HomeMy WebLinkAbout20123598.tiff INVENTORY OF ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION
Applicant High Sierra Water Services Case Number USR12-0069
Submitted or Prepared
Prior to At
Hearing Hearing
Surrounding Property Owners - Letters X
I 4( Patricia Schwalm Letter of Opposition dated October 15, 2012
2_ / Surrounding Property Owner Petition of Opposition dated October 29, 2012
3 / Rick & Betty Osborn Letter of Opposition dated November 2, 2012
L-` 4 Surrounding Property Owners Map of Location
I hereby certify that the THREE items identified herein were submitted to the Department of Planning Services at
or prior to the scheduled Planning Commissioners hearing.&I,Kim Og LI Planner
2 X. 1 )- - 35q S
EXHIBIT
/a- 141O4,--
e-
Kim Ogle
From: Schwalm, Patricia [Patricia.Schwalm@DOT.STATE.CO. US]
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 12:50 PM
To: Kim Ogle
Cc: Schwalm, Patricia
Subject: USR12-0069
Good Morning.
I am Patty Schwalm and I live north and a little west of the drilling site. 22577 WCR 64 %.
I am concerned about all of the traffic coming to this site. Will they be using CR 64 and coming through the current site? Hopefully
they will not be using 64 % and then dropping south through the field to get to the site.
When will they be starting this project?
Thank you so much.
Patty Schwalm
22577 WCR 64 IA
Greeley, CO 80631'
970-381-5018
EXHIBIT
1
RECE fl/ ED
N0V 0 ?m ,
October 29, 2012 Weld County Planning Department
GREELEY OFFICE
Petition concerning Case Number USR 12-0069: Lyster Family Farms Partnership, c/o High Sierra Water
Services
We the undersigned own property or reside within an impact area of the referenced injection well
g p p Y P J
facility. The well has been in production for some time and we have learned to live with it. With the
new amendment, however, we have concerns with the following items:
1. Currently trucks park and idle along CR 64, to the west of the CR 47 intersection, to complete
paperwork etc. This is a noise, congestion and pollution problem that needs to be rectified .
With the increase of trucks being serviced by the facility this is going to increase to a detriment
of the rural lifestyle.
2 . In the past, when there were fewer injection wells in the area, a higher volume of trucks were
serviced by the facility and trucks backed up along CR 64 and waited for servicing. This too
needs to be addressed and a solution needs to be in place to deal with the traffic impact of
expanding the facility.
3. Of paramount impact to landowners, is the change of the facility from designated operating
hours to 24 hour operation. The noise, traffic, dust and changes in quality of life on a 24 hour
basis will greatly impact not only our quality of life, but our property values. We know the
facility exists, we cannot change that, we just want to be able to live in peace as well.
4. We support and understand the importance the oil and gas industry plays in our county. We
believe a solution can be reached that allows everyone involved equally benefit from
restrictions that can be in place before approval is granted .
5. Dust control measures need to be taken on all dirt/gravel (directly entering/exiting and
indirectly entering and,exiting) roads that will be traveled upon by the trucks.
1. 3Aprinted name ,S:\� \ '(
't -
G _ (!�°ic-C�-- printed name
3 , printed name L4p_ iRQzSçtç(,
4. �. . tkA ilikinted name <. "--ct.AOIL1 &4O
5. printed name ?PU_ J�- `'
, �
6. Cb' printed nameLarkt& Afp.
7.r r
printed name 1?ph 4 / � e , (
8. printed name J T(,„tm. -ise4 5 icp
9. ,! printed name Ware A , 74 2wa4(%'
EXHIBIT
RECEIVED
rr� NOV 0 7 7n17
. . Piro Counts/ ,m.;:.;1wg Department
October 29, 2012 GREELEY OFFICE
Petition concerning Case Number USR 12-0069: Lyster Family Farms Partnership, c/o High Sierra Water
Services
We the undersigned own property or reside within an impact area of the referenced injection well
facility. The well has been in production for some time and we have learned to live with it. With the
new amendment, however, we have concerns with the following items:
1. Currently trucks park and idle along CR 64, to the west of the CR 47 intersection, to complete
paperwork etc. This is a noise, congestion and pollution problem that needs to be rectified .
With the increase of trucks being serviced by the facility this is going to increase to a detriment
of the rural lifestyle.
2. In the past, when there were fewer injection wells in the area, a higher volume of trucks were
serviced by the facility and trucks backed up along CR 64 and waited for servicing. This too
needs to be addressed and a solution needs to be in place to deal with the traffic impact of
expanding the facility.
3. Of paramount impact to landowners, is the change of the facility from designated operating
hours to 24 hour operation. The noise, traffic, dust and changes in quality of life on a 24 hour
basis will greatly impact not only our quality of life, but our property values. We know the
facility exists, we cannot change that, we just want to be able to live in peace as well .
4. We support and understand the importance the oil and gas industry plays in our county. We
believe a solution can be reached that allows everyone involved equally benefit from
restrictions that can be in place before approval is granted .
5. Dust control measures need to be taken on all dirt/gravel (directly entering/exiting and
indirectly entering and exiting) roads that will be traveled upon by the trucks.
printed name cc— 4 (.41 f rfea< <i21../
2. printed name
3. printed name
4. printed name
5. printed name
6. printed name
7. printed name
8. printed name
9. printed name
EXHIBIT
D
8
October 29, 2012
Petition concerning Case Number USR 12-0069: Lyster Family Farms Partnership, c/o High Sierra Water
Services
We the undersigned own property or reside within an impact area of the referenced injection well
facility. The well has been in production for some time and we have learned to live with it. With the
new amendment, however, we have concerns with the following items:
1. Currently trucks park and idle along CR 64, to the west of the CR 47 intersection, to complete
paperwork etc. This is a noise, congestion and pollution problem that needs to be rectified.
With the increase of trucks being serviced by the facility this is going to increase to a detriment
of the rural lifestyle.
2. In the past, when there were fewer injection wells in the area, a higher volume of trucks were
serviced by the facility and trucks backed up along CR 64 and waited for servicing. This too
needs to be addressed and a solution needs to be in place to deal with the traffic impact of
expanding the facility.
3. Of paramount impact to landowners, is the change of the facility from designated operating
hours to 24 hour operation. The noise, traffic, dust and changes in quality of life on a 24 hour
basis will greatly impact not only our quality of life, but our property values. We know the
facility exists, we cannot change that, we just want to be able to live in peace as well.
4. We support and understand the importance the oil and gas industry plays in our county. We
believe a solution can be reached that allows everyone involved equally benefit from
restrictions that can be in place before approval is granted.
5 . Dust control measures need to be taken on all dirt/gravel (directly entering/exiting and
indirectly entering and exiting) roads that will be traveled upon by the trucks.
1. -Ars--
printed name (? tr ()S Y1
r
2� (jA Cr, \ Y� printed name i; , l ��- or
3. — printed name
4. printed name
5. printed name
6. printed name
7. printed name
8. printed name
9 . printed name
EXHIBIT
C
NJ i
to
N -.i 'C(
CO
CC g
,I UIME
v
Q
a
_aill , i �' 1181HX3
\NK ,
/
/
IllaMM•Ina V8O I _ t-
co i co
. 14611 U c; .
' d1SIA l 5 23O U •
k[ - U
- o - `
�� _ Ali
, ,■I - r��
IE. 4 . ..- -I., _,_I ,
.....„.._
. 1 _
. . , _
i Dot i ...
\_______________., z z .
, .
lelle tD et
ow_ .
. . _
-1.... .
6i? err MII
en 0 Ni 0
c., cc CD (NI c‘ .
S ra
, 06 U)
T 22 U
r Q r
r J r J I N. Ill . - / a
4N .__ ,,, /a ma .z.
N eat
Incr ''yy�� 06 (Y'� / 1 11
I C7 r f�.t.:41,i'l I 1 r . i /—\N L / IL
.. •- : I \ , • ii.
Lb 23O Lb CIVOJ ,uNnoo cor 1.17 OV02:I AiNn•
•
1 - ' _rail oo / y- !
r // :1
• f a) i ' a -,b���s
_ °, I ", ' Q °�0 III
--r_ a _
f`_ - N O VI
BUSS AV
9t7 en - V OVS23 AiN(lOD up -_.< r 9t� 230 9tV QVO≥J AiN(lOO z
p D Igli
Z oIw_ (lbU i
•lir \ I s Z O _ O ( p i
1— 0 intU >� i O Z O
Sr . Z CC M W W W � � � � O �wZZ
WW O JM W
� ` I O D _ w J _Jwaaw (/) ft > > � _ ‹ n. 00 i
J � } = aa � 02000D1- Wm 2ctncmn
- co
IF I —U -- a LII orc‘itii4uicO cDUU
co o.. C.I en t+ LO 0 CO a r . . . . r t- r r r
0 (pI
U
-
I ' ■ Eta 23O
AV A2J2J3H0
...gilliit' ir I . I I 1 T I 1- i I (' j Iv
t - — li It: in ,
ii
o
ac — . .._ AV WVS1V8 N ll
AVINVSl3 N • `.
Applicant: Lyster Family Farms Partnership , c/o High Sierra Water Services
Case # USR12-0069 Planner: Kim Ogle
Acreage : PT of SE4 Section 26 , T6N , R65W
`
id
•
. .4..,. .. _ .
a..w• ;... , _ _
•
•
7 �-..
Ir
pip
� rs gxC� 101 ..: �` ., County Road 66 •
t 4'_
'.1. tus;
kt
LO
i.
- . '
0 ti X
C ii . `�1 ,
YY v �
. : ____Iiti
O ' 1 Rio
1vCount Road 64
j,-, ly .,............Lgit
V. Z liska�•
�1 } ? I !, v 4
tz
C r
,:}: a
.ti
il
LIN
in r l
F
t Is
,..
si--- t--#2.. — ' _.
is dir
iti . , ).
t., • a
out Road 62 , . _ _ ,...
I ii„.,_„....
Y V r-
O t' J -'
II
•
•
v.
• .. _ .
■ • I � 1 � p .r''
." - -• ' ' Ite . ,. I
.....
. ..,
., I
•
i �T r Q
it 1 I1 4I *• - y - P .. ff`ter!' •:w
8 ���i i .-ter. • i� r- s�rri
fa
7.1 is, PIA4fifft J N
■ ■ Miles
00 . 112 0 . 4 0 . 6 0 . 8 w —lilt�
r
S
Hello