The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20123583.tiff INVENTORY OF ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION Applicant Dawn Scena Case Number USR12-0059 Submitted or Prepared Prior to At Hearing Hearing Surrounding Property Owners- Letters 1 Surrounding Property Owner— John Jervis letter dated October 16, 2012 X 2 Surrounding Property Owner—Denelle West email dated October 17, 2012 X 3 Surrounding Property Owners—Charles and Kathy Kovanda letter dated X October 29, 2012 4 Surrounding Property Owner—Patricia M. Reisbeck letter dated October 25, X 2012 5 Surrounding Property Owner—Kathleena Hill, Real Estate Agent, email dated X October 25, 2012 6 Surrounding Property Owners—Jerry and Patty Feather letter dated November X 1, 2012 7 Surrounding Property Owner—Kathleen Ramirez letter dated November 14, X 2012 8 Surrounding Property Owners—Peter Brown and Clarice Tyler letter dated X November 14, 2012 9 Surrounding Property Owner—Judith Luke letter dated November 14, 2012 X 10 Surrounding Property Owner—Douglas Wilson, Manager of DRAJ, letter dated X November 15, 2012 11 Surrounding Property Owners—Bonnie and Robin McIntosh letter received X November 17, 2012 12 Surrounding Property Owners—Sharon and Fredric Minne email received X November 17, 2012 13 Surrounding Property Owners—Robert Sevier letter dated November 18, 2012 X 14 Surrounding Property Owners—Fred and Sunny Brown letter received X November 19, 2012 15 Surrounding Property Owners—Andarko letter received November 19, 2012 X 16 Surrounding Property Owners—Michelle and Tom Price email received X November 19, 2012 17 Surrounding Property Owners—Randy and Christine Curl letter received X November 20, 2012 18 Surrounding Property Owners—Justin L. Mildenberger and Johanna L. X Mildenberger-Abbott email received November 20, 2012 19 Field check form from Jason Maxey dated November 19, 2012 X 20 Image of the charred area after a fire "One cigarette butt nearly cost us X everything" 21 Image of a professional dirt bike race X 22 Image of a DNA semi trailer that transports dirt bikes X 23 Map with the existing residences shown with a square X Prior to At Hearing Hearing 24 List of the addresses of the property owners surrounding the subject property X 25 Petition in objection to granting of permit application 12-0059 X 26 Written outline of the verbal presentation given by the property owners that X object to the project. I hereby certify that the twenty-six items identified herein were submitted to the Department of Planning Services at or prior to the scheduled Planning Commissioners hearing. D Aungs P Planner r Diana Aungst Subject: FW: USR12-0059 Scena Attachments: image003.jpg From: John Jervis [mailto:jlh.jervis©gmail.corn] Sent: Tuesday/ October 16, 2012 1:07 PM To: Diana Aungst Subject: USR12-0059 Scena Diana, Thank you for your response. Please except this letter regarding our firm objection to URS12-0059. This is due to the long term, high level of noise pollution it creates. It is extremely annoying for people and animals. It goes all day long and, at a mile away, we can hear it inside our house with the windows closed. There is no escape. We were about to start actions with other neighbors to stop it when it seemed to stop by itself. We had heard (in error) that the they were not going to do it any further. Yesterday was the first that I had learned that they were applying for a permit to run this dirt bike race track continuously. We thought (in error) that such a permit needed the approval of the neighbors that would be affected/impacted by it's operation. Since we are less than a mile away, we thought (in error) that we would be contacted if any such permit was being applied for. In this part of Weld County, the country is wide open, gently rolling prairie. The noise level produced by a dirt bike race track travels for miles around. This is a situation that will impact a very wide area, I would guess it would have a radius of at least three miles, possible five miles. The people requesting this permit know that they have a better chance of getting approval with the fewest number of people knowing about it. As more impacted neighbors become aware of it, we will be forced to take actions as a group to get it to stop. It seems like this should be an appropriate topic for a wider discussion before the County considers this type of wide impact land use. Is the law adequate to protect property owners from this type of threat? Everyone that lives around here will agree that property owners should have the right to use their property as they wish. Nobody would disagree with that. We also agree that no property owner has the right to determine or diminish somebody else 's property uses. This has been a quiet, rural, agricultural area for many years. With few exceptions, that is why we all live and love it here. The permitting of a dirt bike race track will seriously diminish property values along with our joy of living in Weld County. Would you like to live within easy earshot of a dirt bike race track? Not many people would. Why would anyone buy property where they would have to endure that, except if it was very cheap... That is my point. Please except this letter to advise of our formal and very firm dissaproval of URS12-0059. This is not good for the people of Weld County. 3cHELBIT 1 king a oucii Thank you, John and Jan Jervis 9780 WCR 57 Keenesburg, Co. 80643 Cell: 303-859-1423 2 Diana Aungst From: Denelle West [dwestknsbrg a©yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 11 :06 AM To: Diana Aungst Cc: Torn Perko Subject: Fw: USR12-0059 Scena To: Weld County Dept of Planning Services Attn: Diana Aungst Diana, Thank you for returning my phone call and answering questions Iliad in regards to this case. Please except this letter regarding our firm objection to Case #USRI2-0059. In March/April 2012 there was a race put on at this same proposed location. I was awakened at the crack of dawn by many motorcycles. The noise from the motorcycles as well as the announcers made for a very disturbing situation and it lasted all weekend. I did not make a complaint at that time as I was informed it was only a one time event. Now that it is a permanent request I need to say again that I firmly object to this permit request. We are a quiet rural agricultural area and this location is wide open where noise does travel for several miles and allowing a motocross track out here would create a noise pollution problem. This noise pollution will effect all of us out here as well as all of our animals. I would like to touch base on some misleading information on the Special Review Questionnaire: 3. It states that Road 55 dead ends and then North of there is Waste Management Landfill - Waste Mgt has miles and miles of pasture ground that they lease out to a rancher who runs cattle on it. It states parcel adjacent due east has several acres with no visual residence - East of them also is Road 57 and there are 10 residents on Road 57 east of them, whom will all be effected by this noise. I can see their place from my place so this statement is deceiving. 4. It states 3 miles away is a family owned auto salvage - The Auto Salvage does not create a noise pollution issue. It states 3 miles away is a family owned truck driving school - Again not a noise pollution issue and this business backs up to Highway 76. It states due north on County Rd 55 is the Waste Management Landfill - Again like in #3, there are miles and mile of pasture ground that a rancher leases from waste management and runs cattle on. The landfill is not at the end of Road 55. 5g. Fire protection - I would like to touch base on this issue. A lot of the properties out here are dry land pasture and there are times when we have a dry season the fire danger is very high out here. We have experienced how fast a fire can take off and get out of control and running motorcycles in these conditions can create a very dangerous situation. 6. No erosion control is planned as it is mostly sand. Let me tell you, the wind can blow like crazy out here and the disturbed sand will go with it, covering neighboring pastures up with their sand. 1EXHIBIT It was stated in the Site Specific Development Plan that no more than 20 motorcycles shall operate on any one track at any one time with the exception of special events. That means there could be 40 motorcycles operating at the same time and then at special events even more than that. Would you like that next door to you? Please understand where we are coming from. To allow this motocross track will hurt our property values and take away our way of lives out here. Thank you, Vern and Denelle West 9745 Weld County Road 57 Keenesburg, CO 80643 Home: 303 732- 1009 Cell: 303 503-9551 2 Diana Aungst a_ From: Kathleena Hill [kathleenamh r@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 10:20 AM To: Diana Aungst Cc: Christine Curl; Sunny Brown Subject: Application for Motocross/ Case Number USR12-0050 Dear Diana Aungst, I am writing this e-mail pertaining to case number USR12-O059. I am the real estate agent representing Frederick and Sheila Brown. We are currently under contract on 9508 WCR 55, Keensburg, CO. We recently found out that Dawn Scena has applied for a permit to run a motocross at her property which is 2 houses over from this property my buyers want to purchase. This has defiantly made them think twice about following through with the purchase. There ultimate goal of purchasing this property was to move out to the country on some acreage and get away from the city noise and congestion. It seems if this motocross is approved it will be none of the things Fred and Sheila signed up for. I have talked to the listing agent Christine Cud @ Colorado Tenderfoot Properties and she agrees this will be the worst thing for the neighborhood. She also lives in the neighborhood so she will be on the side of shutting this idea down. As a real estate agent our job is to try and help homeowners keep their value up on their property. In my opinion any chance of increased home values will be greatly diminished in this neighborhood if this is approved. I am asking you and your department to please consider the ramification of this approval to the quality of life and monetary damage this will cause to the existing neighbors and the town itself. My buyers really love this house and property and had started making plans on moving their after the closing but have to now make a hard decision on weather to move forward or not. I appreciate you taking the time to read my e-mail about our concerns and hope you will consider ALL the neighbors feeling and concerns. Sincerely, Kathleena Hill 303-807-5390 cell Kathleena Hill Broker Associate ABR, SRI, CNE, SFR, SRES James C Hill RE 9110 N Washington St. Thornton, CO 80229 303-807-5390 cell 303-287-3266 fax ubKc-a\s.42:09 Diana Aungst Subject: FW: USR12-0059 Scena/Comments To: Weld County Dept. of Planning Services October 25, 2012 ATTN : Diana Aungst I appreciate an opportunity to comment on the above noted application for development of two motorcycle tracks/recreational facility in Keenesburg, CO. I strongly recomment that this request be denied by your Department. My daughter and son-in-law live near this proposed development and I spend many weekends there as well as several weeks during the year housesitting and caring for their animals (dogs, horses, cattle). The property proposed for development is visible from my daughters living room. My background: I spent 29 years with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8 Air Program. I am retired but was an Evironmental Protection Specialist. During my EPA careen was the National Lead Region Coordinator for Air Programs, working as the liaison between the ten regional air offices and Headquarters in DC and North Carolina. Until retirement I was the Region 8 lead for approval of the Title V Air Program to the six Region 8 states. I would also mention that my brother-in-law and numerous friends were motorcycle racers and my husband often worked as his brothers mechanic. I attended many races and personally like motorcycle racing but never attended a motorcross/endurance race held anywhere close to residences. I would not want a track near my home and doubt you would enjoy motorcycle tracks near your homes as well. After reviewing this application I would like to offer the following comments for your consideration. 1 . I was staying at my daughter's home on the weekend during the March/April 2012 races. I awoke before 7:00 a.m. due to the noise generated from this event. My daughter explained that the homeowners were told in advance that it would be a "one time only" event and, therefore, they decided they would tolerate it and make no complaints. Although the doors and windows were closed, the constant noise was annoying. Normally this is a very quiet area. 2. The applicant claims this is a "family oriented recreational park" and not a retail business. I strongly disagree since they clearly state in their Site Specific Development Plan the "Sale of used or new motorcycles and accessories shall be permitted during normal business operating hours and in the Special Review Questionaire they state "Retail business proposed for the recreation park would be in motorcycle parts sales. These would be new replacement high wear or spare parts, such as tires, inner tubes, protective clothing, goggles, sunglasses, pedals, levers, handlebars, rims, gears, sprockets, gloves, pads, helmets." Note that normal business hours are being 10:00 a.m. to dusk (except on special 2-4 day events). Obviously this is a retail business. I would also mention that the businesses they refer to in their application are retail businesses and do not create excessive noise. I believe it is possible that "recreation park" designation is an effort to continue being taxed as agricultural land rather than commercial. 3 . I know first hand that the wind in this flat agricultural area can often be very strong and that sand motoreross tracks can contribute considerably more to the poor visibility and air pollution experienced during high wind days. 4. I understand the property in question consists of only 30 acres with a very large home and one motorcycle tract already established. Surrounding areas are homes with flat fields that I believe few EXHIBIT 1 (t� individuals would enjoy taking a scenic walk around; particularly if that walkway is adjacant to two motorcycle tracks and a horse trail. In addition, the noise from motorcycles often "spook" horses. 5. While contending to be a "family oriented recreational park" the applicants have requested permission that they be granted the maximum permissible commercial noise limit of 80dba. It is impossible that they can even meet 80dba when 40 motorcycles (plus crowd, loud speakers, and pit noise) are all contributing at the same time. In addition, their Development Plan states "This standard shall be monitored and enforced only as a result of an adjacent property owner complaint." This provision removes the rights of all the other property owners effected by the dual track noise to voice a complaint that would have legal standing. Many property owners in the area will definitely be effected although they may not be "adjacent" to this property/"recreation park." 6. Fire danger to the pasture lands from numerous motorcycles (both personal and racing motorcycles) in the area is a valid concern, especially during dry conditions. I'm confident that neighbors that have experienced the tires first hand will expand on this concern. 7. The roads around this area are dirt and the traffic they anticipate would create road damage that no amount of watering will prevent. In closing, let me again state that I firmly believe this application must be denied based on the air and noise pollution it would impose on my family, the other property owners that live in this Keenesburg area, as well as me when I stay at my daughter and son-in-law's home. Sincerely, Patricia M. Reisbeck P.O. Box 367 Firestone, CO 80520 303-833-2142 2 Oct. 29, 2012 RECEIVED TO: Weld County Department of Planning Services OCT 3 1 2012 1555 N . 17th Ave. Weld Counts a; Departure nt Greeley, CO 80631 GR!✓E�� I 01-FIU Attn. Diana Aungst Re: USR12.0059 Scena This letter is to register our objection to USR12-0059 Scena. 1 .) They state that motorcycles and horses are proposed uses. We know from personal experience that those two activities do not mix. Therefore they will default to only motorcycles. That is not an agricultural use of the property. It should not be permitted to run a commercial enterprise on agricultural zoned property. 2.) During the March/April 2012 event held on that property, the noise started at 6 am and continued all day. We live approximately 3 to 1 mile from the property across the fields and still heard a lot of noise. It certainly disturbed our peace. They also state that there were no complaints. That is only because they told everyone that it was a one time event. The noise upset all the livestock in the area for the whole day and they were impossible to work with. 3.) During the March/April 2012 event, riders rode across private property and through high, dry grass and pasture land to ride down the private part of road 57 and harass and tease the dogs that live there. I had to ask them to leave more than once. They also created a fire hazard in the dry grass with the sparks from their motorcycles. A prairie fire was a real possibility and one this area has experienced before. We have no wish to go thru that again. 4.) They state that approximately 350 people were at the March/April 2012 event and there could be upwards of a 1000 at future events. On 30 acres! ! ! We run gymkhanas on 120 acres in Ft. Lupton and when we have about 250 people we are wondering what to do with everyone. That includes about 90 riders, 100 vehicles and 150 spectators. I do not want to even envision 1000 people and all the vehicles on 30 acres. 5.) They state that there are no houses near. That is totally false. From the road in front of their house I could see 6 houses and there are many more just over the ridge.(see maps) The noise carries to all of these houses. 6.) The truck driving school, landfill and auto salvage yard do not cause a noise problem. 7.) Why would commercial noise levels be allowed to disturb the whole area? This is not commercial land nor a commercial area. It is zoned agricultural because it is used to raise horses, cows and hay in that area. The noise associated with fanning and livestock is expected. A commercial motorcycle track is not, nor the associated noise levels. EXHIBIT-� }n 8.) A retail business has no place on this land. Retail businesses belong on commercially zoned land. 9.) For erosion control they state that they have planted trees. These trees are 1-2 feet tall. What kind of control is that? When the wind blOws out here the sand moves around a lot and piles up against fence lines and trees. Trees that size will not hold it back. Our pastures, corrals and homes will be covered in blowing sand. Real estate will be exchanged with the wind! The only way to prevent this is to cover their track with gravel or grass. 2 Bar K Ranch Charles and Kathy Kovanda 9718 CR 57 Keenesburg, CO 80643 303-732-0255 As a footnote on 10/28/12 I was trying to work with a horse in the arena when multiple motorcycles began to run on their track. The horse became so focused on and upset by the noise I had to stop before either he or I got hurt. Also all the other horses were upset and running up and down the fence lines. I had to put them all in a corral to calm them down. The cows would not eat until the noise stopped. We are supposed to deal with this everyday? Our business (an AG business) would be badly hurt, There are numerous livestock businesses in the immediate area and all would be damaged, perhaps irrevocably. H ser Aottzt& 14 !-- • h a sca -j1rS./'r Co • [ cet..)z,c_ ict ?+ ♦ .)' ) 11 e • .. , /. i T ) 2 ; /ij )/ =- -lack V 1 �.1 it0v N s lA. (L re.'' sjv 1 v n - } i ( ' IL' 1. 11 ' �r4 V. , , -(ew r i -e r 0 -C- IL IS. ('. ve.. 1I'.` c,�,,t `' �{•„,, t e, /11 k,, —'7 �_ — — - it P St 1cica— ir• ! f. il is Ni! a . de5e. 4t, : cc._ 4M. lie, 0 f '' 1 , : C. F ,_,, -cc/ , ,r,..„ .. , 7. 4, 4. , , a a— ibit C 7 sigialal 4-C. ri? osecC-2 -ere C: galsr t• - C' C. ste.e r ice aie. .01. AT (t_ e ,, ! ----- c.• Google Maps Page 1 of 17 To see all the details that are visible on the screen, use the "Print" link next to the map. Google K-x_ _ -e . :.- Mr _ . v i r " I lir% 1_1 Y t -lit -. i 0 ,Y V ,\,. a .1 it ✓Jf` ,�st b , T r y‘ H - f r., ., _ i t I • •- li� qr 7j;. r : , A i . r 1 v.j Ili --wilhoine:8•77 ...•t v '�,I F . . , , , . ti 'lc rY21".° _ __ s_ _ _ I _ _ l •,*EP. U.S. Cool nice! Survey. USDA Farm Service agency, Map it. I ' ate ` 1ei b \i-i fl,„../ "r tk)-1cksj‘j 1/4.... ics\,.,)}:d) \' () http://maps.google.com/maps?h1=en&tab--rwl 10/27/2012 Google Maps Page 1 of 18 To see all the details that are visible on the screen, use the "Print" link next to the map. Google 4114, . , :•.:, - . pi -74 - . ... I iii• tic �,. . , 41 1-) P ♦ • Z t ~ Y r ~ T ♦. 9-1.. 1/4. 4. -re , ii . ii. : .6 -.4 ♦ !` }! e • w"4. , • .. , .... . . , ,r IM , i. , 4 Ire\ DP{ .1 i •al. T II 11 ! - i • r re ~ t Icfilt-li; s 4114H is', • r- �, R11 }it 4.f # .o. i Is . iat ..141Niii, , I I '1 . � • kr Y i a . ..1 2 - - -� -_ — 1. V pie 4, 44 W. • i as -. ,.• r 1 iteo: 1 • f ' • r • -aA Acf` b� • k ire - a— -- - : -- . ...,.....1.: .: t ! ,. '. .; Ss _ _ . _ _ c . ; .1 1 1r 71) ,4 • R : e"14isi is, IA 4? ' ..— .) i Na_ 1.- 4 :ones, Map ld: ,... a .. .2,_.. ., ilit: .: t . p urry. http://rnaps.gc ogle.com/nlaps?hl=en&tat=wl 10/27/2012 To Weld County Planning Department °/D Diana Aungst: URS 12-0059: Objection Letter from Jerry & Patty Feather, owners of 2 properties which have a direct view of the proposed Track. We live at 9757 CR 57 with our 11 year old daughter Brittany. Our house sits on the elevated back/West portion of our original 80 acres; we have a clear view of the proposed "birt RaceTrack". We heard all the noise and saw the dust in the air the day of the Dirt Track Races and drove over to see what was happening. We spoke to a lady running the gate to get onto the racing viewing area and she said she was with the dirt bike organization that was running the "one time event". There were lots of people, motor homes , trailers, helicopter and mostly noisy bikes. The dust from the bikes on our loose "blow sand ground" is devastating. County Road 55 was a torn up where the bikers had spun around and around tearing up the road by spinning their tires. Bikers were riding everywhere on the properties to the North on Rd 55 even onto Section 16 across Rd 55 to the West which is owned by the State of Colorado and just going and going until they were out of site and then they would come flying back onto the road and back to the race track. Most of these riders are kids and have no driver's licenses or plates. The Biker's that were in upcoming events had no space to ride on in the designated race track area, is as it is too small and they had to ride anywhere they could. The space allocated for this track, 29 plus acres is too small for its usage. All of the ground that is torn up by these bikes will take a lifetime to return to its natural state and in the meantime noxious weeds will cover the area that was disturbed. Weld County maps show the track to be, out of Scena's boundary several times. Section 15 is dotted with homes' 7 on the West side Rd 57. On Rd 20 side of the Section there is an 80 acre parcel owned by Craig & Sondra Pralle & a very nice home owned by Bob & Marta Sevier". On the Rd 55 side 1st you the Pralle's then 4 homes'" and a 80 acre horse property. A total of 12 homes in the section, plus another dozen within a mile or so which will also be negatively affected. This is a Neighborhood which helps each other with problems , an un maintained road 57 to weather, prairie fires and the occasional cow that gets out. This land was bought and improved by people who wanted a quiet country lifestyle that was agriculture, most of us grow hay grass , have animals or in our case have planted over 1 ,000 grape vines. Why doesn't a person filing for this "race track" variance have to post signs? We have worked hard to have a nice rural neighborhood where you can sit on your patio and enjoy the sunsets , but instead the noise and dust from this track is very disturbing. We would have complained before but we were guaranteed it was a "one time thing". But as we sit on our patio this early evening and the end of a very hot summer and see that mess over at 9264 CR 55, Dawn Scena's home, it is depressing. We have gone to the effort and great expense to purchase and completely remodel one of the houses on Rd 55 on 50 acres but if we had known this race track was coming we would not have spent the time and money. We had plans to buy the Wroblewski home at Auction on November 20th, the day of this hearing, but if with this track is still pending, we will not. Wil_Bj1; (. Mr. Ron Law, who I believed to be the husband of Dawn Scena came over to our house at 9508 CR 55 and we had a nice talk. We talked about the Dirt Track and Ron said it was a one-time event. This was not very straight forward and another reason I am against this track. I had to find out from my neighbors that this Track was proposed. Dawn Scena should have had to go to all the property owners and get their feedback and approval of a majority. On a legal point, someone either Dawn Scena or the previous owner John Montoya were paid by the Public Service Company for the Transmission Line Easement' which crosses their property on the West end and is 160 ft. deep the whole width (661 ft.) of their property. PSCO must be petitioned to use their Easement. Has this been done? Also did the county or water authority approve the right of adjudicated water deeded to Sharee Sloan to be freely used by the RaceTrack? We have 2 properties in this section, a total of 122 acres , which will be affected by this Dirt Race Track and are against this in the strongest way possible. These types of commercial properties should be South of Rd 18 by the Driving School and the Firecracker storage containers. We believe that a precedent has already been set by zoning being along Interstate 76 & Rd 18. Rd 18 is to be paved very soon and all the additional traffic, will not be a problem with a track South of 18. We are adamantly against this Race Track! Sincerely, Jerry & Patty Feather, 9757 Cr 57 & 9508 CR 55, Keenesburg, Co. 80643 The 7 homes from South to North are Kyle Law at 9037 CR 57,Mike Clemenson at 9265 CR 57, Don & Judy Luke at 9355 CR 57, Jesus & Kathy Ramirez at 9611 CR 57, Vern & Denelle West at 9745 CR 57, Peter Brown & Clarice Tyler at 9769 CR & Jerry & Patty Feather at 9757 CR 57 ' Robert Sevier 28285 CR 20 The 4 homes on RD 55, 1St home is owned by the petitioner for the Dirt Track, Dawn Scena at 9264 CR 55, next is Don Wroblewski, then Jerry & Patty Feather's remodeled home at 9508 CR 55, then the vacant home owned by Dwayne Novak at 9740 CR 55 and finally an 80 acre horse property owned by Doug Wilson,(DRAJLLC) & he owns 19 acres North of what would be RD on Rd 55 " The Public Service Company Line exemption #3743862, Diana Aungst From: Kathleen Ramirez [Kathleen.Ramirez a@frontier.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 6:56 PM To: Diana Aungst Subject: dirt bike track We live very close to the proposed dirt bike track in Keenesburg, CO. This email is to register our concern and dismay over the prospect of the track. Our neighborhood is quiet and peaceful. That is why we all live here. It is wrong to bring in something that will be disrupting the peace and quiet and invading neighbors. Each one of us needs to be considerate and respectful of our neighbors. We have all moved to this area for just that. Our property value has already decreased significantly with the fall in the housing market and the last thing needed is for a drop due to this dirt bike track. There will be noise, trash, and disruption of the "peace" we have. This should not be put in a rural community of houses. You would not build this in a city neighborhood/ so it should not be allowed in ours just because we all live in the country. Please do not allow this to disrupt the life each one of us has. It is not right or fair to our community and is ceertainly not fair to smash home values due to someone wanting a dirt bike track. There are places appropriate for that, our neighborhood is not it. Please be considerate of each of us who chose this community before the bike track. This is invasion of our privacy and our property. This will bring down our community and the people who love living here. This should definitely not be allowed. Kathleen Ramirez, R.N. CFNP Class 98 9611 County Rd. 57 Keenesburg, CO 80643 303-345-5653 Advisor: Dr. Sharon Weyer Projected Clinical Bound: 2015 EXHIBIT 1 9,5 a- c Diana Aungst From: claricetyler a@aoi.com Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 12:41 AM To: Diana Aungst; peterbeeee@aol.com Subject: RE: #USR12-0059 Motocross racetrack proposal Peter Brown and Clarke Tyler 9769 County Road 57 Keenesberg, CO 80643 Weld County Dept of Planning Services 1555 N 17th Ave. Greeley, CO 80631 Nov 11, 2012 RE: #USR12-0059 Motocross racetrack proposal. Application date 7/15/12 by Dawn Scena, 9264 County Road 55, Acct R1032702, Parcel 130515000033 Dear Ms. Aungst and members of the Weld County Planning Services Commission: My husband and I oppose the establishment of a commercially operated motocross race track less than a mile from our home. The health consequences resulting from exposure to sustained noise is our primary concern while fire hazards, re-zoning, and damage to the unimproved roads in the area are secondary concerns. The volume or power that sound emits is measured in decibels (dB). Agricultural communities engaging in agricultural activities typically generate from 35 to 45 dB whereas a jackhammer at 50 feet registers 95 dB. A motocross 'dirt bike' on the other hand emits from 85 to 110 dB as measured 200 feet from behind the motorcycle. According to Kawasaki, its 2013 KX250F model has a muffler assembly which keeps noise levels at or slightly below 94 dB while retaining power. Multiply the noise a typical dirt bike makes by 40 — 100 motorcycles and you have the potential for significant noise and potential health risks for the community. As a medical technologist, I know first hand the potential health consequences of loud noise. Sustained noise levels above 80dB has been shown to increase the risk of heart attack by 20%, increase the risk of neurological problems, induce hearing loss and cause stress related disorders. As sound is not diminished significantly on our relatively flat prairie, noise generated by racing motorcycles will be heard for miles around. The noise generated by the racing motorbikes will cause stress for the humans and animals in the area and will manifest itself in health problems for everyone exposed to the noise. In the motocross plan, it was stated that the maximum permissible noise limits would be 80dB but the decibel limit would only be enforced if Scena received complaints from adjacent property owners. When such complaints occur, as they most certainly will, Scena will surround the track with bales of hay. Being a scientist and having a measure of common sense, I know that hay does NOT mitigate noise and is in fact a serious fire hazard. The Scena proposal begs the question: What legal recourse will adjacent and non-adjacent property owners have when noise levels exceed 80dB (and they will) and will neighbors be put in the inevitable position of being `Sound Police'? My husband and I recently moved from the Portland, Oregon metropolitan area. In Oregon, not far from where we lived, a motocross race track was shut down because noise levels ran consistently above 80 dB and MIBT_ neighbors complained repeatedly to the Clackamas County Sherriff's department (File #Z0348- 10-C, Thomas Private Park). At that time, Clackamas County had a noise limit of 60 dB in its agricultural communities and the motocross race track consistently exceeded those limits. North of where we lived, in Washington's Snohomish County, agricultural noise levels were mandated to be less than 49 dB during the day and 39 dB at night, yet a motocross race track was still proposed and was brought before the planning department (F/N 07-101924-000-00-LU Granite Falls Motocross Track). It has been several years now and the track is still in the planning stages because the owners have been required to conduct two noise studies and have been unable to demonstrate that they can keep the noise levels below 49 dB. The first study (ENVIRON) determined that dirt bikes emit from 83 to 90 dB of noise at 200 feet and that the sound was only diminished 6 dB at 2,000 feet. The second noise study (Geomatrix Consultants, Inc.) determined that a 25 foot earthen berm around the track might decrease noise levels to 64 dB although they could not prove that 500 feet beyond the berm noise levels would be below 64 dB because noise carries up and over earthen berms. (Never mind the fact that the county's limit is 49 dB .) In fact questions arose as to the validity of the second study about berms being successful at mitigating noise because an ORV noise study, conducted by the California Department of Parks and Recreation, concluded that because a typical motocross bike at 50 feet emits 89 dB, an earthen berm could not possibly lower noise levels to 64 dB beyond the berm. In contrast to the Granite Falls track, which is being proposed on a 75 acre parcel surrounded by 350 uninhabited acres, the Scena track is located on hundreds fewer acres with neighbors in much closer proximity. A motocross race track within our tight knit agricultural community just does not make logical sense. Oregon and Washington are not the only states with counties that have been fighting the organization of motocross race tracks. Some states, such as Montana and Ohio, have initiated lawsuits to shut down tracks in their states. In 2003, Leonard Moyers brought a civil action against Lorraine Morine in Flathead County, Montana. In district court, the judge ruled that the track was a public nuisance because of the noise and the tracks were ordered removed and the land restored to its natural contours. In 2001, In Angerman vs Burick in the Court of Common Pleas, Wayne County, Ohio, it was ruled that the Burick's could not use their property as a commercial motocross facility because the excessive noise caused substantial and unreasonable interference with the Plaintiff's use and enjoyment of their property. The motocross track was also considered a nuisance to nearby neighbors. Another comment in the Scena plan stated that a "commercial limit of 80 dB" would be maintained, which does not make sense because our area is zoned agricultural, not commercial. I anticipate that in order for this track to become a commercial enterprise, the area would have to be re-zoned commercial which would seriously impact the ability of the surrounding agricultural land owners to receive government subsidized farm grants and tax breaks and would damage the economy of our area. Most of our neighbors use their property for raising horses and cattle or growing hay and grapes and can not afford to have their acreage re-zoned as commercial. It is also well documented that dirt bikes damage the environment and the potential for damage can spill over onto adjacent lands. Fire is the worst damage that can happen to our properties. The argument in the plan that fire can be controlled is faulty, especially in our arid dry environment. Many of our fields are sown with hay and that hay becomes dry by April or May. Consequently fire is a grave concern. There is no plentiful supply of water in the area, such as a lake, river or reservoir, for fighting fire, so extinguishing blazes are next to impossible. Most of our neighbors harvest rain water in underground tanks for their crops or rely on well water to nourish their livestock, but there is no plentiful supply of water to fight fire. Motocross participants often bring cans of gas to refuel their bikes and leaking fuel mixed with sparks is a recipe for disaster. Most of our homes and crops are quite expensive and the increased threat that fire from a motocross track presents is unacceptable. In addition, County Road 55 and 57, as well as County Road 20, which runs perpendicular to 55 and 57, are all unimproved dirt roads. County Road 55 and 57 end at two of our property lines and are therefore not maintained by the county. Large numbers of motocross participants (upwards of 1000 per event) would 2 seriously damage our community's roads making them unusable for our neighbors that require those roads for access to their property. Lastly, Scena stated that the motocross tracks would not be used in the summer, yet the tracks were continually used this summer, especially on the weekends. It does not appear that the Scenas plan on following their own spring and summer schedule, When my husband and I were out tending our vineyard this summer, the noise from racing motor bikes was so loud we often had to go indoors. Racing occurred on the track all summer long and the noise and fire danger, in one of the hottest worst fire seasons in history, was unacceptable. In conclusion, many of the statements in the Scena motocross proposal were either untrue or misleading, especially about the lack of neighbors surrounding the track. The plan did not list the 13 homes, all within 1 mile of the track, who would be impacted by the noise, dust, fire hazard and road damage that such a motocross track would pose. This proposal is an especially egregious one and is a dangerous use of the land. Please take mine and my neighbor's health and environmental concerns into account when making your decision. I am certain that if your dream home were located next to a proposed motocross race track, you would have no problem stopping this proposal and so my husband and I are confident that you will make the right decision. 3 Diana Aungst From: Judith Luke [judithluke10@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 9:00 AM To: Diana Aungst Subject: USR12-0059 Scenalcomments From: judithluke10@gmail.com To: daungstaweldgov.com Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2013 Subject: USR12-0059 Scena/Comments To: Weld County Department of Planning Services ATTN: Diana Aungst - We have some real concerns about the proposed race track for the above application. We are strongly against this proposal for many reasons. We are the seventy acres to the east of the proposed track, the home they cannot see. However, we can hear them almost daily. We were awakened rather rudely one beautiful day last spring by loud speakers well before 7 AM. Not having been notified by the owners that they had a race permit, we thought it was a police action. Our neighbor a mile north called us to see if we knew where the loud speaker was coming from. To our surprise the property behind us was full of motor homes, travel trailers, and other vehicles, including many motorcycles, resembling buzzing bees from a disturbed hive. The noise went on well into the evening. During the day, some of those buzzing bees escaped the hive and visited the neighborhood. Underage riders with unregistered, unmufflered bikes used Road 20 as their own race track, riding at high speeds. Two of the many invaders came up our section of Road 57, revving engines, spinning circles, and using driveways as mini jumps into the ditches and back to the road. One set continued on to Road 18. When we took our dog for his afternoon run in the back fields we brought binoculars to see how many participants were still there, hoping against hope that it would end. What we saw was very disturbing. On the School Section we would see the bobbing heads of riders traveling through the tall dried grasses there. This brings up the first objection to the proposal. Fire: We have lived here thirteen years. Our property has suffered damage four times from fires, all of which came from Road 55. The daily wind, especially in the summer, can carry the flames from one property to another. Just last year a boy started a fire that spread for one mile-- five of our acres burned. An unknown source of a fire, accompanied by a 40 MPH wind burned 1 EXHIBIT U5 V (3-0059 -'1 600 acres and was stopped fifteen feet our home and barn. A teenager with an old jeep on safari behind his grandfather' s house burned the jeep and damaged six properties--ten of our acres. The owner to the north of the Scena property threw a hot drill on the ground-300 acres burned, needing three fire departments and LaFarge water truck to save our homes—every blade of grass on our land was decimated. It takes two years to recover that loss of natural grass. Numerous neighbors have reported the trespassing of motorcycle riders outside the Scena property on to private properties—tracks tell the story. We have a set on our back pasture. I have seen their family member using Road 20 for his open throttle racetrack. On any given day they plan for 40- 100 riders on bikes with no mufflers or spark arrestors. They plan to have campers, and we assume barbecues. And then there are the containers of fuel, oil, and additives. And smokers. So when is the next fire going to come? Will it be a child on a hot motorcycle? Will it be a spark into the adjoining property? Or will the wind blow over a grill and send the sparks? They have no contingency for taking care of the danger other than the local, volunteer fire department. Ground contamination: This plan calls for 40 to 100 bikes daily as well as the vehicles transporting them. They also want visitor parking, pit areas, delivery vans, street motorcycles, and overnight camping,for motor homes. There will be oil drips, spilled gasoline, antifreeze, and other additives. They have no real plan to handle the pollution from these petroleum products. They say, "Any contaminated soil would be quickly abated." How? There is no way that the sand on that property will be abated with so many motorized vehicles present. Will they be running around everyday spot cleaning? Where will they dispose of the contaminated soil? If the plan for this race track goes through, by the end of next summer, not only will the fragile grasses on that property be decimated, the sand will be contaminated. Dust: The wind starts blowing nearly every day in the summer around noon when the sun heats up the air. And when a storm is due the winds can register over 40 miles per hour. They say, "No erosion control is planned, as the land is mostly sand and absorbs quickly." Nice fantasy, but not true. The sand does not hold moisture and barren land blows for miles out here. Anyone who lives out here knows the sand shifts with the wind and erodes away during large snow or rain runoff. Driveways are always being reconstructed. This application calls for a decimation of the delicate grasses on that 29 acres . If this passes, within a year the land will be barren. Parking lots, two race tracks, pit areas. Also, on her Facebook page, Ms. Scena proudly shows one of her family members doing a sand wave, where the sand is thrown up in the air far above the rider' s head. If they are going to affect appropriate dust control, how would they contain that much loose sand? The blow sand is going to leave that bare acreage and spread the contaminated soil to everyone around, to the pasture to the south, to the homes on the north, to our hay field, to our neighbor' s pastures and crops. How many years will it take to create an EPA situation? To contaminate our fields and pastures? This is poisonous to this rural farm community. 2 Water available for dust-for their tracks, not the rest of the damaged land, will be supplied by Ms. Sloan. But her water is for irrigation. Is irrigation water to be sold to commercial concerns? What other sources will they use to keep the dust down when the entire 29 acres is barren? Noise pollution : The neighborhood has already had a taste of the noise pollution coming from this property. Now they want to bring that disturbance to us seven days a week, plus invade our privacy with bigger events of 2-4 days. One day this past summer a blast of noise came through our living room windows, over the television and air conditioning. We thought it was an explosion. Upon further investigation we discovered that the noise came from a motorcycle on Scena' s property, obviously being tuned up, nearly a mile away, continuing for at least ten minutes. The combines who cut wheat out here do not make that kind of rattling, screeching, explosive noise coming from that bike. Is this, then, to be the new norm for the two dozen families within a mile of Scena' s? Will the bikes (40 per day) be coming to practice and to tune up their motors with blasting engine noises? We have the right to peace and quiet in our own homes. 80 decibels of noise: The mean average of noise for a factory is 85 as prescribed by OSHA. This can go up or down ten decibels in range and still apply. Noise at these levels requires protection, anything from earplugs to earplugs with ear muffs, including outside work such as oil well drillers. If the explosive engine noise we recently experienced is any indication of the noise they plan to bring to this farm community, then it is pollution. Our rural, quality of life will be gone. Will their riders be required to have earplugs to protect the younger riders? A castle high wall of hay bales will not stop the noise. There is a reason why no race tracks are found around Brighton, none in Fort Lupton, and the one southwest of Hudson was closed due to noise complaints. Keenesburg had one but the same held true—violation of the peace and quiet in the neighborhood. Roads: The county roads are not designed for the traffic needed for this commercial race track. Is the county going to upgrade the access roads to accommodate this plan? How will the neighbors be affected who live on these access roads—dust, traffic? Will the roads become rutted and full of potholes regularly? Will it be graded daily? All-purpose park: They want this to remain agricultural because by declaring this commercial their taxes will skyrocket. But the mention of horses is just a ruse. They have not included any upgrades for any other interest than racing motorcycles. They mention horses, but to be fair, where is the all-purpose horse arena with holding pens for cattle, parking for horse trailers, day stalls? Who in their right mind would go there to ride horses with all the motorcycles buzzing around? Will the entire 29 acres be fenced with six foot chain link for safety? What about security lights for campers and parking? Emotional distress: I have a file of emails from very concerned neighbors. Ms. Scena is a school bus driver and knows this area well. She knows how quiet and serine this community 3 is. And yet she wants to destroy the lifestyle of so many for the expansion of her hobby. And what' s next? Will another owner want to have demolition derbies, monster truck races? Relocation: This plan needs to find another site. Areas in the county have already been addressed for commercial business with access roads, locations near the highway by the railroad where they could counter the noise. With all the open areas in Weld County, surely there is a place for this track away from so many families and where they can make their noise. The Planning Board members would not want this in their backyards and neither do we. Thank you, Judith and Donald Luke 9355 WCR 57, Keenesburg, CO 303-204-2513 4 Diana Aunrst From: darts2 a@aol.com Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 4:37 PM To: Diana Aungst Subject: Fwd: Zoning changes on Wcr 55 Hi Diana: Doug Wilson sent to me I am forwarding to you. Thanks Jerry Feather Original Message From: Doug Wilson <doug(c7wilsonbrothersroofing.com> To: Jerry Feather <darts2taol.com> Sent: Thu, Nov 15, 2012 3:42 pm Subject: Zoning changes on Wcr 55 11/15/2012 Dear Sirs, I would tike it to be known that I am opposed to having zoning changes to allow any commercial zoning. I own 80 acres directly to the property under consideration for rezoning. I use this property and my 20 acres across the road for grazing. Rezoning would severe negative impact on my property. I urge you to decline any rezoning. Douglas A. Wilson, Manager o fDRAI tic 5499 WCR 69 Keenesburg, Co. 80643 970-209-0296 ILIMPE59 Diana Aungst From: Sherri Minne [slm.minne©gmaii.com} Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2012 8:06 PM To: Diana Aungst Subject: URS12-0069 We would like to inform you of our extreme opposition to URS12-0059. Our concerns are the noise and air pollution, traffic on county roads that are already in extremely poor condition, and the destruction of our rural lifestyle. The oil industry traffic is bad enough, and the dust pollution at times is unbearable to say nothing of trying to travel roads where the dust is so thick you can't see 50 feet in front of your vehicle. That situation will be considerably worse if this motocross track is built. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sharon Minne Fredric Minne 8505 County Road 57 Keenesburg, CO 80643 Diana Aungst From: Robert Sevier [sevierro2@aol.com] Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2012 4:29 PM To: Diana Aungst Subject: USR12-0059 Weld County Planning Dept Diana Aungst Concerning URS 12-0059 I am writing to express my strong support for Dawn Scena's recreation park. I live just to the southeast of the proposed park. I have known Norm and Dawn for awhile, and this all started out as a small track for their kids and neighborhood kids to ride on. I have in fact enjoyed sitting on my front porch watching the kids out in the field building a jump with shovels and rakes, and enjoyed watching them having a great time riding. I attended the first race they had . There were security guards on site (along with other people they had asked to keep an eye on things) and at the entry gate there was a large sign stating the rules of the park. For example some of the rules stated were - No Alcohol, No Fires, No Leaving the Premises. Also, almost the entire property had been mowed, except for a few spots that couldn't be mowed because of the terrain . There was very little grass to burn, and if there had been a fire there were way more than enough people there to put it out. There was a fire several months ago on a property with long grass close by and the entire southeast side of the fire was put out by neighbors not the fire department. The track was watered twice during the day and there were not dust plumes traveling all over. The entire property had been for the most part roped off, and I spent almost the entire day at the race sitting on the east side of the track as Norm had asked me to do, so that no one would leave that side of the property. I did not see anyone leave while I was there. I live on Road 20, and came home a few times during the day, and the only people I saw riding on the roads were the normal kids from the area who ride around here all the time. I never saw people racing on road 20. No one was hurt, there was at no time any helicopters or UFO's. There was plenty of parking with space left for lots more cars. No one was parked on the road except for area people who wanted to see what was going on, and I did not see people riding everywhere as has been suggested in previous letters. I thought the event was very well planned, especially for their first try. It was a great day, and fun was had by all who attended. I feel Norm and Dawn should be allowed to enjoy the use of their property just as everyone else out here should . I feel the noise, dust, and pollution issues are being far overblown. For example, we live a few miles from a dump. The pollution from the dump is of far more concern to me than the pollution from a few motorcycles. As to the dust, it doesn't seem to be a concern when people allow their 4 legged friends to eat every blade of grass on their properties, clear down to the blow sand. After allowing their animals to overgraze their properties the weeds take over and when the wind blows we get dust, weeds and trash from their properties. As to the roads, unless it's wet you could drive 10,000 cars in and out of here and not even know it. The grader comes on a regular basis and the roads are maintained well . The trash trucks and oil field trucks going up and down Road 20 are a much bigger concern . I am sure that the huge dust plumes I watched the oil field 1 F1- B�T53t trucks make coming into our area this summer put more dust into the air than this small track will in my lifetime. If straw bales don't work for noise suppression, why do the oil companies waste all that money and diesel fuel hauling them from site to site? I have heard they cut out a lot of noise from people who have had wells drilled on their property. Oil Company's don't spend a dime they aren't forced to, so I'm positive they have a proven purpose. People should be a little more worried about the gasoline and oil that could leak out of the vehicles in the junk yard and seep into the ground than about any gas that leaks out of a motorcycle. A motorcycle holds about 2 gallons of gas and 1 quart of oil . I also know that the majority of any gas that spills will evaporate. I am sure Norm and Dawn would not allow any gasoline spills or trash to go unattended . I am also confident Norm would attend to any gas spills as soon as possible and dispose of anything he had to in accordance with EPA standards. I am sure someone can give him the number of the retired woman who lives in Frederick, and who worked for the National EPA and somehow thinks this involves her. In conclusion, I am not a scientist nor am I going to site studies from San Francisco or Boulder, but I don't believe the proposed track is going to cause anyone to have a heart attack or go insane. Motocross may actually relieve stress for people who ride and those who enjoy watching. I totally understand neighbors concerns, but instead of being rude to anyone who wants to listen to both sides, maybe they should open communications with everyone. Norm and Dawn are extremely nice people, and I' m sure would answer any questions anyone has. As stated before, I feel many concerns have been overblown and exaggerated, and believe many neighbors are holding Norm and Dawn to a higher standard than they hold for themselves. Robert Sevier 27713 C.R. 20 Keenesburg CO 80643 2 8335 WCR 55 Keenesburg, CO 80643 To: Diana Aungst Re: USR12-0059 Motorcross Race Track Application We are Bonnie and Robin McIntosh, 8335 WCR 55, Keenesburg, CO 80643. We are writing this letter to protest the above request for a permit to operate a Motorcross Race Track at 9264 CR 55, Keenesburg, CO., 80643. Our main objections are noise that continues all day (it seemed like), which we already experienced when they had an event back in March. The roar of one motorcycle is bad enough, but when you multiply that by 100, even the cattle are traumatized. We have already experienced the ungodly amount of traffic produced by the event back in March.. When their event was over we had bumper-to-bumper traffic from road 20 to road 18 on CR55. Our farm extends % of a mile on the stretch of road between 20 and 18. 'l'he dust raised by that amount of traffic was unbelieveable. Our cows pasture alongside road 55. The dust caused by the traffic already traversing this road is bad enough, so if you add 3-400 cars this race track is going to cause, the amount of dust raised will more than likely cause our cows to come down with dust pneumonia. You can't have that amount of traffic on a country dirt road without repercussions. The next problem we face is the devaluation of our property. A 40-dog kennel was recently approved by your board to exist next door to our property. As if that's not bad enough, we are now faced with the possibility of your board approving a motorcross race track. Who would want to buy property next door to a dog kennel and just up the road from a motorcross race track. My husband and I are at the age we want to retire, and we were counting on the proceeds from the sale of our farm to last us the rest of our lives. Now it looks like we are not even going to be able to sell our farm because of the undesirable practices that are being approved to exist in our neighborhood. Why doesn't Norm Law and Dawn Scena put their race track out where there are no houses for miles. That way, if people move into the area where a race track already exists, they do so knowing that they are buying next door to a race track. As it is, we moved here 11 years ago for peace and quiet. We feel like we are being raped by practices being allowed to move in around us. We've worked hard on our property to improve the value of it. I guess we are at your mercy as to whether or not all our efforts were in vain. My husband and I appeal to your board to consider the wishes of the vast majority of the people that live in this area and withhold your approval of USR12-0059. Sincerely, Bonnie and Robin McIntosh � �R1.15131105 To Diana Aungst, Case if USR12-0059 We are writing to you regarding some disturbing news we have heard. Yesterday we finalized the last needed item to purchase a home and parcel at 9508 WCR 55. The news concerns a theme park featuring a motocross motorcycle track just 200 hundred yards from our soon to be front door. We have been looking for four years for a retirement place for our remaining years and found this place. I hope you agree that listening to motorcycles from dawn to dusk every day, 6 months out of the year and who knows how much dust we will have to deal with, is not how you would want to spend your golden years on this earth. Please consider ours and other property owners in the area that will have to deal with this situation and turn down this motocross petition. Thank you. Fred and Sunny Brown 303-286-8021 EXHIBIT , . 3 Anadarkpt Petroleum Corporation November 19, 2012 Via e-mail and Federal Express Diana Aungst Planner Weld County Planning Department 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Re: Scena USR Permit Application Township 2 North, Range 64 West Section 15: N/2SW/4 Weld County, Colorado Dear Ms. Aungst: Weld County has received an application for a site specific development plan and use by special review permit from Dawn Scena ("Applicant") for property in Weld County described as a portion of the N/2SW/4 of Section 15 in Township 2 North, Range 64 West ("Property"). This letter and the enclosed notice letter are submitted on behalf of Anadarko Land Corp. and Anadarko E&P Company LP (together the "Anadarko entities") and also Kerr-McGee Oil & Gas Onshore LP ("Kerr-McGee"), an affiliate of the Anadarko entities, with respect to applications for development that the Applicant files with the County that include the Property. The Anadarko entities own the mineral interests that underlie the Property, and Kerr-McGee owns oil and gas leasehold rights in the Property. Please find enclosed a letter dated November 19, 2012 entitled "Notice of Mineral Interests owned by Anadarko Land Corp. and Anadarko E&P Company LP and Oil and Gas Leasehold Interests Owned by Kerr-McGee Oil & Gas Onshore LP" which I ask that you provide to the members of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners to be made a part of the record in the proceedings. Please send notices of future hearings on applications filed in connection with this matter pursuant to C.R.S, § 31 -23-215, C.R.S. § 24-6-402 (7) and C.R.S. § 24-65.5401 , et. seq. to the Anadarko entities and Kerr-McGee as follows. Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Kerr-McGee Oil & Gas Onshore LP Attention: Andrew Voelker 1099 18th Street, Suite 1800 Denver, Colorado 80202 EXHIBIT l' l Page 2 Thank you for your consideration in this matter. If you have any questions, please call me. Best regards, j r t Andrew Voelker Enclosure cc: Jeff Fiske, Esq. David Bell Molly Buchanan, Esq. Don Ballard Dawn Scena/Applicant flnadarIqat Petroleum Corporation November 19, 2012 Via e-mail and Federal Express Members of the Board of County Members of the Planning Commissioners of Weld County Commission for Weld County 1555 North 17th Avenue 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 NOTICE OF MINERAL INTERESTS OWNED BY ANADARKO LAND CORP. AND ANADARKO E&P COMPANY LP AND OIL AND GAS LEASEHOLD INTERESTS OWNED BY KERR-McGEE OIL & GAS ONSHORE LP Re: Scena USR. Permit Application Township 2 North, Range 6 4 West Section 15: Ni2SW/4 Weld County, Colorado Ladies and Gentlemen: This notice letter is submitted on behalf of Anadarko Land Corp. and Anadarko E&P Company LP (together the "Anadarko entities") and Kerr-McGee Oil & Gas Onshore LP ("Kerr- McGee"), an affiliate of the Anadarko entities, with respect to an application for a site specific development plan and use by special review permit submitted to the County by Dawn Scena ("Applicant") for property in Weld County described as a portion of the N/2SW/4 of Section 15, Township 2 North, Range 64 West ("Property"). This letter is notice to the County that the Anadarko entities own mineral interests that underlie the Property and that Kerr-McGee owns oil and gas leasehold interests in the Property. The Anadarko entities and Kerr-McGee assert their continuing rights to develop their mineral interests and oil and gas leasehold interests in accordance with applicable law and regulations. The Anadarko entities together own all of the minerals that underlie the Property, including the oil and gas. The oil and gas interests owned by the Anadarko entities and the oil and gas leasehold interests owned by Kerr-McGee are real property interests that entitle the Anadarko entities and Kerr-McGee to develop, operate and maintain oil and gas wells on the Property in accordance with applicable local and Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission ("COGCC") regulations. The oil and gas interests owned by the Anadarko entities and Kerr-McGee have significant value. Rule 318A a. of the COGCC rules and regulations currently provides that oil and gas operators are to utilize five drilling windows in the quarter section where the Property is located, one in the center of the quarter section and one in the center of each quarter quarter section, to Members of the Weld County Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners November 19, 2012 Page 2 access the Cretaceous Age formations from the base of the Dakota formation to the surface. Other COGCC rules apply to formations other than the Cretaceous Age formations. Please note that Kerr-McGee operates two producing wells in the E/2 of Section 15 and has rights to drill wells in the SW/4 of Section 15 where the Property is located. The Companies are concerned that the County may allow future or additional uses of the Property in ways that prohibit or substantially impact the development of the oil and gas or cause their development to be more onerous or costly, and they prefer to have a procedure in place with the Applicant that provides for the joint use of the property for both oil and gas operations and the use proposed by the Applicant. Colorado case law and statutory law provide that the mineral owner and its lessees own an independent property right to make reasonable use of the surface, to include access to and use of the surface estate to explore for and extract minerals.' Approval of any future surface development plan that forecloses the rights of mineral owners and lessees may be a compensable taking. The Anadarko entities and Kerr-McGee request that the County provide for the private property rights of oil and gas interest owners in all application approvals for the Property, and the Anadarko entities and Kerr-McGee continue to assert their rights to explore for and produce the oil and gas they own for the Property. Please make this Notice and the comments in it a part of the record in the proceedings. Very truly yours, Andrew Voelker cc: Jeffrey Fiske, Esq. Dave Bell Molly Buchanan, Esq. Don Ballard Dawn Scena/ Applicant 1 See Frankfort Oil Company v. Abrams, 413 P.2d 190 (Colo. 1966). Note also, Gerrity Oil & Gas Corporation v. Magness, 946 P.2d 913 (Colo. 1997), which discusses in a footnote on page 927 the principle that the owners of both estates must exercise their rights in a manner consistent with one another. Diana Aungst From: price, michelle [michelle.price@judicial.state.co.usj Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 2:48 PM To: Diana Aungst Subject: FW: Please proofread Michelle Price Adams County Combined Court 303.654.3225 ga From: price, michelle Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 9:58 AM To: Price, Tom (Tom.Price@anadarko.com) Subject: Please proofread Dear Ms. Aungst, I would like to inform you of our firm opposition to URSI2-0059. It is with my deepest concern that I send this email. My regret is that it has taken me this long to write it. My husband and I both strongly disagree with Motocross track proposed for near WCR 55 and WCR 20. We reside at 8280 WCR 55. We have lived in this area for most of our lives. We have raised our kids and now are raising are grandkids in this area. This motocross would cause an extreme amount of traffic on County Rd. 55 which in turn would cause an extreme amount of dust and required maintenance because of the heavy traffic (bus campers and traiters).These roads are barley maintained as it is. One of our biggest concerns is the noise factor. My husband and 1 along with our neighbors live in this location to enjoy the peace and quiet. We all work 40 plus hours a week, the last thing we'd want is for our peace and quiet to be disrupted by motorcycles on Saturday and Sunday mornings. Another concern is the fire danger. Dirt bikes along with dry conditions would obviously increase the risk for prairie fires. This alone should be a key factor in opposing this proposal. This is an agriculture/farming community. The dust factor alone can put a stop to people actually using the land for its purpose of pasture do to dust pneumonia that kills cattle from all the traffic. Please do not take away the reason we chose small town living. Please deny this proposal. This IS ABSOLUTLEY NOT a good location for a motocross track. Thank you for your time and consideration. Michelle Price Adams County Combined Court 301654.3225 1 EXHIBIT To : Diana Au ngst EXHIBIT I u5rt to-o ;. RE : USR12-0059 Motorcross application trir Dear Diana, Since the day I spoke with you at the planning office regarding this motorcross application, I have spent much time talking with neighbors, researching information on such a venture, especially the long list of negative impacts it has on an area, and have firmly come to the conclusion that my husband and I are in total opposition to this application and would ask for denial from the county. Eleven years ago, we built our home here for the purpose of moving to the country to enjoy the peace & quiet. Had there been a motorcross track, a dog kennel operation, a dairy, a chicken farm, a pig farm in the vicinity, we would have looked elsewhere . Now, per our conversation, your office is planning to recommend approval of a motorcross track that will impact homeowners for miles around . Why is our freedom of choice being stripped away to accommodate one property owner that moved in AFTER all the homeowners they will now impact? Since our conversation I hope you have had the chance to visit our area, so you can see for yourself how many residents will be impacted on so many levels : 1 ) By the thru traffic on our dirt roads of not just cars, but vehicles AND trailers, doubling the impact, 2 ) By a noise decibel that exceeds healthy limits not only for humans, but animals as well, 3 ) By noxious air pollution generated from the motor bikes, the vehicles bringing them there, and the spectators, 4) By the property damage due to trespassing on adjacent properties as experienced on the day of their "event" this past March . 5) By raising the fire danger even more in an area that is on high alert every year due to the dry conditions of the sand hills of this area . Attached is an aerial from the Weld County Assessor's office showing the proposed motorcross marked by the "X" . Each box represents an existing home . In just a little over a 1 mile radius, this application negatively impacts many, many residents, not only by the noise & air pollution, but by the traffic on the roads to the site . Very few of them would have bought their land or homes in these locations had there been an existing motorcross, as I have been adamantly hearing from them . My ability to earn a living is being directly impacted because two doors down from the applicant's property I have a client's home under contract. The address is 9508 County Road 55 . This motorcross application had to be disclosed because by law I am required to disclose any material fact regarding a property for sale. The buyer has, in no uncertain terms, relayed that they will not go through with the purchase of this home should the motorcross track be approved . Their whole purpose of moving to the country is to enjoy peace & quiet. NOT to move in next to a motorcross track. Wouldn't you have the same response? Another client would like to purchase the property adjoining the Scena property to the north at 9490 County Road 55, but is waiting on the outcome of this application . They simply won't buy a property next to or near a motorcross track. The next question is what would it take to sell a home in the vicinity of a motorcross track? The same thing as when it's near a dairy, a dog kennel, a chicken or pig farm : a HUGE price reduction . We call it a Stigma in real estate . To do that to an entire area is irresponsible on the part of our county officials. We rely on you to protect this county and its residents . There is a place for Residential, a place for Agricultural, a place for Commercial, and a place for Industrial . To plant a commercial operation of this motorcross nature in the middle of an agricultural/residential area makes no sense and will be devastating to our way of life and to our quality of life . Many of these properties raise animals or crops, and neither is compatible with buzzing motorcycles and congested roads. In conclusion, the county has already been through this motorcross idea twice in Keenesburg. Both times it was approved and failed miserably, requiring revocation of the issued permits due to violations regarding the noise levels, exceeding designated hours of operation, the fire hazard, the trash along the county roads. Commissioner Kirkmeyer is very familiar with the problems at 30123 CR 398 . The precedent has been set : Motorcross tracks and residential areas simply don't go together. May I suggest that the county adopt some type of regulations regarding motorcross tracks, like the states of Oregon and Washington were forced to do. Then applicants would have a clear idea, and not waste their time and money. The applicant simply chose the wrong location for her idea, but there is still a lot of wide open space in Colorado that can accommodate a venture of this type, without disrupting an entire neighborhood . Sincerely, Randy and Christine Curl 26521 County Road 18 Keenesburg, CO 80643 303-884-3466 Diana Aungst From: Johanna Abbott [abbottjohanna a@what-wire.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 9:46 AM To: Diana Aungst Cc: Justin Mildenberger; Johanna Abbott Subject: URS12-0059 Dear Ms. Aungst, I would like to inform you of our firm opposition to URS12-0059. We hope you will take consideration of this during the hearing at the Weld County Planning & Zoning hearing on Tuesday, November 20th at 1 :30pm Justin L. Mildenberger Johanna L. Mildenberger-Abbott 25606 WCR 18 Keenesburg, CO 80643 Please do not hesitate if you should want to further contact us by phone at 303/210-7701 Respectfully, Justin L. Mildenberger Johanna L. Mildenberger-Abbott EX IBIT 1 ` -QC$ I FIELD CHECK CASE NUMBER: IiIS,C1Z005 '3 DATE OF INSPECTION: APPLICANT'S NAME: PLANNER: D.z vvA A uA C f REQUEST: oro64,x) 5,5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: L g A 46 - 3o f LOCATION: 6 cfp ei . 1..(,vtz- c.C 4crF LAND USE: N LCfl ,Z.tc. E &Ai'''t. In S 0/en/ f�wt. W Snit oo ' him" ZONING: N A (Agricultural) E A (Agricultural) S A (Agricultural) W A (Agricultural) COMMENTS: rovvvvi eivit ,11/3 1- JP/troy& Inv E„ra,., Y 4.004-1,,s TO ' ' - + 4' S LMJCwAID r✓6 r , iris._ ST P.C. Member VIEUBIT it za, ltot-- . . 1 • fir e .CrTh --,---,,. - ,, . , . . , 9 • 2 I I Na ti . i; t ,# - iy--- " - e,� -t4 it ' . i vi • . r __.. stAfrr. 4 it j M. ., r I 1 j • 44 tabbies` 1011 le P Y �s a tb ca _ mil th 4, (JeepE, . i - • .• • SE. 4 A'wo. r -, f ' - •10 ye a.. . v ., 4 I Pt II S 40:41. ., • 14'.* at- a It? 0 e II tf: 1. r-‘111111r. Lit t C . Cirille -..jilia i• : T. :. . , 16-‘ 4 . ie i'. 4 v: I "4 a • I' . I 'I- 4 dles r ir ft i -cc." • ' ` a .i 4 tis.17.. ....,... .,, is.:,, .. Itirim.H..v.` .1 •17.4. J ! \sof•N' A II 4" ii t . it r •e - 7.. •i �.iii A( 1• .1 74f • 1 ' 1•� • IP will% A ^.*••• et..5" V 1 i 1 . ,i at •� + ••A f � r -Ilili 'ea �,,,.,-. it . ai, II -V *t . ,tai If - w c. . k ri , . -4.50 le • ,-$ . .�* 1 a. y� P. Ili t . q • a 4 } • • .. s =f lusts _ st , , ..... - -- .. 4 ell Ali ,• _..�' r 4. till ( s ` • ! 4. 1 At A ht 1 isNo , gi w s i i , 1- ...: i • t1 1 mai : P i _ 1, w + •. -r •fit+ rs T. Ili • , • -• ►kJ 1 t J: • t4lbbkr' • I I 71f 1 i t ;r - • I h rn . * . --r....44...• '! • tin, '�` r i . ' .r r 4r,�. '+i i 0 ' s. s� r • ! . . '� Ilie 4 4. 106 I . . • ifit 1 la _fit to 6 I t ,, ip C 1 s its . A ' jJ, ~ • ' a 't i00, I4 4 4 ..............1._ . . I, it . .. . . . ., •t ) �1 r •• r * #1 1 �' '�'• M it 6 1I , ~- 1� /� Al A t. 15 \ I 4_ . : to .,,,, . ; a( i , 1 1 ,I t‘ .... •Ire i it,. # A. • I: ,i 4 rt : 444 0 it �- . •i , "� �-• { j ►r • j • 1' ` I! / 1 "f ' e � r t. f a j ti r Vi II t/ �� -, . $ ,� sir •Ill f • 4i j ,„-ars } i. :A • I :i. . 1 Illi: I a at . 7 k ...L.' , a - " •i 0 all7 e ' `� viiiply " • 4 �, , , ;� . • 3 t,. ate t , .p. kw y . . ,imp . ,.. , . !tit ,,ii , ‘. , . . tp,�i /lisks ...... : i .ti, • h , .. ,igh •, PI " '{ : lk ' �aII spa•' r. - mob.. 0 ~ `jam ' -J, f *iii I 1114 II :.C ii I i 4 : 11(rof , ,rcitc lobs? it • i Laii..1 Ij Har it i iiir $1•14. All... - �wa. 'Pi'. - el e 1:1,- IF tti p- 0 -... i4 f. : i - r . iJ $'pe4 Al • el rM 4-.-r, 1 s .a • .i . e e! • In;ilk I •La es - all i Me op J{ .ms's • { iii fir r ft I Y :le/I 1 iiii r. gli gig it ,` 1 dill til "ilia V I mg Yu lip el Pill Y I: - 0 • I t el M h 7c I II II % � ti • 'TI i )1 n ,, fi I t ,„'4, 1 j { e y 1 Y1 Pi I , 1 7 R 9! ji As t, it r PIS i • ++ r rith i• jr.A.IlliisIll - t i �� .A tlbWE3' I ' "lr - ' :sir � C r•0 . la:1 i. ! P • y I , Nes amaell IF --11 li • aro Mier la IMIr FOB., _ . ... ...- .4 4 4 1 y IC a.• T^J tell CR ri et t. C")a Y ,,.1 O r1• T !� In ae.r Sf! 9. -i1 �_ U1. ` U O tit. 4ION �w `rte,+, • ', w ,r cr. �� •.ate Sle, r� s� 1 �' , -, P -CAL 53 '�:,f G#�t 5 J i "J U P. I'll f r I 41111 . 'Shr4i ,t CD , 4 ______ . _-._.1 .- ....1 •...... . le0). ... n c.'d'ab,„ c., i i '- "...me 4 t. ,..- 14, "al•�, l' 1 ,, L i-r:.� "t1 i :- , .;i 'j rte s� +' i - 1] ...„3---1 til Ti f i * w � t, clr . . I. �-•. "r i'a -- .:. 4 Ir_ \ T f ,... • ``et ^"r. _ ti .h , I r. mil.•. v T^r t--3 \i - U am f . iii "IV'.‘ 22 '- - - Illnak - iirr 11 J% [F:t t 141 I — 'ft l; ' ` 4 - • . .�, 11j. 1 i S..>` `M!1'i1� il 1 . .. ii , __...Rt .._. . ... .• _ _ _ _ ___ , ,,, 'PH Ik•', •I arf-, Wig TP I•Nsii fr + • d l._S ` " it k i i an . 'Nis -!1/41 .mss: ; r .. .4 . . . ...... .. . _ ; _ •.(..z. „re., . __ L. ,, , .., ..tabbies' I ' a\ : ."-k-..._ ' Ui � �ii -, - — ' I imil 1 � • Population Density Surrounding Proposed Motocross Track Issue: Application gives the impression of very few homes close to the motocross tracks. Uses compass-point statements such as "... several acres with no visual of residence from our property." Facts: (1 ) Standing by the playhouse/ticket booth entrance to the tracks there are 6 houses easily viewed from that vantage point alone. (2) Within one mile of the Scena/Law property there are 26 houses. Here are those private home addresses and their owners: Co Rd 57, Dead end and headed South 9780, Jervis 9769 Tyler/Brown 9757 Feather 9745 West 9718 Kovanda 9611 Rodriguez 9378 Draper 9355 Luke 9265 Clemenson 9037 Law Co Rd 57, Crossing over Co Rd 20, and continuinq 8878 Stills 8872 Orr 8680 Garcia 8542 Conner 8505 Minnie (Owns all the land in that section) 8490 Erger Co Rd 20, headed west from its intersection with Co Rd 57 27713 Sevier 26906 Sydlow 26904 Gerlinn 26902 Gerlinn Co Rd 55, headed toward its dead end 9490 Gregory 9508 In escrow 9740 Noveck Dead end - Wilson (Not presently tenanted, not counted) Co Rd 20, headed east from its intersection with Co Rd 57 8755 Whitmore 28285 Boyd Arnold 28667 Wilder Peter Brown EXH IBIT November 17, 2012 / 1.o (1..11,. -z a24 u vie tat- 01S .. PETITION IN OBJECTION TO GRANTING OF PERMIT APPLICATION 12-0059 FOR THE CHANGE OF ZONING TO ALLOW BUSINESS OF A PUBLIC RECREATIONAL FACILITY (MOTORCYCLE TRACK) TO BE LOCATED AT 9264 WELD COUNTY ROAD 55 KEENESBURG, COLORADO 80643 We, the undersigned owners of interested property near or adjacent to 9264 Weld County Road 55 Keenesburg, Colorado 80643 object to the rezoning and granting of approval for the creation of a motorcycle track at the above listed address. We have many objections to the granting of the Application USR 12-0059 a few of them are listed below: The Site Specific Development Plan paragraph 3 of the plan states that all liquid and solid wastes shall be stored and removed for final disposal in a manner that protects against surface and groundwater contamination but what is important is not addressed in the plan. It does not state how or when this will be accomplished. The Site Specific Development Plan paragraph 4 of the plan states that No permanent disposal of wastes shall be permitted at this site. It does not state a plan for the disposal of the wastes. The Site Specific Development Plan paragraph 5 of the plan states that Waste Materials shall be controlled. It does not state a plan for this control of the waste materials. The Site Specific Development Plan paragraph 6 of the plan states that Fugitive dust shall be controlled. It does not state a plan for controlling the dust which in the summer months with the extremely dry conditions in this area can be extensive. It does speak regarding water and hay bales to buffer the dust. Yet this would be impossible with the high winds that are often present in this area. The Site Specific Development Plan paragraph 7 of the plan states that the Maximum permissible noise level shall not exceed the commercial limit of $0dB(A). It is using the chart provided in the Weld County Ordinance 14-9-40 and the correct land use would be Residential Property or Commercial Area with maximum noise level of 55dB(A). The Site Specific Development Plan paragraph 16 of the plan states that Special Event maybe 1 to 4 days in length with more than 100 entrants. This would be extremely loud, dusty and would disturb the peace and quiet of the resident neighbors. EXHIBIT -If 17,0 / Z• 1L ez-C1, 5 . u5. tier OO6 _ • WE THE UNDERSIGNED OBJECT TO ANY CHANGE IN ZONING OR CREATION OF THE MOTORCYCLE TRACK AT 9364 WELD COUNTY ROAD 55 KEENESBURG, CO. 80643 N .pv ADDRESS PHONE i 106 cedct7 of 3/47g,ON- 6/1111-4-03 2. Gteivicio: \._ r._,..•_ 61311 *"0 11 h- S1 e e n` :.+ 3/v 30.3 - 73t2-14c131 . t�..--tees, ., 37 . s- 17 Re- , E-5-b 4, 363432113, 4. 1 / e s 7- ve , ,/, , , h ,,, 6 3 x 3 _ 0-- sus, i i k ' 1 1 i ( 5. j .. g.ti, ,-6./?,,/ * 9 .----aef: 7°17 n IP z).9 Aftemie s Mien/ 94)ga ° 7; H keert r) i)e, u 2.) 6n Jr ( N1C 'CLi, AY lernejj fiti 3,3 zi,.2 - 8. c (WYtr ge14-49.1r;9. -CL0to. _ -- ' ‘__--L-__) La , /If) it R emeriti COI e_di , 3125 ', 7 ` - �- ii2- j. /1".C 1 . - / L-f2i-fte 11,7740,„,,, ra).,\ on no 0 ,Th.vve-uzAN- - vipl,npawrepio..32tiv3 ,,,,,6 tA . 12. ( r�11 se-17 . S AI., I-1,,&son CO -59or a .3 -5'.15-- S393 13, i --., C , hili 0 -. N t c1. 4V r CI. hoehe_sbi o1 o6til 3 R. ,yi 1/4 5,_ , 5s. ' CO 1866 ?3 1 -`r- . f'{) or l f I i i if 11 Si ' a n in h igitu r-t : SOY -173 l 1 a 16. E-alliknifilve_ 50 1 ,Mot 5 14edahrsg ' 3 3 c:,3 > 2-1AS 17. J , / m Ojh1 . /nA 106 Ai C or , C-I . Vinn&trg CO &o&' ` �g- 214 t0 wifi) „ tAft) A„1 Is? oicirbc_a J9c)(tudiwit_ittefrb-/Lb.90i, g...9 19. 6 Wret 2 z D N C ._. _. tAtEr L4e CI,42ÔW r 2atatal.�I1`l , t i _ 0 �car 1 7n/4P, h6i9/ ,, 06,y; �:�r ac . 11c 1.O � & /thJL6k/kq( � vs k 2 et --m ei`eJC-7 CR Thl \kerf Any. L . c a04611 23. : r C 7 2 <C (,rr c j c7 , 'fir- m r-S jot) tt 1 Cr..) gal- yoZZ1 • 24. 4 . useoetta g,: r , uvek, eri t -eirks\x1,,1, ` CD 5 - r WE THE UNDERSIGNED OBJECT TO ANY CHANGE IN ZONING OR CREATION OF THE MOTORCYCLE TRACK AT 9364 WELD COUNTY ROAD 55 KEENESBUR(LCO. 80643 NAME ADDRESS PHONE 1:iK, c‘Skc, (R\ tfCr___ In fc)62 1-Weit eetoisz.40u1 Co&CoLg, criar 5 ?9 --ocat 2. #OdC l[ , 0 v' han 1?-45-37 C( 57 111469,4,2,2i O Y-3 no- 7,'?- St 3 I'` 3. ged at, sac.- '532 u'c !Z n fc —4. soG" `s3 3 - fl`,e-ec37 4. ci ftlA r A 474re *4 / /.1 .'7c y 57 gOlnen <f a 44? s. goatu,12 F\vJ\(Nok3 . 7 X11C91i 6. fcV . 3 a L.3c t7 kectucsiccj8-0. 643 7. -7e f ". ea V .1/287tN.1%Cjr"a C\\P\CA AbAS-3 R.4 .\\&.‘:1\ ?,, .. ctIZI4A4 9. ,\ kv .4 & Pgiee eas70 ( -& &C 5 b 311313 Ilc2U 10 _ ii SM.-ea-tabu/L. 1363 --r?.3 Z -4 .2 4 ‘ . 1 Lc fleet Fter0 Oakairs AKS.5 Kics_ecoet:E7 al- 732 - /I 44 12. . E-c_ - '.. r.)10 att 4 c5.- rateLtth tsv S7143 Vs it . f/ ,57,- / kt, e,in - -- es _I> sa , 0,15. SAX Ir 4/1 / y9 Is G y / L 'rre, id 4 e 16. * eta (Air-- 34 / . Cie6 3 never: e t cc go eti3 17* eNe fcArThcSrThy ( Sal r , wc$- & s I8• 11)24ZEIP r 13.0)(457 (4 -,iikitet, SD)4 19. O riCr y /,0 ( re 'l ,.?i..� 4'e-''55. /- . 6'0 gcte6' 9/3 20. batiqt16L CUcvb /05/ 8 Ci? ciii Iski dson, Co ssail v O7, -- /9r V07 ? 1 � �°' ��Y i ) 1 0.5c c C ie '7/ / �' 'l sot, .} 9)24? --� -3err- `f 7 7 'f )e e • t 2._ t, _ „�_ _ II .. 11a y _ 4 L 1 f r � {i .' (Tint .. 23. v1.- - lCf)Sti ( I r ed - -- ':e i 5 10 _1 u-�'N3 C -� `tt % °7)`-4 % 24. SA e l/�, _ Hz e of 4x4- en nest gerde4,4 I' g t 75d' l 39 0I NAME ADDRESS PHONE 25. ii4vkttet 1 :- x. - E &ott /&gES eize%co J n 3f,'-?..912aite) 26. Easikk; *\.,kstE / c' Ai4 , , af t( kt' - 3 N . 6 9f q 27, tt&' wt /Z 0c OP( c.,y4 et) 45113 -- 5/17-- N ,' 3, VKWIV/28. T , es:_____s- 29e 0- nig `� " ti 5 O Y / 4 / 8f37 12i� tfJcvic rM30. tee 8 I / fit,' , D - 1- , Gicj G 31. if?2, ;: A1,41. 5 1 ?“:". i __, ‘_,-, ' 71 ,.-77t:_,..stocgj 32. fgaett 01PM Clisci- ii--*A-P2/0047ty.,74_,crin 33. 04knu - slat- till; 7/ (doc 63 d- 1 , . 4 . 450poos t t... 34 a '. , '� ' $ �j� _ ' - _ Rpee0 - 2,0,CeL J . e# 3S. ' ' l . 27-€10S .''C. ileity-d•44 ,--rek off \ c �' 9r /efl / 74/ q; '�� 303 al�• r � U-S*- 49X, � is 37. p Alk-aficitep GLis\MCIYL---- Int;t•Atr- L. ( WoLcitha______ ,38: .t. _ 'V Ilk; _, *-1-27 Y-- (-- c4- 'VI i-kurtsar, co 39. ,c0t0111116Cfk . I CA-ILA .---P r O M� IC€ C�171 66 41. (1,- niet i lay? 4, Ift_1(1/7 _ RIO?, EH Xi A ai.5D-i) 1 . 112(. ." %, ‘ . i i ( I . it : -19A5 /5 LC ( ill dil 1-4-tioira‘Keio 170 Pt .. :3351r wait Fei etw_ 1/4voratilo 40. i ) °I Roy ft kiALpo Lucie qg 4ucisopi 1 cio - 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. NAME ADDRESS PHONE 25. .7 - _ _ 2 'e,ie p a-)R n 90 `. -tco 26. Ii.. -e z`efl a en U7 c2O i 3 97 ' t> 27. 28. 29. 30. 31 . 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41 . 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. WE THE UNDERSIGNED OBJECT TO ANY CHANGE IN ZONING OR CREATION OF THE MOTORCYCLE TRACK AT 9364 WELD COUNTY ROAD 55 KEENESBURG, CO. 80643 NAME ADDRESS PHONE • 81 g 95(c-c- we 4E-5 °7 ateAlasooteivic, cn-3- aO4# ast3 gairb, A nrse. wen_ se7 it9eene_ ell-An-D 1107..204 -26'n 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21 . 22. 23. 24. PETITION IN OBJECTION TO GRANTING OF PERMIT APPLICATION 12-0059 FOR THE CHANCE OF ZONING TO ALLOW BUSINESS OF A PUBLIC RECREATIONAL FACILITY (MOTORCYCLE TRACK) TO BE LOCATED AT 9264 WELD COUNTY ROAD 55 KEENESBURG, COLORADO 80643 We, the undersigned owners of interested property near or adjacent to 9264 Weld County Road 55 Kcenesburg, Colorado 80643 object to the rezoning and granting of approval for the creation of a motorcycle track at the above listed address. We have many objections to the granting of the Application USR 12-0059 a few of them are listed below: The Site Specific Development Plan paragraph 3 of the plan states that all liquid and solid wastes shall be stored and removed for final disposal in a manner that protects against surface and groundwater contamination but what is important is not addressed in the plan. It does not state how or when this will be accomplished. The Site Specific Development Plan paragraph 4 of the plan states that No permanent disposal of wastes shall be permitted at this site. It does not state a plan for the disposal of the wastes. The Site Specific Development Plan paragraph 5 of the plan states that Waste Materials shall be controlled. It does not state a plan for this control of the waste materials. The Site Specific Development Plan paragraph 6 of the plan states that Fugitive dust shall be controlled. It does not state a plan for controlling the dust which in the summer months with the extremely dry conditions in this area can be extensive. It does speak regarding water and hay bales to buffer the dust. Yet this would be impossible with the high winds that are often present in this area. The Site Specific Development Plan paragraph 7 of the plan states that the Maximum permissible noise level shall not exceed the commercial limit of 80dB(A). It is using the chart provided in the Weld County Ordinance 14-9-40 and the correct land use would be Residential Property or Commercial Arca with maximum noise level of 55dB(A). The Site Specific Development Plan paragraph 16 of the plan states that Special Event maybe 1 to 4 days in length with more than 100 entrants. This would be extremely loud, dusty and would disturb the peace and quiet of the resident neighbors. WE THE UNDERSIGNED OBJECT TO ANY CHANGE IN ZONING OR CREATION OF THE MOTORCYCLE TRACK AT 9364 WELD COUNTY ROAD 55 KEENESBURG, CO. 80643 NAME ADDRESS PHONE 1. til 0141 , 77/1 (417 A3 -7,5 -6,2_53-'' lei Je 4c,, i' -e -� 7/f d/e 57 e ' 73,E— O � 3 r l 3 b 44w ger,fr 5 9i ' % i' AO b -1/2528- 65efifre 4 4 � r %el.-. es—k- g O - 2S / •- —9-29 ' S.: -.19 - 44:$ 5. - r 7 Ft ` t . # /57 , 9757 3 — 732 /7 as/ C / 3 s — 6 - 7 7. ( . /j/c -y- - L %&A q? (-).. .:(rhipdsr7_' , ::: _.6,7 9/ 8. setv/ \-Iniii" - C Cil 'I '. i • Jett 1S3 ‘ I ?e. ri/ t :36 - 1/3 a -- 18(56.) fr t-- 4 N.) 01/4. - rf 1t 9, tit, i 'r,. IL / _ '2 / ./ i* \ t57 '739- iL:( 1 . . ‘, 04 17•5 Lie Pon "ii, VS1 t\% it\SSc\ ma . Clq7c6" Laci C 1 0 15. 1 ' /00 ,rCil shei, et d fa 50,5r soy 4 1 45,, et iz e-, 771 (4444 ..r_ a. C- 1 4 7 w b- - -k,( ' l t0 i 7 ? i , -.,c ' d. 'c' 9 9o' 3 -?22 -* P/6 18. /1( Iwo ct I --- _ a 19. - i .. .a SIA-Ck0 Lk. .,e, X5-1 - -I-3 , -oak 1 20. dr7 Al - (9c9 51.349 r c2 `0315 -60Y ) 2t . OL-2712- c- ' - 5 ? 3o3 - 732 tit if 22. t s-4, IA) c., 1 S7 Z0 3 7,3 z --424f 23. 2CIe2ee2O y 24. 29W ce WC C 3O:'>-- 7 NAME ADDRESS PHONE 25. rel /4/pte 4,2 vq ,1 el? 20 26. le:plAtai,/- s & t ao ate 700 --/c09 ..„-----_ e9so c.e 3-3-- 28. _I if'/lk-12z'ea ,,:( 3 O3 -732---146 29. , ' -e ---- t 303- 7 32 --n/ z4 30. 9 \ifil e. .-5,56-c CS tc:i-6 •• 7i 2.- -t,. 31. (911,A0 19<det4Wit-JikArt , S3 3,5°- c-xs'r ?col ~ -73r ti ! i'' 32. Vtrievt, < td fire fr(b. we Z O3r staza - 3V79 33. ,,tom` 2 (1d ( '1K2d 3c3T9) 5--,6-73( 3 f &. a&P Mlle 57 , 3 61A- 81a034A,--r-je LieW S 7 9 3 5L1, q 202_,cy 36.1/4 c d' 6 g / V 7o S3 Y O z--A 9 37. (52404da/II ,1,2615.)/ c. I' rig 903 -(..519(-5-Yi 38. i l ,�`z" ` ._,x.it.+Q -2- 6, 07, 0 to C'.. . .�° 3 ° 3 - 53141 - '' l 639. 'tat 77.-creA 0 03 0 tecice4 it cfca L,53 c< Vot 7( itoitte iL;Hik, 2 ( 1 ( O ..3rt _ I ai, m ` st�- oL e 41 -• is--tom1 2&OO c x`' IT '9' >0 is ≥ 2 ?ofl g:e. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49, Good afternoon everyone . My name is Jan Jervis and I am the recently retired principal of Centennial Elementary here in Evans . I live at 9780 WCR 57 with my husband John . We have 80 acres . We've lived there for 16 years in a house we designed to fit the site and our lifestyles as we grow older. Since 1996 , we have heavily invested our money , effort, time , and expertise in our property. It is truly our slice of heaven on earth . We cannot imagine living anywhere else . We are roughly % mile away and just over a slight hilt from the proposed site for the motocross race track. During race days , the noise , including their PA system , drove us indoors . Even closing all our windows , we still had to turn up the radio to drown out the noise . There was a fine mist of dust, similar to a light fog in the air. Yes , we , and nearly all of our neighbors, are truly and deeply upset. We want U RS 12-0059 to be absolutely denied . . . here . . . today. E_ ,XH BIT 2 �2a Z� w zR ► 2- 0.501_ We wish to present our case briefly and yet specifically address the relevant issues. We have 7 Presenters each with specific expertise who have researched and prepared their topic. Each will address a single issue in our case . We would like to make these presentations in order followed by a brief summation . Each presentation has been timed to respect your time . At the conclusion , we will submit a Petition signed by people in the affected area . We will also provide a copy of our presentations to you to further document our case . We hope this will be useful to you as well as a record for Staff. Thank you . I ' ll begin my introduction . We are a diverse group of families, young and old , living within a one mile radius surrounding the proposed site of the motocross race track. Of the 26 homes there are horse properties, small farms , ranches , people have cattle , chickens , ducks , goats , you name it. Some raise hay and feed crops . There are families with kids and retirees . In normal times, we are staunch individuals out there . We mind our own business. We live and let live . However, the prospect of the motocross race track forcing its way into our community has changed that and galvanized us like nothing before . In response , we formed a cohesive group of neighbors to actively and aggressively defend our homes and lifestyles. We all CHERISH our peace and quiet, clean air, and safety. We will not give it up easily. Please understand that we honor and respect the rights of Ms . Scena to work at gaining income from her property. Property rights are something we all hold dear. We also want you to know that have nothing against the sport of motocross. Some members of our group are enthusiastic bikers . They are us , and we are them . Our research has shown that successful motocross tracks typically start in areas that are sparsely populated or outside of an effective radius of involvement for existing neighbors . These areas grow and develop in accordance to the race track, usually with light industrial or other things that are not affected by a race track. If people don 't want to rive next to it, they don't move there ! It's really quite simple. Everybody is happy, the neighbors and the motocross enthusiasts . This situation , however, is completely backwards. They want to locate their race track in the midst of an existing , well-established , residential/agricultural community of families. There are 26 homes inside of an effective radius where noise and dust levels are toxic. This is unacceptable . It's like trying to force a square peg into a round hole . It simply won 't work without a lot of damage . As a result of property value losses due to the market, and then substantial further loss of value due to the proximity of the race track, we cannot sell out and move without substantial losses . Lowered appraisal values are likely to force some into an underwater situation with their mortgages . We will be captives . We have no recourse except to fight it as long as it takes . If this is not resolved today, our fight will not end . It will continue in any legal form or fashion necessary until this public annoyance and nuisance is removed from our midst. This is not a new issue for the Keenesburg area . There are recent precedents here with previous similar attempts at starting a motocross race track. They failed and were shut down decisively due to overwhelming public outcry. We will address this later in our presentation . The following areas are a concern to us. We hope that they will concern the County as well : Noise: Clarice Tyler, a professional medical technician and supervisor for Kaiser Permanente will address this issue . Dust: Judy Luke , a retired educator of Weld County RE- 3J and longtime resident. Fire : Vern West, a Professional Fire Fighter and Fire Engineer for Westminster, knows his subject well . Roads/Traffic : Jerry Feather, an independent businessman , has researched this subject Waste Removal : Trisha Draper, a Paralegal who has worked for the court system for 20 years, will discuss this Real Estate Issues : Christine Curl , a Professional realtor experienced locally, will cover these issues Omissions and Errors in the application : Peter Brown , a retired Facilities Manager for Fortune 500 companies , will address these oversights and shortcomings . Then Peter will give us a brief summary and overview of our major objections to this application to conclude . We thank you for your time and attention . We live here ! NOISE and MOTOCROSS RACETRACKS Good afternoon, planning commissioners. My name is Clarice Tyler and I appreciate your time and attention to our concerns about the proposed Scena Motocross race track. My husband, Peter Brown, and I live at 9769 County Road 57 in Keenesberg, which is less than 3/4 of a mile from the proposed track. This is the Weld County codes yardstick that the motocross track has to measure up to: I. Article IX NOISE, of the Weld County code, states that the intent of the code is to protect the citizens of the county from excessive, unreasonable and unnecessary noise (14-9- 10). 14-9-20 defines EXCESSIVE NOISE as: • Harmful or injurious to the health, safety or welfare of an individual. • Of such volume, frequency and/or intensity that it unreasonably interferes with the enjoyment of life, quiet, comfort or outdoor recreation of an individual of ordinary sensitivity and habits. • Unreasonably interferes with the value of real property. 14-9-30 Prohibits EXCESSIVE NOISE: • Noise may not exceed 50-55 dB in residential, commercial or non-specified areas. • No person may operate a vehicle (including a motorcycle) without a muffler, nor shall a person operate any vehicle in unincorporated Weld County with a muffler that has been equipped or modified with a cutoff, bypass or similar device or modification. II. Article I ASSEMBLY PERMITS states in Section C the applicant shall not allow the sound of the assembly to carry unreasonably beyond the boundaries of the location of said assembly. Sound created from the assembly which measures more than 55 dB, beyond the boundary of the assembly, is considered unreasonable. III. Typical motocross motorcycles GENERATE 96 dB OF NOISE and many noise studies have bore this out. In fact, Kawasaki touts their 2013 model as having a modified muffler that can keep noise levels at 94 dB. Each increase in dB is 10 times the sound and pressure. To keep things in perspective, a freight train blast generates 96 dB of noise, although that noise is brief and not sustained. The passing train generates 85 dB of noise. IV. ADVERSE HEALTH AFFECTS OF NOISE: As a medical technologist, I know first hand the health consequences of noise. Sound is more than what your ears perceive, it is pressure on the human body. We are objecting here to the high pitched, high decibel of sound that a motocross track will generate. The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) has determined that a loud blast or explosion or prolonged exposure to noise levels above 85dB can have the following health consequences: • Gradual or sudden hearing loss which is permanent and irreversible. • Increased fatigue and irritability. • Tinnitis (ringing in the ears) which is difficult to control. • High blood pressure. • Increased or abnormal heart rate which can lead to increased risk of heart attack. • Upset stomach. • Insomnia or difficulty sleeping. • Disruption of the development of babies before birth. V. NOISE generated by Motocross Race Tracks is a serious community concern. The following tracks were established without taking into account the consequences of noise and the affects that noise had on the community. The tracks were eventually shut down, but not before the community involved suffered both physically, emotionally and financially because of the noise: • Weld County, Keenesberg: The motocross race track was shut down. • Clackamas County, Oregon (Thomas Private Park Z0348- 10-C): The noise consistently exceeded county mandated levels of 60 dB. There were numerous complaints to the county sheriff that noise levels were well beyond 80dB and the track was finally shut down. • Flathead County, Montana (Moyers vs Morine): Judge ruled that the motocross track was a public nuisance and ordered the tracks removed and the land restored to its natural contours. • Wayne County, Ohio (Angerman vs Burick): Judge ruled that the Burick's could not use their private property as a commercial motocross facility because excessive noise caused substantial and unreasonable interference with the neighbor's use and enjoyment of their property. • Snohomish County, Oregon (Granite Falls Motocross Track F/N 07-101924- 000-00-LU) 1 924- 000-00-LU) on the other hand, contrasts sharply with the Scena proposal before you: i. The Granite Falls track is located on 75 acres in the center of 467 acres of uninhabited land. In contrast, THE SCENA TRACKS ARE LOCATED ON ONLY 29 ACRES WITH LITTLE MORE THAN 10 ACRES BETWEEN THEIR TRACK AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES. ii. A 25' high earthen berm completely surrounds the Granite Falls tracks. This keeps noise levels at 68dB, better, but still high and does not quite meet that county's requirement of less than 58 dB. In stark contrast, the Scena proposal does not consider utilizing a BERM, EVENTHOUGH 26 RESIDENTS LIVE WITHIN 1 MILE OF THE TRACKS AND NOISE IS A SERIOUS CONCERN. THE SCENAS INSTEAD PROPOSE USING BALES OF STRAW WHICH DOES ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO MITIGATE SOUND. iii. The 75 acre park has a cyclone fence completely surrounding the area to prevent bike enthusiasts from leaving the area. A FENCE DOES NOT SURROUND THE SCENA PROPERTY AND RIDERS CONSISTENTLY LEAVE THE AREA AND TRESPASS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. iv. A 1000' swath was cleared around the outside of the fence to prevent the spread of fire. A 1000' SWATH AROUND THE SCENA TRACK WOULD INCLUDE 13 RESIDENCES. v. Fire extinguisher stations were positioned every 75 feet to mitigate fire. NO FIRE EXTINGUISHERS ARE PROPOSED IN THE SCENA PLAN, ONLY BALES OF STRAW - WHICH IS, IN FACT, AN EXTREME FIRE HAZARD. vi. 5,000 gallons of water per day will be sprayed on the tracks to keep dust under control. This will be accomplished with the help of a water truck that will water the tracks every 2 hours. The water will be stored in a 2.2 million gallon clay lined reservoir. THE SCENA PROPOSAL HOPES TO USE IRRIGATION DITCH WATER WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT CONTAIN WATER AT THE TIME IT IS NEEDED. vii. All roads to and from the Granite Falls tracks and the surrounding area are all paved. ALL OF THE ROADS FOR TWO MILES AROUND THE SCENA TRACK ARE UNIMPROVED DIRT ROADS AND CAN NOT SUPPORT THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THE PLAN PROPOSES. viii. The Granite Falls track has constructed a roof covered area with concrete floor which is sloped to drain oil and gas into a collection basin which will be pumped out by professional petroleum removal service. THE SCENA PLAN DOES NOT APPEAR TO HAVE ANY PLAN FOR DISPOSING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE. In conclusion, this track, especially as it relates to sound, has not been thought through. One of my neighbors, Kathy Kovanda, told me some disturbing news: She said that when the two day event occurred last April, her cattle and horses were nervous and stressed and refused to eat because of the noise. If cattle do not eat or have nervous energy because of the noise, they won't gain weight. No weight gain means no income. While she was riding in the Pasteur, a motorcycle rider spooked her horse and threw her off She sustained many broken bones due to the fall: her clavicle, arm, 2 ribs, pelvis and her leg were all broken. She spent 6 weeks in the hospital and was in casts and on crutches for the next 3 months. A motocross race track is just not practical given the high density of homes in our agricultural community and the noise dirt bikes generate. We urge you to veto this proposal. We live here! 1 My name is Judith Luke. My husband, Don and I live on 9355 Road 57, due east of the property in question. I am a retired educator for the Keenesburg RE3J School District. My husband is a retired engineering manager. We are the property the applicant describes as having several acres and no visuaL..from our property. Actually we have 70 acres. The back 50 we cut for natural grass hay for my registered paint horses. However, although the applicant cannot see us, we are well aware that they are back there because of the constant roar of motorcycles, one so loud it rattled my living room windows. i`m going to discuss the total lack of dust mitigation as reported on this proposal. First, the land on and around section 15 is sand. Our property has sand for 3.4 feet down until it reaches a hard pan. The grasses are fragile and when disturbed are replaced by noxious weeds or become blow sand. The blow sand is not static, rather any exposed sand is dynamic and will erode and blow, relocating anywhere the wind takes it. When the crops are newly planted on Road 20, the winds often create dust storms until the crops begin to grow. The dust from these storms rise two to three times the height of houses as it blows across the landscape, and can be seen moving for over a mile. The applicant's property is about 29 acres. They have two tracks already in use around five acres in size. They want parking for visitors, parking for motorhomes, and then traffic daily from cars, pickups, delivery trucks, trailers for towing. If this is passed, that 29 acres will become a sand lot, with loosened sand ready to leave their site and settle somewhere else with the wind. Some wind storms are well over 40 miles per hour, some last more than 2 days. The only water source sited in the proposal was for the race day last March. There is no dust mitigation for the daily use of this land and the tracks for 20-100 bikes a day that will come to practice, including the pickups and trailers. According to the applicant, Sheree Sloan allowed water to be taken from her irrigation pond to water the track only for that race. And FIRE My name is Vern West I live at 9745 WCR 57. My occupation for the past 21 years has been Firefighter/Engineer for the City of Westminster Fire Department. Since building began on this section of land: WCR 55-57 & 20 to future 2216 years ago I am aware of 4 major wild fires on this section of land. In each case the fires came dangerously close to more than 1 home nearly causing catastrophic damage that would have cost us everything we have worked so hard for. For example according to Southeast Weld Fire Protection Dist. Report #156 dated 7/11/10, the fire burned 50 to 60 acres before the firefighters reached the scene. Hudson fire departments help was needed and approximately 200 acres were burned before the fire was extinguished. In each case the fire would have caused us to lose our homes instead of the loss of our pastures, fences and landscaping that it consumed had it not been for the generous help of neighbors and friends. The local fire departments work hard and we applaud them for their service, but they are ill equipped to handle the urban interface complications that come with building in a rural setting with no hydrants for water supply. With that being said, we are all aware of the inherent dangers and we are willing to accept the calculated risks in exchange for the life style we all love and enjoy. But now we are faced with a proposal that will significantly increase the potential for catastrophic loss to our pastures, livestock and homes. This is a burden we should not be forced to bear. Motocross bikes run at extremely high temperatures with no heat shields. They have no spark arresters on their exhaust to guard against wild fires. Nobody can guess what the weather will be in any given year, but the prairie grasses can easily be ignited at most any time of year in our arid climate. We did not complain about the one time use race on March 31st thru April 15t because we believed it to be just that. A onetime event. But since it was mentioned in the application lets discuss the horrors we endured. The racers did not and will not confine themselves to the proposed property. Racers were and will be parked up and down Weld Cty Road 55 filling gas tanks, smoking cigarettes and cooking over open fires as well as other functions related to outdoor camping and racing as you might imagine. Racers were and will be riding their hot, spark producing motocross bikes on WCR's 55, 57 and 20. They were riding on the Lukes dry hay meadows. They were and will be riding on the dry wheat and stubble of the government land west of the proposed race track. Most racers will not have self-contained Motorhomes as stated in the application. We will be forced to deal with open camping and the unique dangers associated with young dare devil personalities in our back yards. I had a conversation with Thomas Beach the Fire Chief for Southeast Weld County Fire Protection Dist. Chief Beach told me on 11/19/12 that he had concerns beyond just a helicopter landing pad. Chief Beach explained that there are no stipulations for access of emergency vehicles. He would like to see a designated improved road for fire and ambulance vehicles to guarantee access for the inevitable injury and probable fire. He went on to explain that there should be a secondary improved road for egress. In case of fire there may be over 1000 people frantically trying to escape the race track by one small one lane road, which by all standards will be inadequate. Every assembly should have a minimum of 2 means of egress. I as a firefighter I know that smoke as well as fire can be hazardous and deadly to humans, pets, and livestock. I do not believe that we the neighbors of this proposed but ill-conceived race track should be forced to face the danger to life, health and property that this venture will no doubt create. WE LIVE HERE Southeast Weld Fire Protection District Response Report Call Type: Fire-Grass Station 'i Times: Call Report Number 159 Date 7// 112010 Dispatched: 1700 Li 3901 I 3932 39,42 ENRoute 17 : 10 [a 3902 r1 , 3933 J 3943 On Scene . rr el - 17A 5 D 3903 EJl 3935 Ei 3945 Clear/Avail 19:56 Ill ' 3905 I J_ ' 3930 El 3946 L-i . 3922 [ J 3937 , �. 3951 _ 3931 p 3941 j Location : 9740 WCR 55177T-. •� . � . . ' — �. I City: Keenesburg - Fire Personnel Responding 1 . Adams, Walt 6. Nash, Terry 11 . 16. 2. Dreher, Tony 7. _ Rupple, Corey 12. 17. 3. Huwa, Tyrun 8. Schweitzer, Jeremiah 13. 18. 4. Johnson, Carl 9. - 14. 19. r 5. Maupin, Shawn 10. 15. 20. Summary of Incident Paged to a controlled bum out of control. Upon arival found multiple structures threatened. Personnel worked to extinguish the fire which already spread over aprox. 50-60 acres. During the incident, an intoxicated party assaulted Tender Command personnel and threatened to take one of the tenders to his own residence. The party left in his red Ford pickup and returned again attempting to take the radio of Tender Command . 3971 arived at Tender Command post and sent the DK individual back to his residence. One Engine crew and one Brush crew were taken away from the fire line to help mediate the situation with the DK party. SO was requested by 3971 and dispatched at 17:49. SO was in the area at 18: 10 and contacted 3971 at 18: 15. DK party was contacted by SO, but not arrested. Weld County Sheriff CR# 3357. Hudson Fire was requested for mutual aid and brought 2 Tenders and 2 Brush trucks as requested . The weather was hot and dry with wind conditions starting to the south and changed to the west- northwest by the end of the incident. The fire was extinguished with aproximately 200 acres burned. No structures were burned . After extinguishment, the owner of the residence at dispatched location said that "his son had been burning weeds and it had gotten out of control" The owners were away from home and driving back home at the time the incident started. Another resident stated that it may have been started by a BBQ unit, but we have no knowledge of which address. A tractor with a bush-hog style mower was also seen mowing in the area prior to the firer Equipment Lost or Damaged -• • r &" ._ M ...�_. 'i'� 1Iti- ,'�{�r. '� / � � ' . Ip � Cdr Lw:J�y'�w. - lea-7'-�,� lL'i�1�.. �i.'�;i�i` !_�.�v� �n"��.fs��=1S•• f �'s:. �a:::��1..•�1 Water Source `[ J`� Pump pr Li Tender aflydrant Assisting Departments: Hudson Fire _J Other: 7 Le , ! Officer in Charge: ipiri Shawn Report By: I. m ��''��'Y'. °. .r , j i Y1 • I 1 ' 1 1 . I , J 1 1 N " ", t 4 1 _ :1 r I I �LLVI •rrTT Y ':+ 1 'I r } • N. 1 I 41141. p laA Ie! 'r1 _yr{ t� .tire I S ` !� • - yGy r " 1)1,l 1•1t !* f S' n — i Hi ; My name is Jerry Feather and my wife Patty & I own 50 acres at 9508 CR 55 to the North of the proposed Motocross track with only one 50 parcel, (660 Ft. ) between us and we own 72 acres at 9757 CR 57 which is our residence . Existing Rd 55 Problems : • There are 3 ways to get to the proposed Motocross track. 1st from Denver most will get off at Kersey Rd, which is Weld County Rd 49 turn right on Rd 18 then go to Rd 55 and take a left. 2nd some locals will know they can take the service road from Hudson and go under 1-76 at Rd 53 then go to Rd 20 and take a right and then a left on Rd 55 . 3rd way is to get off 1-76 at Keenesburg, go North until the dead end and then left on Rd 18 and a right on Rd 55 . So a lot of the roads will be affected . • There is a Jag in the road at Rd 20 & Rd 55 and dead end at what would be Rd 22 . How many will miss or over steer this, no one knows but somebody will . Where does traffic turn around? The answer is some resident's driveway. There is only one lane into the Motocross property, the house last time had a "private lane"sign on it. • County has a problem keeping the roads drivable now. • No Police in Keenesburg, only Weld County Sheriff who have an officer stationed in Hudson . So any problems will have a time lag. Coming events that will increase traffic problems on Rd 55 : • Motocross track will generate by their own estimations 40 to 100 number of vehicles on race days and an unknown but as we can testify by the sounds it is being used . The number of vehicles on non-races ( practice) days will greatly increase if this permit is given . • The fact that there were 240 bikers at the "One time only event" tells a more factual story, they had more people at the one day event than they are asking for in their application . ( I have picture here of a Motocross race with 200 Bikers) A picture really does tell a story. Some come with their bikes in the back of a pickup, others on trailers and still some come with picture #2, pretty fancy isn't it. • 40 bike trips are 80 ins and outs or passes per day. At 100 bike trips that is 200 vehicles per day not including trips to town for food & gas. • If you extend this out for just one week this 560 to 1400 passes. • To extend further to just one month 2,408 to 6,020 passes. This on a road that now has about 250 passes a month and most of that is from Scena's with them going to work and her bus driving 4 passes a day. In the summer months, we created the most traffic renovating the house on Rd 55 . • But going back to the facts, all of the real numbers based on their "one time only event" would not be 6,020 passes a month but closer to 14,448 passes a month . This is not counting 1,000 spectators on Motocross Race day, who knows how many, Too many for their 29_acres. • We must not forget the neighborhood kids who ride here now and will do so in larger numbers if this permit is approved over the roads without plates, without licenses and without lights ! Because these bike normally do not have any street legal equipment. • An unlimited number of bikers can practice day after day. Right now without the permit people are riding the track almost every day. A couple weeks ago my wife and I saw a blue car actually driving, bouncing over the course . • Who is going to stop these kids from riding wherever they want when waiting for their turn to race? No One ! • OIL WELL TRAFFIC • 5 new Oil wells being drilled in 2013 in Section 16 with 17 in directions from these 5 wells. This across Rd 55 from the proposed Motocross Race track. • Will Weld County have to put down the dust inhibitor ( Mag Chloride) due to this oil truck traffic? • What happens when the Motocross track is having an event and the oil drillers are bringing in a constant line of these huge trucks? Somebody gets hurt when a child on a dirt bike flies out onto the road in front of one of huge trucks . Summary • This Motocross track is asking for a license which would allow up to 6,000 plus passes a month, but their own statement show they will get almost twice that many. • The Motocross Race track will need flagmen for all this traffic, has that been addressed. • We Live here and Don't want this Race track Good afternoon my name is Patricia Draper, my husband, Randy and I have lived at 9378 Weld County Road 57 in Keenesburg for 14 years. We purchased eighty acres and have built Cedarwinds Ranch. Our Log home and ranch is located approximately one half mile due east of this proposed site. The concerns and issues I wish to speak about today are wastes. This includes the management, control and disposal of the three main types of wastes, which are solids, liquids and hazardous waste. What are solid wastes? Everyone in this room can remember going to the circus, football, basketball or a baseball game. When the event was over we can also remember navigating the trash to leave the stands or event center. These items can be food wastes such as popcorn, gum, plastic bottles, paper or Styrofoam cups and any refuse left over in the end. In a perfect world, all of the above would be placed into trash barrels or garbage cans. Yet, we do not live in a perfect world. This proposed site is an open area with no fencing and it would be impossible in this environment to control the blowing debris and without barriers this rubbish will blow whichever way the wind does. Thus, impacting the surrounding neighbors, livestock, wildlife, and their properties. My next issue would be liquid wastes and there impact to the area. Liquid wastes are any substance that is in a liquid state such as the contents of porta potties, gray water from motor homes, wastewater from cooking, and/or cleaning. The concerning area is what will be allowed to seep into the soil and directly in the ground water. And how it will be controlled. l We believe it would be almost impossible to monitor all of the vehicles and people using this recreational facility. Please remember this is our drinking and potable water for our animals and most importantly our families. Just as in the area of solid wastes, we the neighbors of this proposed site do not believe that the owners/operators will be able to control the liquid waste leakage and the disposal of the stored liquids safely and cost efficiently. This may lead to possible neglect in this area. The third and the most important area of the information I am presenting to you today would be the hazardous wastes that this motocross/race track will create. These wastes include gasoline, oil, anti-freeze, and radiator water. Any spillage of these on the wound would be hazardous to the ground water and the environment. Even the owners/operators speak to this concern in their Special Review Questionnaire. Paragraph 10's last statement is telling in regards to the abatement of contaminated soil. Thereby, acknowledging the inevitable contamination of the ground. Yet, speaking of the abatement only tells us that the contamination will happen, not how long it will seep into the ground before being taken care of or the method for sterilizing the area. As Ms. Luke has stated in her presentation regarding the dust mitigation, if this spillage is not address immediately and thoroughly the contaminated soil will be allowed to blow in the wind to all of the neighboring properties. Thus, endangering the neighboring families and livestock. Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment have strict laws and penalties regarding hazardous wastes and they are inspecting and controlling sites with regards to this issue. Waste Managements facility due north of this proposed site has stringent laws and codes that they abide by with routine inspections. 2 So my concern is how is this going to be monitored and who -will be doing the monitoring. Per Ms. Aungst administrative review recommending the approval of this special permit paragraph 2(B) she states "these applicants are already in violation of operating this motocross/race track". (Violation ZCV- 12-00141) We have not even begun to have a business or recreational motocross/race track and they arc blatantly and repeatedly disregarding the rules, regulations, codes and/or the laws of this state and county. Due to all of the reasons I have stated we feel that this is not in the best interest of the agricultural community of Keenesburg and especially not in the best interest of the neighbors and surrounding property owners and their families, wildlife, and livestock. We live here! 3 Good Afternoon Board Members, My name is Christine Curl. I reside at 26521 County Road 18, which is between County Road 55 & 53. 11 years ago my husband & I bought our 30 acres there because of the peace & quiet, the incredible views, and the Henrylyn Irrigation water it offered so we could raise alfalfa for our horses & critters. There was no motorcross track, dog kennel, dairy farm, chicken or pig farm . Had there been, we would have simply looked elsewhere. In America, I'm blessed to have that choice. My husband and I even signed the closing documents, knowing that the Recorded Exemption that had created our 30 acre parcel, had a Weld County Right to Farm Clause. The same clause that Dawn Scena, the applicant, agreed to when she purchased her 30 acre parcel. Specific to this application for a motorcross track is the following excerpt from that clause: "Along with the drawbacks come 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." Most importantly, it goes on to state "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." My first question is why has Dawn Scena been led to believe that her application has merit, and then been asked to pay a hefty fee for this process? If Weld County is trying to attract urban dwellers, then there is a tangible, monetary impact to every single property affected by this motorcross. The most concrete example would be the letters in your public comment file from Kathleena Hill of James Hill Real Estate, and her buyers, the Browns. They have the home at 9508 County Road 55 under contract. It's the 2nd parcel to the north of the Scena property. I am the listing agent, and about 2 weeks after we went under contract, I was informed of the proposed motorcross track. After confirming this application with Diana, our planner, I was now required to disclose this material fact to the buyer's agent, who immediately got me the buyer's response. If the motorcross gets approved they will back out of the contract and look elsewhere. Wouldn't you & your wife or husband have the same response if given the option? The sad fact is that they would be the lucky ones. Should this track be approved, the rest of us are now stuck. Who wants to buy a home in the country next to a motorcross track? Is that what you want to come home to every afternoon, or deal with every holiday weekend? Of course not. It's a great place to visit, but you wouldn't want to live anywhere near there ! Please know that you are holding the future of at least 100 residents that signed the petition, in your hands. The precedent is already in motion regarding property values should this track be approved in ANY shape or form. A full time or part time motorcross track simply doesn't matter for a buyer of a rural residential property. They WILL go elsewhere. The house adjoining the Scena property is in foreclosure. I'm personally working with a buyer wanted to purchase it, until they found out about the motorcross track. It's all on hold awaiting the final outcome. Another precedent has been set: Two other motorcross tracks have been approved and revoked right here in Keenesburg over the past few years. The track just east of Keenesburg at 30123 County Road 398 was shutdown 2 months after approval due to numerous violations regarding noise levels, trash, curfew violations & fire hazard concerns. Commissioner Kirkmeyer was called in due to the violations. It's physically impossible to contain a motorcross track in a residential area, without a huge investment as Clarice Brown brought to our attention. The solution is a more remote location far away from residential/agricultural activity. The second motorcross track that failed was right across the street from the Wildlife Sanctuary. I have to assume it was shut down because motor bikes and animals don't do well together, as we also heard earlier. If the elevated decibel levels hurt our human ears, imagine how insane it drives the animals. Speaking of that you might want to consider the 25 dog rescue kennel this Board approved 2 weeks ago just north of my home. It will be less than a mile from this proposed motorcross track. Today isn't about winning or losing, OR about who's right or wrong. But it IS about preserving and protecting what the county has asked US to preserve and protect - A way of life that attracts residents to our county for the purpose of maintaining the great agricultural heritage it has become legendary for. Please use this opportunity to develop a set of requirements for any motorcross application, so that an applicant knows upfront what constitutes an acceptable site for an activity with such a big impact to an area. This is no corn maze, or county fair, nor remotely compatible with existing surrounding land uses. ....K. lrllrjpll. till°Thl).1.11. - liKk 46 C C LI. ir Est I , _ • ressip • • t.i ,-t i . . { + t IL k li : :t -: ~) '�,"alb f: (.rryy ``..�'\ C9-1:1D• M t f 1' -..fin.... W'' ----''''. 1. \ --a . - .......r.„--,.....: .Y ,� I Ch.S"'21 I i i i. „r�y VOIllie . yI I t, d 440 ,...., , 5i ,,a - I f4) F . ' �. .YI�V. 1 I LI • J d r _ 1► %II {+ irr-14 • ''‘`...t i'f'.'e Pit \ : E:1 <1 N. l +,'4 0' �. �. t N,, N C4i r 'wf5 I. lb' .1 r- 1-4 gvmq . 1. k. V • C t• *c, - \ : - _ ..E.1 MI G? s e + `; ,. ��r4 , j! f E so r ~ ' W� — fy, 'Tye I�:A S. I •�. "ti -y l.•1 '{a •4 Saio - _ GS } ' ,, 16 > sr.r Sri ?3 :34 . +. ir �y a, i III' f .ya .. tie C) . r. -� , :4 CO) +I. - lit �1 .__ �` -+'? ' 1 NO t♦ I • _"CI 4 ••• , • 411:41.+_'• 1.1:Tr- _ ` S i _ [\s . F eli 'i'w '! J :1;7s . 1: `TA---..02^' Wil X.; ic. ' ... .1111_41 te CLj e P I • • l ti 'i. 't ,��~ fir' " • \itT f t.rfr 1-flr ;. 6'1L_,.:, :� w • ti(r_ . ..fit. .. .:, i �i �ti r- ----.4-• •I �. 4 A NCI 6?a li , ... , FOL- _ MA` - ..tirliV.4 4-•11- 1 YT/..:V —_u 'II' .. -. a"-tn." I-M V J • G P•-� { yam l.. I , .4. 4 40711 a 1, , • ',lb . . r m: .1.5 red.itf, 1. i ink I' • i ;• lS w`r IrUD ICE �. vP sell .n MPr :a Era v , Iliti-4 1 t - �' ' 1 r O C\iii ,L• (3' Ann ..1;1711:1 1;r1 Li I ' •rIP N. ,... \ ----\16 y 1 r tji c...... vt f y+ti S. �+ 44r 1 1/4. dr _ :3 4 1 La 14.7.-----qi,IMO, <X r, - im 1:1Th ft.r.. -" IS I �� a :ti cc ci .._ , I ncce agt c Li • i 11 . • . 4 gay S "Lin �! F.:5' 71'3 -, ' LIC.-...jt,eat ir ..t a na L ��It at!! l� r CrC I t • . tea, - ' F-/ NIL ��_ 6 7a. 1,, ca 11.08 Ctie ,2 CI !,` CJ it S 110 - '[ S 1;J__ _ � - I .HZ) t9i " � X • alb rr i tst:tri ' CM`F��y% c c 'I ` • "or ..,,t0 t ,Thr t. en f II 0 1Li ' ra/�' o . Ile / ( i �) f s. A. Y �� -;, ' 1 ' ; __+LJ` �. — , - _ -IG•i+ . 311 - � .. . -', IN au 1.' T ♦J- — _ • _ __ C` >✓ 2J3 .. CL) 4tittirsitHA' _ '1•1 jt � _ it f =' 1 x p 3 r r to U) ll r r r ',•r- r„clljj � -—rats. ,X Ill* �� f!‘ • co.i.,, ... 1 ii t Ca NO r`^ ' '' '!rs '.' LZ!3 tah: ` o } a 1 a A . n I: •i Jam. - v • l 1 ur- CO at) it c____. ril e'69 ill". hk. � '- SIR,p d - fir— •_'+; a� ,, r 46. ti Alair% - OF . ii,j,, . ..... • 0,6 1, ,_ . ..... ,,,,,, ft - ;J +YY t ullit - cll-. I, _ E'. _'1,r- r ';IS RI 01 as , •,. t - it Nat ; W. sf‘ .4 * 4, _ _ r e 1 • ••••.k.2. . 'I - . .1 4 i , 4 ..,-,, -. ..., . ... ., . ... i . •(t_ . yIiiis — �a f " .n r la •c 1... r 3 ..-. - _, tat—. . '.. ii41 r eave. 11/41 k•__.-.,4 Ca.I a •a is C _ E, at,k tip S .;, ` r — r pr p t. sy Pk „ •. - O 1f - •V t 14• t- k1:.1 C� IP E . . 42 a•,, 'ry 17 •�` 4 diiii ' r't``X Y ' • tD far' t _ ' C. •. A ; Jr • 7 + �I ! c ,. , , , sax a3t '� -el c- i cU i'�` 444! t •• •� , Ps r ! ev viraIMF• I N II .. .,fir J Lz• ;,1 Y. I! 4. �y - - s. . .. 7 • L 1 L. - r.Ow L � L•x.yt'i •' yin;�. .� � � •.�;• 'a tr . - y a-r L, �y. fa`ilr. S•' y s*_ ��Y t _y C 0 .... al = 4,' �' r !M r 1 ' r 1 'u�' n-4^ t till.a j ° r- ;.I� r• :1. J•• �� g f!�,y.� SO _: 4 f '44, •r-, i_i tl�� • r , 'J....1/2;1 ,it,„ :ol i _ __ }' _ : `ate r ` r �r _ 1- �, e. -• ••f c 1T ._ •. let _ . * „ ;sr, ` '4 R � .+ter---1r�aV• '�+•- _' .,� $ r:+i ,--i — — _OS 4- Iv 4.d [v y� , .p _- i. 1 - _. r; ' •v� 1.•t. b ' i 'Sf•LL.. •-f ' , . . . ". .\• -J - • ".J��,IrP•y � r. '� .�_ it •'fit _ '� f'P ! f L .�' • . ~ . . � F• '• IA•`_ . ..'� /M - ..�^r' l�ty�.•L . . - .a- y r A�,Y ?it.. Ili ' •. . _ .., Eilli.rVic) ilitir'''') . • i li."416' .; I. ' .0.a .l. •r, Y q .• - , 1 t - Y • s� • r I F' • w it -.9 i. 1,•.•J •11#y.� • 1 • ! �i. JY� 'may _ I -it. I _ J ti y 06,.....). ''.ea': "jilt. . 4 r • . . tit. .1„„.. 1 • . • . 1 _ 4,, ti,i . . . . .0..,.. , , ....,.. ..._....„... ...„,,, .. , .., -ilit 4. . . -' _ - -s. •• -..: 4, .. , .-1/2 - . . •". o m _ tr • -r t,. :! •.ate: - •, ' t4 1_t. . ,.g, y r • 4S...1‹ . • . 44,:li et/lilt t• -•ry _ t Y �. 4�1e t� .• �7 it C • a. dt f CI . S. �._R C zr -P I , i r h • y L t c h }r�}�I�. /,..,.. fin{ _ '. . - r a.1:ff . ..4., _ .. . ..,, .CU CI Earn :,..,...0 c 1- , c CD TO, •yam r •,_ a_.i}y- _ - - - P.tif �.y ' c, ,.... 2 , C.) "' 7 4. .J L .. 4 USR 12-0059 Application Errors, Vagaries and Omissions Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is Peter Brown. I live at 9769 County Road 57. Clarice Tyler, who outlined our concerns about the anticipated noise, is my wife. Our house is at the end of extension of CR 57. Although we're each separated by many acres, we're among S houses somewhat clustered about -Y4 of a mile from the dirt bike track. We strenuously object to creating a commercial dirt bike track in the very midst of our agricultural-residential community. Our purpose today has been to provide you with the substantive information you'll need to veto this proposed venture. The race track application tends to frequently use broad and non specific statements in response to the County's requirements for approval of their site as a recreational area. Time does not permit identifying all the nebulous statements in the petitioner's application. And I'd probably insult your experience and intelligence if I attempted to outline all of them. But there are errors too, which I'll point out. I want to be brief and to the point so I'll stick to just examples of nebulous responses which really provide little substance upon which to hang your decision-making hats. First, an error — and it's sizable because it has to do with Noise. The applicant has cited Article IV, Section 14-9-10 as the basis for their contention the maximum permissible noise level for their project is 80 dB. There are 2 problems: Article IV, Section 14-9-10, is noise definitions, not allowable limits. Maybe it was a typo, but it's Section 14.9-40 that outlines permissible noise levels. It cites 80 dB is permitted in construction zones or industrial areas, only. The County permits 55 dB in all other zones or areas. So a dirt bike track can only be permitted if it remains within 55 dB. 20 dirt bikes racing emit almost 1900 decibels, Commissioners. So "noise" is a big deal. The petitioners cite "Upon complaint, large bales of straw to buffer noise level will be brought in." Since the use of straw bales to build fences is a long standing tradition for parts of the UK, I discussed straw's acoustical properties with an acoustical engineer in Cork, Ireland. His name is Dan Fitzgerald. His consulting firm is called Irish Acoustics. I explained that 20 dirt bikes racing is the equivalent in sound of one 4-engine jet airliner. I asked how many bales of straw it would take to reduce that much sound to 55 dB, the code limit. I had to wait for him to stop laughing. Cutting to the chase — l bale of straw 39 inches thick reduces 3 dB of sound. To contain 1880 dB (a jet engine's sound output) would require a wall thickness of 600 bales of straw. You need earthen berms 25 feet high — and built all around the entire track, So -- complaints is not an "if' concern, it's a "given." Errors, Omissions and Vagaries Page 2 Another example of saying a lot but giving you precious little information is Sanitation. Answers of"Portable restrooms," and "adequate toilet facilities shall be provided, monitored, serviced" are cited. We understand the intent but who defines "adequate?" If and when this park is swamped with hundreds of people, what if they're not "adequate?" Where are the numbers of these facilities, or what is the formula of how many porta-johns are needed per capita?? Fire is an omission. The application points out that last March our Fire District Chief required a helicopter landing area to be installed and asked that a front pasture area be watered down in advance of a day-long series of dirt bike races. But that appears to be the end of the story on fire prevention. Maybe I'm missing it but I find no mention of what fire prevention measures will be undertaken daily, and would be needed for months, if this track would be allowed to proceed. Our resident fire expert, Vern West, has already filled you in on what's at stake. We ask, what's going to happen if those straw bales ignite from a stone spark? We've already had bitter experiences with prairie fires. Before I move on, I read in the application that that one-day racing event was very successful with no problems or complaints. I personally know 2 of my neighbors who drove over to the event and demanded to know what was going on. The sound was horrific. My neighbors had no idea the event was being planned or was scheduled. Other neighbors, Jan Jervis our first speaker, and Tritia Draper who discussed Waste issues, both called the Weld County Sheriff while the event was in progress and complained. The Sheriffs office merely said there was an approved permit on file. So there were indeed complaints but no system had been set up to gather those data. Who knows how many total complaints were made? No one kept track! You cannot learn from experience if you're unaware of the total experience. Another erroneous statement comes up for Dust, The application states, "No impact on Soil ." Well, you've heard from Judi Luke that there's a tremendous potential for dust, erosion, killing of beneficial plants, harming of the environment and inviting noxious weeds. Planning Staff seems convinced that a straw wall will contain the racing dust clouds from the neighborhood. I cited my source for estimating the sound containment properties of straw. I 'll be very interested to hear how the Staff decided how high a straw wall must be in order to contain the dust? They must know because the application provides no specifics Errors, Omissions and Vagaries Page 3 There are so many vague answers, which at first glance seem to tell you what you want to hear — but don't. But I'll wrap up this segment with a look at Population Density. We'll contrast the application's statements with reality. You can determine whether this is an error, a vaguely worded explanation, or an omission. The application sets a scene of open acreage surrounding the tracks with very few houses. I live less than a mile away and that description startled me. So I drove over and stood by their play house which would be used as ticket booth and point of entry. I could see 6 houses without moving an inch. I then got into my car and surveyed all the homes within a mile from the Scena-Law tracks. I'm reporting to you that there are 26 homes within a mile. You'll all be provided with a complete copy of our presentations and exhaibits. Your packet will contain a copy of my survey of nearby houses so that you may contrast it with the sparsely populated views the application has laid out for you. What was one of President Reagan's favorite phrases? "Trust, but verify!" ?? We don't mistrust Ms. Scena and Mr. Law but we find some of their application entries tend to move rather quickly through and around pertinent issues. Putting ourselves in your shoes, Commissioners, we would want more of the facts. So we hope we've helped you to further verify what you need to know today. And on behalf of all our neighbors, another reminder — Please remember, We Live Here! Population Density Surrounding Proposed Motocross Track Issue: Application gives the impression of very few homes close to the motocross tracks. Uses compass-point statements such as "... several acres with no visual of residence from our property." Facts: (1 ) Standing by the playhouse/ticket booth entrance to the tracks there are 6 houses easily viewed from that vantage point alone. (2) Within one mile of the Scena/Law property there are 26 houses. Here are those private home addresses and their owners: Co Rd 57, Dead end and headed South 9780, Jervis 9769 Tyler/Brown 9757 Feather 9745 West 9718 Kovanda 9611 Rodriguez 9378 Draper 9355 Luke 9265 Clemenson 9037 Law Co Rd 57, Crossing over Co Rd 20, and continuing 8878 Stills 8872 Orr 8680 Garcia 8542 Conner 8505 Minnie (Owns all the land in that section) 8490 Erger Co Rd 20* headed west from its intersection with Co Rd 57 27713 Sevier 26906 Sydlow 26904 Gerlinn 26902 Gerlinn Co Rd 55, headed toward its dead end 9490 Gregory 9508 In escrow 9740 Noveck Dead end - Wilson (Not presently tenanted, not counted) Co Rd 20, headed east from its intersection with Co Rd 57 8755 Whitmore 28285 Boyd Arnold 28667 Wilder Peter Brown November 17, 2012 Our Summation Let's start with your mission statement. It's brief, as you know. Planning Commission Mission Statement To ensure that land use and land development are consistent with adopted codes so that quality of life and property values are maintained for County residents, businesses and property owners through response to citizen concerns. We represent the hundreds of our SE Weld County neighbors who look to you for your response to our concerns, just as your Mission Statement outlines. We are all fellow prairie dwellers who have established ourselves here to enjoy the privacy and quiet of our rural way of life. Listening to motocross races is not a part of that way of life. And common sense tells us all that there are not enough straw bales in this world to protect us from racing sounds equal to 4-engine jets. Dust raining downing on us, and the constant threat of a racing-created fire on our prairie, our fields, our livestock and our houses will ultimately drive us from our homes. It's all preventable, Commissioners. Not with a water truck and bales of straw — you know it requires more than that. We need you, the Planning Commission, to understand the issues and support us; us is "we, the majority." In school we learned "The majority rules." I guess you can ask for anything you want, including a commercial motocross track. But We — the majority, don't ride or race dirt bikes. In fact, We, the majority, already hear the sound from practice riders, and we hate it. Summation, Page 2 They say, "The devil 's in the details." Agreed, and we've done our dead- level best to outline our concerns for you in detail: Fire Noise Dust Property Values Crowd Waste Traffic And it's not just us, this handful of citizens you've listened to today. A petition has been circulating through a wider area also telling you of these same concerns. It is included in the information packets you will receive. In concluding, I think our Weld County Right To Farm Statement says it best: "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. 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. " Thank you for this opportunity to explain our deep seated concerns. We five here. Motocross racers can. and do, go all over the country for their sport. Whereas "Us?" We live here! Thank you, Commissioners. _ c1z:.at 1_fit li C"i A fit It IA i V. i , . C ir t'tF'�I I I it , , , l r � �.r�•. �T '�ot- -�..�••r' • re. • / `- #: • I gikt- S. a- 1 4 A 11 i 14 : I i e ti LL EL yy • j l'2ail.�. Ir . CSi 1 �' �+1Pi 'r '. �j - �1 - = _ 1 f5„, w. ;� , 1 1 ��ira!, : r _ 4F I r.mod 1.• r -�! i '! * � . it f i . r 11 r. - •. Ir J r • I Ci4 t i ,r ' ti 111Sitil. g. S. .jrniliel I le; . , ... !IP- . Ncm Q. , . . • .. .. . tit! x x r,7+ • :�liii��' • - _ +, yJ� lei ' , J 7 .ir'. �I. i . N • . fit ! � 1T Y ' J _ _ 1 • 1 .-•.. .1 _ O r . rr''. ziiaisllIF T- figg' Si .d{! - i. CT it"' r Si - 1 6.'1 1 r A- 1 l t 1 e�'., a y I+h 4� 4 1 � � � „' ' R , _ • 1j1�li '''''''XiCHM'. 1 t , t • Iw ra 1 1; g a Pe a i2 Nis - M '- ` is. ^V • CP ef _ ' j' fl L....] G ti illi Ci`".r r 1 `� , . , ‘ ,... rail\ E e n,c, i a ,... , _ . ,..,.... s Wit- M rdel `...: .3 mss- r 5 • r ' �... t.. ... �. - - - ' -; M.- 0 rise ,r `I�: 1 reee . . '. � - y ,.i sti icilisi, i� t - a ....4 al iirlisi, .... 0 i a u , • : . ,• - - Ls r - `. �1. i. - I f• �� Y..nr_ _" tom.' t} ."•� Hello