right pursuant to Section 23-8-10 of the Weld
County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
3. The facility will operate 24 hours per day. Equipment operations, trucks, farming activities and
maintenance activities, other than emergencies, will occur primarily during daylight hours.
(Department of Planning Services)
4. The total number of on-site employees shall be limited to thirty five (35). (Department of Planning
Services)
5. The facility shall operate in compliance with Colorado Water Quality Control Commission Regulation
81 (5 CCR 1002-81) and 61 (5 CCR 1002-61). (Department of Public Health & Environment)
6. There shall be no discharge of manure or wastewater to surface waters, unless allowed by Regulation
81 or by Confined Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) Colorado Discharge Permit issued in
accordance with Regulation 61. (Department of Public Health & Environment)
7. The facility, upon being defined as a CAFO (Large CAFO 700 dairy cows), shall register as a CAFO
and compile a Facility Management Plan or obtain a CDPS CAFO Permit. (Department of Public
• Health & Environment)
8. The facility shall control fugitive dust on this site and operate in accordance with their current
approved Management Plan for Nuisance Control. (Department of Public Health & Environment)
9. The facility shall be operated in a manner to control pests. The facility shall be operated in
accordance, at all times, with their current approved Management Plan for Nuisance Control.
Additional control measures shall be implemented at the request of the Weld County Department of
Public Health&Environment in the event that rodents(which can be determined to be associated with
the facility) are in such a number to be considered a nuisance condition. (Department of Public
Health & Environment)
10. The facility shall be operated in a manner to control flies. The facility shall be operated in accordance,
at all times,with their current approved Management Plan for Nuisance Control. Additional fly control
measures shall be implemented at the request of the Weld County Department of Public Health &
Environment in the event that flies(which can be determined to be associated with the facility)are in
such a number to be considered a nuisance condition. Additional controls shall also be implemented
in the event the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment receives a significant
number of fly (associated with facility) complaints, and in the judgment of the Weld County Health
Officer,there exists a fly condition requiring abatement. (Department of Public Health&Environment)
11. The facility shall be operated in a manner to control odors and in accordance with their approved
nuisance control plan. Odors detected off site shall not equal or exceed the level of fifteen-to-one
dilution threshold,as measured using methods set forth in Regulation 2 of the Colorado Air Pollution
Control Regulations. Additional controls shall be implemented at the request of the Weld County
Department of Public Health and Environment in the event odor levels detected off site of the facility
meet or exceed the level of fifteen-to-one dilution threshold, or in the judgment of the Weld County
Health Officer, there exists an odor condition requiring abatement. (Department of Public Health &
Environment)
•
RESOLUTION USR12-0034
BB COLORADO HOLDINGS LLC
PAGE 7
• 12. The applicant shall remove, handle, and stockpile manure from the livestock area in a manner that
will prevent nuisance conditions. The manure piles shall not be allowed to exist or deteriorate to a
condition that facilitates excessive odors,flies, insect pests, or pollutant runoff. The surface beneath
the manure storage areas shall be of materials which are protective of State waters. These areas
shall be constructed to minimize seepage or percolation of manure contaminated water. In no event
shall the facility impact or degrade waters of the State in violation of Regulation 81. (Department of
Public Health & Environment)
13. Any Individual Sewage Disposal System (I.S.D.S.) on the property shall be permitted, installed,
maintained and operated in compliance with all provisions of the Weld County Code, pertaining to
I.S.D.S. (Department of Public Health & Environment)
14. The facility shall operate in compliance with applicable Colorado Air Quality Control Commission
Regulations. There shall be no open burning except "agricultural open burning" as defined by
Colorado Air Quality Control Commission's Regulation 9. (Department of Public Health &
Environment)
15. There shall be no permanent disposal of solid wastes, as defined in the Regulations Pertaining to
Solid Waste Disposal Sites and Facilities (6 CCR 1007-2), at this site. This is not meant to include
those wastes specifically excluded from the definition of a solid waste in the Solid Wastes Disposal
Sites and Facilities Act, 30-20-100.5, C.R.S., as amended. (Department of Public Health &
Environment)
16. Waste materials, not specifically addressed by other development standards, shall be handled,
stored, and disposed in a manner that controls fugitive dust, blowing debris, and other potential
nuisance conditions. (Department of Public Health & Environment)
17. Composting operations shall comply with Section 14 (Composting)of the Regulations Pertaining to
• Solid Waste Sites and Facilities (6 CCR 1007-2). (Department of Public Health & Environment)
18. Adequate drinking water, hand washing, and toilet facilities shall be provided for employees and
patrons of the facility. (Department of Public Health & Environment)
19. If applicable, the applicant shall obtain stormwater discharge permit coverage for construction
activities from the Colorado Dept. of Public Health & Environment, Water Quality Control Division.
(Department of Public Health & Environment)
20. Pursuant to Chapter 15, Articles I and II of the Weld County Code, if noxious weeds exist on the
property or become established as a result of the proposed development, the applicant/landowner
shall be responsible for controlling the noxious weeds. All vegetation,other than grasses,needs to be
maintained at a maximum height of 12 inches until the area is completely developed. (Department of
Public Works)
21. The historical flow patterns and run-off amounts will be maintained on site in such a manner that it will
reasonably preserve the natural character of the area and prevent property damage of the type
generally attributed to run-off rate and velocity increases, diversions,concentration and/or unplanned
ponding of storm run-off. (Department of Public Works)
22. Weld County is not responsible for the maintenance of onsite drainage related features. (Department
of Public Works)
23. The landscaping/screening on site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved
Landscape/Screening Plan. (Department of Planning Services)
• 24. Sources of light shall be shielded so that light rays will not shine directly onto adjacent properties
where such would cause a nuisance or interfere with the use on the adjacent properties; and Neither
direct nor reflected light from any light source may create a traffic hazard to operators of motor
vehicles on public or private streets and no colored lights may be used which may be confused with or
construed as traffic control devices. (Department of Planning Services)
RESOLUTION USR12-0034
BB COLORADO HOLDINGS LLC
PAGE 8
• 25. Effective April 25, 2011, Building Permits issued on the proposed lots will be required to adhere to the
fee structure of the Weld County Road Impact Program. (Ordinance 2011-2)(Department of Planning
Services)
26. Effective April 25,2011, Building Permits issued on the proposed lots,will be required to adhere to the
fee structure of the County Facility Fee and Drainage Impact Fee. (Ordinance 2011-2) (Department
of Planning Services)
27. The Special Review activity shall not occur nor shall any building or electrical permits be issued on the
property until the Special Review plat is ready to be recorded in the office of the Weld County Clerk
and Recorder. (Department of Planning Services)
28. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Design Standards of
Section 23-2-240, Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
29. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Operation Standards of
Section 23-2-250, Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
30. Necessary personnel from the Weld County Departments of Planning Services, Public Works, and
Public Health and Environment shall be granted access onto the property at any reasonable time in
order to ensure the activities carried out on the property comply with the Conditions of Approval and
Development Standards stated herein and all applicable Weld County regulations. (Department of
Planning Services)
31. The Special Review area shall be limited to the plans shown hereon and governed by the foregoing
standards and all applicable Weld County regulations. Substantial changes from the plans or
Development Standards as shown or stated shall require the approval of an amendment of the Permit
• by the Weld County Board of County Commissioners before such changes from the plans or
Development Standards are permitted. Any other changes shall be filed in the office of the
Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
32. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with all of the foregoing
Development Standards. Noncompliance with any of the foregoing Development Standards may be
reason for revocation of the Permit by the Board of County Commissioners. (Department of Planning
Services)
33. All buildings and structures shall conform to the requirements of the various codes adopted at the
time of permit application. Currently the following has been adopted by Weld County: 2006
International Building Code;2006 International Mechanical Code;2006 International Plumbing Code:
2006 International Energy Code; 2006 International Fuel Gas Code; 2011 National Electrical Code;
2003 ANSI 117.1 Accessibility Code and Chapter 29 of the Weld County Code. (Building
Department)
34. Prior to the release of building permit, the applicant shall submit evidence of approval from the Fort
Lupton Fire Protection District to the Weld County Building Department.
35. WELD COUNTY'S RIGHT TO FARM: Weld County is one of the most productive agricultural
counties in the United States, typically ranking in the top ten counties in the country in total market
value of agricultural products sold. The rural areas of Weld County may be open and spacious, but
they are intensively used for agriculture. Persons moving into a rural area must recognize and accept
there are drawbacks, including conflicts with long-standing agricultural practices and a lower level of
services than in town. Along with the drawbacks come the incentives which attract urban dwellers to
relocate to rural areas: open views, spaciousness,wildlife, lack of city noise and congestion,and the
rural atmosphere and way of life. Without neighboring farms, those features which attract urban
•
dwellers to rural Weld County would quickly be gone forever.
RESOLUTION USR12-0034
BB COLORADO HOLDINGS LLC
PAGE 9
• Agricultural users of the land should not be expected to change their long-established agricultural
practices to accommodate the intrusions of urban users into a rural area. Well-run agricultural
activities will generate off-site impacts, including noise from tractors and equipment; slow-moving
farm vehicles on rural roads; dust from animal pens, field work, harvest and gravel roads; odor from
animal confinement, silage and manure; smoke from ditch burning;flies and mosquitoes; hunting and
trapping activities; shooting sports, legal hazing of nuisance wildlife; and the use of pesticides and
fertilizers in the fields, including the use of aerial spraying. It is common practice for agricultural
producers to utilize an accumulation of agricultural machinery and supplies to assist in their
agricultural operations. A concentration of miscellaneous agricultural materials often produces a
visual disparity between rural and urban areas of the County. Section 35-3.5-102, C.R.S., provides
that an agricultural operation shall not be found to be a public or private nuisance if the agricultural
operation alleged to be a nuisance employs methods or practices that are commonly or reasonably
associated with agricultural production.
Water has been, and continues to be, the lifeline for the agricultural community. It is unrealistic to
assume that ditches and reservoirs may simply be moved"out of the way"of residential development.
When moving to the County, property owners and residents must realize they cannot take water from
irrigation ditches, lakes, or other structures, unless they have an adjudicated right to the water.
Weld County covers a land area of approximately four thousand (4,000) square miles in size (twice
the size of the State of Delaware)with more than three thousand seven hundred(3,700)miles of state
and county roads outside of municipalities. The sheer magnitude of the area to be served stretches
available resources. Law enforcement is based on responses to complaints more than on patrols of
the County, and the distances which must be traveled may delay all emergency responses, including
law enforcement, ambulance, and fire. Fire protection is usually provided by volunteers who must
leave their jobs and families to respond to emergencies. County gravel roads, no matter how often
they are bladed, will not provide the same kind of surface expected from a paved road. Snow
• removal priorities mean that roads from subdivisions to arterials may not be cleared for several days
after a major snowstorm. Services in rural areas, in many cases,will not be equivalent to municipal
services. Rural dwellers must, by necessity, be more self-sufficient than urban dwellers.
People are exposed to different hazards in the County than in an urban or suburban setting. Farm
equipment and oil field equipment, ponds and irrigation ditches,electrical power for pumps and center
pivot operations, high speed traffic, sandburs, puncture vines,territorial farm dogs and livestock,and
open burning present real threats. Controlling children's activities is important, not only for their
safety, but also for the protection of the farmer's livelihood.
•
PC g12-) 112-
HORTICULTURAL SERVICES ON A FEE OR CONTRACT BASIS (A MIXED
• ANIMAL VETERINARY CLINIC) IN THE A(AGRICULTURAL)ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOTA REC EXEMPT RE-1676;PART N2SW4 SECTION 20,T4N,R68W OF THE
6TH P.M.,WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: EAST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 3 AND APPROXIMATELY 2/3 MILE NORTH
OF CR 40.5.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case USR12-0041, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application
with the attached conditions of approval and development standards. In addition, Public Works and
Environmental Health presented their reports and stated that they have no concerns with this request.
ID Dana Johnson, 20360 CR 3, Berthoud, CO, stated that she is proposing to have a mixed animal
veterinary ete clinic to treat dogs, cats and horses. She said that they are expecting 10 to 15 vehicles per day.
CJ The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Benjamin Cox stated that he lives across the street from the proposed veterinary clinic. He is concerned with
possible expansion of the clinic and the addition of a kennel facility. After visiting with Staff this morning, he
was reassured that a kennel would require a different land use permit and that the applicant has stated there
will beno more than 6 employees on site at any given time.
CJ Ms. Johnson said that she is happy to have an acceptable landscape plan. She requested that if there is
an employee cap that it be in terms of full-time employees. She said that she does not intend to expand the
operation.
• Mr. Gathman recommended amending Development Standard 3 to read "The number of employees (not
including family members) shall be six(6) full-time employees or equivalent."
Motion:Amend Development Standard 3 as per staff recommendation,Moved by Robert Grand,Seconded
by Benjamin Hansford.
Motion passed unanimously.
The Chair asked the applicant if she has read through the amended Development Standards and Conditions
of Approval and if she is in agreement with those. The applicant replied that she is in agreement.
U Motion: Forward Case USR12-0041 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the amended
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of
approval, Moved by Joyce Smock, Seconded by Jordan Jemiola.
The Chair called a recess at 2:27 pm and reconvened the hearing at 2:53 pm.
ID CASE NUMBER: USR12-0034
APPLICANT: BB COLORADO HOLDINGS LLC
PLANNER: TOM PARKO
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT FOR AGRICULTURAL SERVICE ESTABLISHMENTS PRIMARILY
ENGAGED IN PERFORMING AGRICULTURAL, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY OR
HORTICULTURAL SERVICES ON A FEE OR CONTRACT BASIS, INCLUDING A
LIVESTOCK CONFINEMENT OPERATION (8,000 HEAD DAIRY) AND ONE
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNIT PER LOT OTHER THAN THOSE PERMITTED
UNDER SECTION 23-3-20.A ABOVE(A SECOND SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING)
IN THE A(AGRICULTURAL)ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: NE4 SECTION 22,T2N,R67W OF THE 6TH P.M.,WELD COUNTY,COLORADO.
•
LOCATION: SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 20 AND WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR
21.
--v, t„
v� ,
• El Tom Parko, Planning Services, presented Case USR12-0034, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. This site was previously used as a turkey operation. The existing buildings will be
removed to accommodate the dairy operation. The site is located within the three-mile referral area for the
Towns of Firestone and Frederick as well as the City of Ft. Lupton. The Towns of Frederick and Firestone did
not respond with any comments or concerns; however the City of Ft. Lupton did not object to the dairy but
requested that the applicant visit with them regarding possible annexation. Mr. Parko noted that several
letters were received from surrounding property owners in opposition to this request. The Department of
Planning Services recommends approval of this application with the attached conditions of approval and
development standards.
El Heidi Hansen, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic, access and drainage conditions and
requirements of the site. There will be an Improvements and Road Maintenance Agreement with the
applicant.
El Troy Swain, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on-site
dust control, Waste Handling Plan and Nuisance Control Plan.
e Tom Haren, AGPROfessionals LLC,4350 Hwy 66, Longmont, CO, stated that this facility is support for
the DeHaan dairy which is an existing dairy operation located one(1) mile south. The existing poultry barns
on site will be removed to construct the proposed dairy. The northern portion of the site will house the baby
calves and heifers. The southern portion of the property will operate the dairy milking facility.
Mr. Haren said that he understands the neighbors concerns with the nuisance,waste,and number and size of
cattle on site; therefore they have revised the site plan this past weekend. The changes include an increase to
the buffer size on the eastern portion of the property, redesigned the ponds, and moved the manure and
• composting sites to the western portion of the property. In addition, they have reduced the animal density by
25%. They are proposing to milk 1,500 cows with 4,500 calves and heifers on site.
Mr. Haren commented that agricultural uses are able to operate with incompatible uses. He added that they
feel it is compatible with future and existing uses and provided examples of dairies adjacent to existing
subdivisions.
Mr. Haren outlined the Nuisance Management Plan and the manure and compost location proposed on site.
In response to Commissioner Maxey's inquiry, Mr. Haren said that the idle acres will be used for crop
pr[ogduction or possibly a pasture.
�Fl The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Marian Hobbs, 8590 CR 21, stated that she is the spokesperson for the neighborhood and added that she has
lived there for 22 years. She said that there are 27 families representing more than 50 people. They are
opposing this application because of the environmental concerns, flies, and business profits at the rural
residences expense. She stated that the applicant did not contact any landowners; however after August 13th,
only a few landowners were contact by the applicant's representative. She added that this use is too intense
for this site. Ms. Hobbs urged the Planning Commission to deny this application.
Ms. Hobbs noted on a visual map she provided with all the people concerned or opposed to the dairy. This
represents�g 27 families or over 50 people.
CJ Charles Baum, 8519 CR 21, stated that his family is opposed to this request. There are no adequate
buffer zones, although they have just revised it. He said that this is a mega commercial dairy and even with
• the new reduction to 6000 head, it is still too large for this parcel of ground. He strongly urged the Planning
Commission to deny this request.
4
• Dawn Bernhard, 8798 CR 21, stated that they live directly across the proposed dairy. They have lived
there for 24 years. They are concerned with the odor, flies, noise, and they are opposed to any dairy that
requires a special use permit. She added that she understands that the plan has been revised but it is still not
enough. Ms. Bernhard expressed concern of the drainage that catches the manure and urine on the site and
then it goes through her property. She is also concerned with the increased traffic. Ms. Bernhard stated that
they�y love their community and urged denial of this case.
CJ Debra Griffin, 9262 CR 21, said that they have lived on their property for 11 years. She stated that they
were not contacted by the applicant regarding this proposed case. They do not feel the site is appropriate for
this proposed use. She is concerned with the dust and added that she has a family member who has asthma.
In addition, they support agriculture but stated that this is a commercial business. They are worried about
their quality of life that will be deteriorated by this use. She respectfully requested that this request be denied.
In Thomas Harris, 8575 CR 21, stated that he has lived there for 15 years. He added that they are opposed
to any dairy operation that requires a special use permit. He expressed concerns over the environmental and
ecological c issues and added that it is an unacceptable risk to his family and neighbors in this area.
CJ Frank Hobbs, 8590 CR 21, stated that he has lived there for 22 years. He loves dairy and drinking milk,
but the proposal of the size of this dairy is absurd. He believes that the applicants are grasping at straws with
changing the plan in the last day. It is too intense for this piece of ground. He said that this is a well
established sta community with an intense dairy that could run them out. He requested denial of this application.
CJ Dirk Bassinger, representing Kerr McGee Gas Onshore LP,stated that they submitted an objection letter.
Kerr McGee owns oil and gas leasehold interests and operates 3 producing oil and gas wells on the property.
The site plan provided by the applicant does not identify the locations for the existing wells with adequate
• setbacks for the future oil and gas operations. Mr. Bassinger said that they have initiated discussions with the
applicant to reach an agreement that provides the compatible use of the property; however as of today, no
agreement has been met. Therefore, Kerr McGee requests that either this case be approved along with a
condition that an agreement be reached between the applicant and Kerr McGee or that this case be continued
until the parties reach an agreement.
ID Kelsey Wasylenky, represents KP Kaufman Company, 1675 Broadway,Suite 2100, Denver CO,echoed
Kerr McGee Anadarko's comments that before final approval is made that an agreement be reached between
the parties. She added that they also have three(3)operating wells on the property.
in Willis Black read a letter from his mother into record opposing the request.
▪ Kathy Pope, 9467 CR 18,stated that they have 20 to 60 trucks per hour down their road from gravel pits,
oil and gas activity, and dairy. The road is not wide enough and cannot make the turns. She said she has
asked why the trucks cannot travel the paved road and the drivers tell her that they are not permitted to drive
on the paved road and have to take the dirt road. She added that the dust is terrible.
e Henry Thuener, 10303 CR 20, said that he has lived there for 18 years. He said that he is allowed to
board horses at his facility. They are opposed to any dairy operation requiring a USR. He requested that this
application be denied.
U Bill Lent,8582 CR 21,echoed his neighbors concerns. He moved here 2 years ago and does not want a
dairy farm across from him.
In
Liz Krueger, 8657 CR 21, stated that they have lived there for 42 years. She added that they were not
• contacted until a week ago Monday for this proposal. Ms. Krueger said that in the initial stages of the
composting it is like the stench of decomposing carcasses. It is very impermeating and it will prevent them
from enjoying the outside. They know what to expect from an agricultural area but they feel that this is too
5
• intense for this size of land. She understands that there is a nuisance plan on paper but there is a dairy 1 mile
south with the same problems and the control plans are not always effective.
Joe Krueger said that he has had good dealings with Weld County and his neighbors. However he feels that
they are being attacked by an entity that has no conscience beyond their own bottom line and self interest.
U Rosa Watson, 10228 CR 20, said that she has lived there for 46 years. Ms. Watson said that she is
opposed to this request because there is a lot of traffic and health issues.
I CJ Denette and Kendra Venasek, 7012 CR 21 said that her family has lived there for 65 years. Ms.
Venasek stated that they are opposed to any dairy operation that requires a special permit. They have
enjoyed the country life, no lights,fresh air, and open space. Their quality of life has changed since the Front
Range Diary has moved in. They have dust,odor,flies,and they cannot open their windows. They have had
more than 50 dead birds land over their property on occasion. She contacted EPA and added that they were
told that they dairy is allowed to poison the cattle feed twice per year as starlings eat the cattle feed and then
their droppings in return make the cattle sick. Ms.Venasek stated that they are responsible in disposing of the
dead birds. She added that that they have a bald eagle and other animals and asked what if they eat those
dead birds. In addition,the flies are horrendous. They have tried traps and spray and it gives a little bit of relief
but the traps fill up in about 3 days. She said that the Front Range Dairy business has come at the expense of
her family's quality of life. She requested the denial of this application
U Holly Oxley, 8653 CR 21, stated that they have lived there for 11 years. She echoed Ms. Venasek's
comments. There are 24 hours a day of light, odor and noise pollution. Their quality of life will be greatly
diminished. There will be noise pollution from the equipment moving 24 hours a day. They cannot entertain
or have guests over to enjoy the outdoors. They operate a beehive and are concerned that the pesticides that
will be sprayed to take care of flies will also wipe out their beehive. She has researched and found that animal
• containment facilities decrease the value of the property. No one else will want to purchase their property.
The applicants did not try to contact them as well. There is a buffer zone but they will still smell it and hear it.
She asked that this case be denied for it is too intense for a small area of land.
ID Brian Bernhard, 8798 CR 21, said that even with the buffers whatever is on that property will drain onto
their property. He expressed concern over the environmental issues, manure,composting, noise and added
that you can try to control them all you want but it is still there. This use will impact everyone around them. Mr.
Bernhard noted that there are several bald eagles in the community. He stated that they are opposed to this
dairy.
The Chair closed the public portion of the hearing.
The Chair called a recess at 5:21 pm and reconvened the hearing at 5:39 pm. Joyce Smock left the meeting.
e Mr. Haren addressed the issues brought up by the public. He started by saying that they have drafted
Surface Use Agreements with the oil and gas companies. He added that there is a condition that states they
need to continue to attempt to reach a Surface Use Agreement.
Mr. Haren said that there was a lot of discussion with traffic that he felt was not related to the dairy. He
added that the roads that are rough are also hard on their equipment and trucks as well as their cars. There
will be a designated haul route for this facility.
With regard to flies and nuisance, Mr. Haren noted the comment referring to a tiered approach. The first
approach is housekeeping. He added that there is a tiered approach of utilizing pesticides. He said that they
have used wasps and indicated that it is a recommended practice. Mr. Haren said that they do not poison
their dairy feed.
• There were several comments regarding contacting neighbors. Mr. Haren said that this is the public process.
The communications that they have had with the neighbors was very cordial and civil. He added that the
6
• people have been informed, they have gotten feedback and they have made changes to the application.
Mr. Haren referred to the comment regarding other suggested parcels and said that those parcels were
purchased by Anadarko and are currently under contract. The subject site actually was one of the most
expensive.
Mr. Haren said that if you choose to live in the agricultural zone district, a special use may be located next to
you because that is where they are directed to go. They feel they have met all the requirements for approval
and requested approval of this case.
Commissioner Grand asked what the process is for advising applicants to contact neighbors. Mr. Parko said it
is not a requirement but staff encourages the applicant to hold neighborhood meetings.
The Chair asked the applicant if he read through the Development Standards and Conditions of Approval and
if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that he is in agreement.
e Motion: Forward Case USR12-0034 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions
of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval,
Moved by Jordan Jemiola, Seconded by Mark Lawley.
Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes= 5, No = 1, Abstain = 0).
Yes: Benjamin Hansford, Jason Maxey, Jordan Jemiola, Mark Lawley, Nick Berryman.
No: Robert Grand.
Absent: Joyce Smock.
Commissioner Berryman commented that the applicants have met all the requirements. He spent a good
portion of his life living next to a feedlot as well and knows that there are nuisances and it isn't pleasant all the
• item but doesn't believe it is entirely incompatible for that reason either.
Commissioner Jemiola commented that he lives next to a dairy in Milliken. He added that he believes that this
request is consistent with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan and that it has met all the applicable
requirements.
Commissioner Grand said that the applicants have followed the requirements but is concerned with the
surrounding landowners who expressed frustration for not being contacted earlier. He doesn't feel that
contacting them was adequately done and feels that the intensity of the project given the neighborhood
concerns really requires some thought.
Commissioner Maxey echoed Mr. Grand's comments but he believes that the applicants have fulfilled their
requirements to the best of their abilities.
CJ CASE NUMBER: ORDINANCE 2012-4
PLANNER: TOM PARKO
REQUEST: IN THE MATTER OF REPEALING AND RE-ENACTING, WITH AMENDMENTS,
CHAPTER 23 ZONING OF THE WELD COUNTY CODE.
e Tom Parko, Planning Services, introduced modifications to the proposed code changes to Chapter 23
Zoning of the Weld County Code.
The first change is including yaks and camels into the livestock definition. It was previously defined as an
exotic animal but the Planning Department has had some interest with camels and yaks and they feel that this
could fall into a USR permit. Commissioner Grand asked if consideration could be given for a buffer zone
around an intense use, such as the dairy, to protect the citizens. Staff and members of the Planning
• Commission said that given that it is in the agricultural zone district and the right to farm, it may be difficult to
control.
7
The second change is including concrete and asphalt batch plants on a temporary basis on private property.
• Currently, a batch plant is allowed on a temporary basis for the sole purpose of building a road. In this case,
however, this proposes that it can be used on private property on a temporary basis (6 months) as well.
The final change is allowing oil and gas support and service facilities as a Use by Right in the 1-2 zone district
and as a Use by Special Review in the I-1 zone district. Currently, it is allowed as a Use by Right in the 1-3
zone district.
Motion: Forward Ordinance 2012-4 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the modifications as
presented by staff, Moved by Robert Grand, Seconded by Benjamin Hansford.
Motion passed unanimously.
The Chair asked the public if there were other items of business that they would like to discuss. No one
wished to speak.
isFl The Chair asked the Planning Commission members if there was any new business to discuss.
Commissioner Grand asked the Planning Commission and staff to consider what changes could be made to
require future water storage projects for recreation use. Brad Yatabe, County Attorney,will research if we can
legally impose those restrictions on a water storage project for a municipality.
Mr. Maxey reported back that he contacted Commissioner Garcia regarding presenting plaques to past
Planning Commissioners. He added that the plaques cost$9 and asked if the Planning Commission wished
to pursue the request of presenting plaques rather than certificates. Mr. Maxey said that Commissioner
Garcia expressed concern of being consistent with the other advisory boards of Weld County. The Planning
Commissioners feel that with the years of service, at a minimum, a nice frame or plaque would be
appreciated. Mr. Lawley said that he doesn't have a problem putting some money together as a group and
getting a plaque. He understands the County's position given the number of volunteer advisory boards. He
• added that he wanted to be a part of the Planning Commission not for the recognition but to give back to his
community.
Meeting adjourned at 6:23 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
S
8
7\
e itst_ ,2
,„,.
. .
,....:
N. NJ
O r \I *i<1/4,_
0 _ h,
, O
o a ,
c) N
U.' N \
cc co J-
cn _
Ls, \ _
N n
z cti
m N �' d � N — �0C
o �°`' \} 4L '✓`v av � � � % � ql � N'
F a y t -I pNV
Ls, co W_C�'
CZ 4:E
C
c C
JJ i
� — � �
n 3j CS \it k.V
0 tp (.7, inc_ri4 0` ( �- �,�
a in o e2 c h i �d r
i �, p � ,v\--
0
Hello