The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20110083.tiff HEARING CERTIFICATION DOCKET NO. 2010-52.B RE: SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT#1758 FOR AN OIL AND GAS SUPPORT AND SERVICE FACILITY (ROUST-A-BOUT) IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT - JAVIER BARRON-SIXTOS A public hearing was conducted on January 5, 2011, at 10:00 a.m., with the following present: Commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer, Chair Commissioner Sean P. Conway, Pro-Tem Commissioner William F. Garcia Commissioner David E. Long Commissioner Douglas Rademacher Also present: Acting Clerk to the Board, Jennifer VanEgdom County Attorney, Bruce Barker Planning Department representative, Kim Ogle Health Department representative, Lauren Light Public Works representative, Heidi Hansen The following business was transacted: I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated October 15, 2010, and duly published October 20, 2010, in the Fort Lupton Press, a public hearing was conducted on November 17, 2010, to consider the request of Javier Barron-Sixtos, for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit #1758 for an Oil and Gas Support and Service Facility (roust-a-bout) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District. At said hearing, the Board deemed it advisable to continue the matter to December 22, 2010, since the Planning Commission hearing was continued from November 2, 2010, to December 7, 2010. At said hearing on December 22, 2010, the Board deemed it advisable to continue the matter to January 5, 2011, to allow the applicant to be present, or to provide written documentation for an authorized representative. At said hearing on January 5, 2011, Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services, indicated the applicant is not present; however, a recent telephone call indicated he is on his way. In response to the Board, Mr. Barker suggested recessing the matter for a short period of time, to allow the applicant to be present during staffs presentation. Chair Kirkmeyer issued a short recess of the matter until 10:30 a.m. Upon reconvening at 10:45 a.m., the Board elected to move forward with the matter, even though the applicant was still not present, and Bruce Barker made record of the hearing. He clarified the first hearing, held on November 17, 2010, was continued because the Planning Commission hearing had been continued when the applicant did not appear for the hearing, and on December 22, 2010, the applicant's daughter appeared on his behalf; however, there was not an authorization form in the file. He confirmed the applicant has been provided proper notice of today's hearing, indicating the hearing was scheduled to begin at 10:00 a.m.; however, 'Lc PL NL L i Puo 2011-0083 I - 5 - I 1 PL2087 HEARING CERTIFICATION -JAVIER BARRON-SIXTOS (USR-1758) PAGE 2 the Board has now waited over 45 minutes for the applicant to appear, and he recommended that staff be allowed to move forward with their presentation without the applicant present. Mr. Ogle presented a brief summary of the proposal and entered the favorable recommendation of the Planning Commission into the record as written. He stated the site is located south of County Road 22, west of County Road 31, and is currently in violation for the operation of the business on the site without the proper permits. He confirmed if the USR permit is approved, and all of the Conditions of Approval met, the violation will be closed; however, if the permit is denied, the matter will proceed through the initiated court process. He indicated the site is located within the three-mile referral area for the City of Fort Lupton, which did not return a referral response, and the surrounding properties are predominately agricultural, with pasture land and residences. He stated there are four surrounding property owners within 500 feet of the site, and five residences on eight parcels within 1,000 feet of the proposed facility. He further stated eleven referral agencies reviewed the application materials, and seven provided comments which have addressed within the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards. He indicated there were no letters or correspondence provided from surrounding property owners, and he displayed photographs of the site and the surrounding area. He clarified there is a residence on the property, which is utilized as an office, as well as the service shop building, and it is intended that two of the current buildings on the site will be removed and replaced with a new shop building at some point in the future. He confirmed the property contains an opaque fence, except at the entrance, which is chain-link. In response to Chair Kirkmeyer, Mr. Ogle clarified the applicant did not attend the Planning Commission hearing, and he later indicated he thought the hearing was at the courthouse, which is where he was during the hearing. In response to Commissioner Long, Mr. Ogle confirmed the address of both hearing locations is on the notice provided, as well as on the sign which is posted on the property. Further responding to Chair Kirkmeyer, Mr. Ogle stated Mr. Barron-Sixtos may have personally attended the first violation hearing; however, he was not present at the Planning Commission hearing. In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Ogle clarified the violation on the property was initiated by citizen complaints. Heidi Hansen, Department of Public Works, stated County Road 22 is classified as an arterial roadway, requiring 140 feet of right-of-way at full buildout, and currently there is 60 feet of right-of-way reserved. She confirmed the most recent traffic count, taken in April, 2009, indicates an average of 1,209 vehicles per day, the applicant intends to utilize the existing single access to the site, and the second access has been blocked off. She stated the applicant will provide the necessary depression area for water retention on the site. In response to Chair Kirkmeyer, Ms. Hansen clarified the site is expected to have 23 employees, who will drive up to 18 dump trucks from the site to the field, and the traffic generated from the site is expected to be an average of 62 trips per day. Lauren Light, Department of Public Health and Environment, stated water is provided to the site from an existing well, which was recently re-permitted for commercial use. She indicated the existing septic system is sized for use by eight people, and there are 23 employees, therefore, the system will be required to be reviewed by an engineer, or, a new system may be installed for use by employees. She confirmed the applicant has submitted the required Dust Abatement and Waste Handling Plans, and the applicant intends to utilize crushed rock and water to keep 2011-0083 PL2087 HEARING CERTIFICATION -JAVIER BARRON-SIXTOS (USR-1758) PAGE 3 dust to a minimum on the site. She clarified, according to the well permit, water from the commercial well cannot be utilized for this use, therefore, the applicant will need to let staff know where they intend to obtain the water source. She stated the Waste Handling Plan indicates the vehicles are not serviced on the site, there is no storage of fluids on the site, and the disposal of office waste still needs to be addressed. In response to Commissioner Rademacher, Ms. Light confirmed the commercial well permit allows for water to be utilized within the uses of the business; however, water may not be utilized for the lawn or landscaping, or for uses outside of the building. (The applicant is now present.) Responding to Chair Kirkmeyer, Mr. Ogle clarified three employees, who work as security personnel for the business, live within the residence on the site, and it is his understanding that the well water may not be utilized for residential purposes, since the well was re-permitted for commercial uses. Chair Kirkmeyer advised Javier Barron-Sixtos, applicant, and Rosalinda Barron, applicant's daughter, that the hearing was scheduled to begin at 10:00 a.m., and after issuing a recess of the matter, the Board decided to reconvene, without the applicant present, at 10:45 a.m. She clarified staff has already provided their presentations, and the Board is now ready to hear comments from the applicant regarding the proposed application. Ms. Barron indicated she does not have any additional comments at this time. In response to Commissioner Conway, Ms. Barron explained the employees of the roust-a-bout business come in the morning hours to pick up the trucks which are stored on the site overnight, and take the trucks to the various job sites they report to. Commissioner Rademacher clarified staff indicated during the presentation that the water expected to be utilized for dust suppression cannot come from the well on the site, and he questioned where the applicant intends to obtain the water to utilize for dust suppression. Ms. Barron clarified water may be hauled to the site within steamer machines, and it will be purchased from an off-site vendor. Mr. Barron-Sixtos questioned whether it would be a possibility to lay down blacktop on the site as a dust control measure. In response, Ms. Hansen confirmed if a large amount of pavement were added to the site, the applicant would be required to provide increased drainage measures to control the additional runoff created on the site. In response to Commissioner Rademacher, Mr. Barron-Sixtos confirmed the site already contains crushed rock, which he will continue to utilize. In response to Chair Kirkmeyer, Ms. Light clarified if the employees living within the residence are a part of the commercial business, then the water may be able to be utilized within the residence. She clarified she will need additional information from the State regarding the use of the well by these employees within the residence. Commissioner Rademacher clarified security people are employees of the business, therefore, the necessary water usage could be considered to be a use of the business. In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Barron-Sixtos confirmed the three gentlemen he employed are security personnel, and watch over the equipment stored on the site from the residence. In response to Chair Kirkmeyer, Ms. Light confirmed she has viewed previous well permits which allow both commercial and domestic uses; however, this permit does not provide clarification. Mr. Ogle clarified staff defines overnight security personnel as a "caretaker", which is typically a position where the employee does not sleep on the site, rather, they are actively patrolling during their shift. In response to Commissioner Rademacher, Ms. Light confirmed the residence previously held a well permit for domestic uses; however, the applicant was required to re-permit the well for the commercial use of the site. She further confirmed the well permit was re-permitted within 2011-0083 PL2087 HEARING CERTIFICATION -JAVIER BARRON-SIXTOS (USR-1758) PAGE 4 the past year. Responding to Commissioner Conway, Ms. Barron clarified each of the security personnel maintains a residence off-site, and over the weekends the employees live at their own personal residences. Chair Kirkmeyer questioned whether the Resolution specifically indicates that employees are not allowed to reside on the property. Mr. Ogle clarified the application materials indicated there are three night watchmen employees, who also work for the company during the day. Commissioner Conway stated the applicant has indicated the employees do not reside on the site, and Chair Kirkmeyer clarified if the employees are washing clothes and preparing food within the residence, it essentially means they are residing on the site. Ms. Light confirmed the well permit currently indicates the use of the water is currently limited to drinking and sanitary facilities for the business on the site, and is addressed within Condition of Approval #1.J.3. Commissioner Conway indicated the applicant is not precluded from obtaining permission to utilize the well for residential purposes from the State, and Chair Kirkmeyer stated the applicant should be made aware that employees may not reside at the place of business until the well permit is clarified or modified. Commissioner Rademacher questioned if Mr. Barron-Sixtos expects additional employees in the near future, and indicated an increase of employees may trigger other requirements; however, an amendment to the number of allowed employees could be requested now. Mr. Barron-Sixtos confirmed business has been going well lately, and it might be beneficial to increase the number of allowed employees to forty (40). In response to Commissioner Rademacher, Ms. Light confirmed the septic system is required to be adequately sized for the number of employees on the site, and it may be possible that the existing septic system will have to be replaced with a new system. Responding to Commissioner Garcia, Chair Kirkmeyer indicated several neighbors of the applicant made complaints to her personally regarding this property, therefore, she initiated contact with the Department of Planning Services and asked the Department to inspect the property. She clarified the complaints were regarding excessive traffic and the fact that many other properties in the area had recently been turned in for similar violations. Ms. Hansen clarified if the number of employees were to be increased, the applicant may then be over the threshold for additional road improvements, specifically the need for a turn lane. In response to Commissioner Conway, Ms. Hansen confirmed if the site exceeds more than 25 turning vehicles in a one-hour time frame, the applicant will be required to install a turn lane. Ms. Barron clarified there are only five trucks stored on the site, and there are approximately four employees per truck. Responding to Commissioner Rademacher, Ms. Hansen confirmed the applicant was not originally required to provide a traffic study because the expected amount of traffic was low; however, if the number of employees is expanded, it is possible that all of the employees could be arriving at the site to pick up a truck within the same hour at the beginning of a workday. In response to Chair Kirkmeyer, Ms. Hansen confirmed these types of requirements are typically addressed within an Improvements Agreement, which is already listed as Condition of Approval #1.L. She confirmed staff will make sure to add the necessary requirements regarding the need for a turn lane to the agreement. No public testimony was offered concerning this matter. Commissioner Conway indicated it is unusual that this violation was originated due to citizen complaints; however, none of the surrounding property owners have been present to voice their 2011-0083 PL2087 HEARING CERTIFICATION -JAVIER BARRON-SIXTOS (USR-1758) PAGE 5 concerns at the public hearings. Responding to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Ogle confirmed as long as the applicant completes all of the Conditions of Approval, and records the plat in a timely manner, the site will be in compliance. Mr. Barker clarified the notice was published and posted on the property, and any interested surrounding property owner had the option to provide comments. Chair Kirkmeyer confirmed the neighbors were aware they had the ability to provide comments; however, it appears they chose not to. In response to Chair Kirkmeyer, the Board concurred with the modification of Development Standard #24 to indicate forty (40) employees. Chair Kirkmeyer expressed her concerns regarding the need for the applicant to be made aware that employees may not reside at the site unless the well permit issue is addressed. Ms. Light suggested the addition of a sentence to Condition of Approval #1.J.3 to state, "Unless the well permit is properly amended, employees may not reside at the place of business.", and the Board concurred with the modification. In response to Chair Kirkmeyer, Ms. Barron indicated she has reviewed, and concurs with, the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards, as modified. In response to Ms. Barron, Commissioner Rademacher clarified the applicant may request that the State change the use of the well to both commercial and residential uses, or obtain a written statement from the State indicating the commercial well is allowed to be utilized for the purposes of the security guards within the residence. Chair Kirkmeyer indicated this matter has been continued several times, due to the applicant missing hearings, and the applicant was late to today's hearing. She clarified the approval of this permit requires that many actions be completed within a short time frame, and the applicant needs to understand that the Conditions of Approval must be met in a timely manner. She stated the site has been in violation, and the applicant has continued to operate from the site, and there have been numerous complaints received about the property. She clarified the applicant will be required to make several important contacts before the plat may be recorded, which is required to be recorded within the next 60 days. She confirmed she will personally be checking to make sure these required actions are met so that this facility can come into compliance. In response to Chair Kirkmeyer, Ms. Barron indicates she understands the need to complete the requirements in a timely manner, and she clarified this business is not the sole source of traffic generated in the area. Commissioner Rademacher moved to approve the request of Javier Barron-Sixtos for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit #1758 for an Oil and Gas Support and Service Facility (roust-a-bout) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District, based on the recommendations of Planning staff and the Planning Commission, with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards as entered into the record. His motion included the modification of Development Standard #24 to state, "The number of employees associated with this facility is limited to forty (40)."; and the addition of the last sentence to Condition of Approval #1.J.3 to state, "Unless the well permit is properly amended, employees may not reside at the place of business." The motion was seconded by Commissioner Garcia, and it carried unanimously. There being no further discussion, the hearing was completed at 11:25 a.m. 2011-0083 PL2087 HEARING CERTIFICATION -JAVIER BARRON-SIXTOS (USR-1758) PAGE 6 This Certification was approved on the 10th day of January, 2010. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2aW O ATTEST! s J Weld County Clerk to th o � —2 C� A� c� r `' ` - ` Sean P Co y, Pro-Tem BY: IC�LY�'inn , �o rrk ' , ,. , �e J 7 Deputy Clerk to the Board (, , Will. F. Garcia 3. D • E. Long Douglas ademacher 2011-0083 PL2087 EXHIBIT INVENTORY CONTROL SHEET Case USR#1758 -JAVIER BARRON-SIXTOS Exhibit Submitted By Description A. Planning Staff Inventory of Items Submitted B. Planning Commission Resolution of Recommendation Summary of Hearing (Minutes dated 11/2/2010 and C. Planning Commission 12/07/2010) D. Applicant Copy of Well Permit#284708 E. F. G. H. J. K. L. M. N. Q. P. Q. R. S. T. U. V. W. i c .2 r A c' 1 RC _ r r s 2 J Q v J 'O1- o � et O a O a N '�'- w o 11.1R N m f CO Cr U Cu N S w i3 hI z la t.m _ N. V a U '° N 3 uj Co m Z LL Cl) F al O W G M t I- p O E W p CO \L. a Ul a 0 6 Z c O 3 v o �, N x a A a N �J y 9y g F. 00 it, 5 � m g 55 O a , i. ? 0 mZ - O W F C J Et= C r 0 .4U. I I 2 < V?im C 3 nooLLI o o >. a J Cl C4 CO Z . W w 0 V V a au a ^: w• 00 w L-I Z 2 0 0 a / \ y � 3 -0 o \ o • / \ o F4 § ill re § \ '/ § g . ( / k / ) « 2 S | � z < $ � $ » Q. } al b 2 0. mm ck, j5 - a / § ul L O 7 « o © w 0 { % / § § k ] 2 / / » \ 2 o2 & 7 ■ k § § c $ / 2 CO ° l o uj < k 9 /S . ( % 2 0 ‘, I I a III § § / -- i 0 - \ u) 2Q 2 w � w La k « ■ § . 100 ) Kj Hello