The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20101017 HEARING CERTIFICATION DOCKET NO. 2010-14.A RE: SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT#1723 FOR A MAJOR FACILITY OF A PUBLIC UTILITY (A WIND ENERGY FACILITY WITH A GENERATING CAPACITY UP TO 250.8 MEGAWATTS (MW) ALONG WITH A 230-KILOVOLT (KV) ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION LINE, AN INTERCONNECTION FACILITY TO TIE INTO AN EXISTING 72-MILE TRANSMISSION LINE, EXISTING COLLECTOR TRANSMISSION LINES, UP TO FIVE (5) PERMANENT 80-METER METEOROLOGICAL TOWERS, ONE (1) SUBSTATION, AN OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE BUILDING/FACILITY, ALONG WITH ONE (1) TEMPORARY BATCH PLANT AND CONSTRUCTION FACILITY) IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, C/O BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. A public hearing was conducted on May 19, 2010, at 10:00 a.m., with the following present: Commissioner Douglas Rademacher, Chair Commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer, Pro-Tem Commissioner Sean P. Conway Commissioner William F. Garcia Commissioner David E. Long Also present: Acting Clerk to the Board, Jennifer VanEgdom County Attorney, Bruce Barker Planning Department representative, Chris Gathman Public Works representative, Janet Carter Public Works representative, Don Carroll Public Works representative, Clay Kimmi Health Department representative, Lauren Light The following business was transacted: I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated March 1, 2010, and duly published March 4, 2010, in the Windsor Beacon, a public hearing was conducted on April 14, 2010, to consider the request of Cedar Creek II, LLC, c/o BP Wind Energy North America, Inc., for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit #1723 for a Major Facility of a Public Utility (a wind energy facility with a generating capacity up to 250.5 megawatts (MW) along with a 230-kilovolt (kV) electric transmission line, an interconnection facility to tie into an existing 72-mile transmission line, existing collector transmission lines, 1-3 permanent 80-meter meteorological towers, one (1) substation, an operations and maintenance building/facility, along with one (1) temporary batch plant and construction facility) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District, at which time the Board deemed it advisable to continue the matter to May 19, 2010, in order to allow adequate time for republication of the matter with the correct legal description. At said hearing on May 19, 2010, pursuant to a corrected notice dated April 19, 2010, and duly published April 22, 2010, Bruce Barker, County Attorney, made this a matter of record. Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services, presented a brief summary of the proposal and entered the favorable recommendation of the Planning Commission into the record as LC : Q� P u3, Hi-Lc-P5) 2010-1017 (y - 9-1b PL2059 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, C/O BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. (USR-1723) PAGE 2 written. He clarified this proposed facility will be under separate ownership than the previously approved project for Cedar Creek I, LLC, and the original application requested a generating capacity of up to 300 megawatts (MW) to be built in three phases, with up to three substations; however, the request has since been modified for up to 250.8 MW and one substation. He confirmed any future expansion of this facility will require an amendment to the USR permit, or a new USR permit. He explained the improvements are now expected to built in one phase, therefore, up to 250 employees will be involved with the construction stages of this project. He indicated the facility encompasses 26,927 acres; approximately 146 acres will be disturbed on a long-term basis by the wind generator facility, and approximately one acre will be disturbed by the transmission line facility. Mr. Gathman stated the proposed wind generator facility will be located at the eastern end of the Pawnee Buttes National Grasslands, between the facility operated by Cedar Creek I, LLC, and another wind farm operated within Logan County. He clarified the facility will be located on a bluff escarpment and a majority of the surrounding area is grazing land or ranch land, with some crops in various locations. He stated the substation and operations and maintenance building/facility, along with the temporary construction staging yard and batch plant area, are located approximately one-half mile south of an existing residence. He clarified the owner of this residence also owns the land which will be utilized for the construction yard, which the applicant is leasing. He indicated 24 referral agencies reviewed the application materials, and seven referral agencies provided comments which have been addressed within the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards. He further indicated the applicant was directed to meet with outside agencies, including the Department of Defense, Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), Kimball County, State of Nebraska, Laramie County, State of Wyoming, Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). He clarified summaries of the meetings and/or lists of attendees were provided for the file, and staff received referral responses from the CDOW and USFWS. Mr. Gathman stated the site is not located within the three-mile referral area for any municipality; it is located approximately 17 miles east of the Town of Grover, and 17 miles north of the Town of New Raymer. He indicated several letters and e-mails have been received regarding this project, which included concerns regarding long-term impact of the turbines and transmission line on the soils, the long-term viability of wind energy, and the possible encroachment of generators upon an existing runway. He clarified there have been subsequent conversations with the surrounding property owners, and the applicant has entered into an agreement to address the concerns, which the applicant may address within his presentation. He indicated five e-mails of support have been provided for the record, and another e-mail was recently received from a surrounding property owner who was not sure if he owned property in the surrounding area. He clarified staff researched the property and there were no property ownership records available for this individual. Mr. Gathman stated the applicant has indicated the status of the Power Purchase Agreement with Xcel Energy is confidential information; however, a Condition of Approval does require evidence of an agreement, prior to the commencement of construction or hauling of materials. He clarified the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of this application on both hearing dates, and he confirmed staff received a large amount of materials within the past couple of days, which have been added to the file as BOCC Exhibits, and are still in the process of being reviewed by staff. Mr. Gathman displayed photographs of the site and the surrounding area, and clarified there has been a slight revision to the placement of the 2010-1017 PL2059 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, C/O BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. (USR-1723) PAGE 3 transmission line, as it was required to be altered slightly to avoid a drilling envelope on one of the properties. He confirmed the transmission line will connect with the existing line operated by Cedar Creek I, LLC. Responding to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Gathman indicated the concerns presented regarding the possible encroachment upon a runway have been mitigated. He submitted Exhibit O, requesting a modification to the last sentence of Condition of Approval #6.F to state, "Setback and offset distances shall be determined by Section 23-3-50 of the Weld County Code." He clarified the Section reference has specific setback distances called out for this type of use, which provides more clarification for the applicant. Responding to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Gathman indicated a packet of materials was presented to staff on Monday which contained a Final Drainage Report, Road Access Plan, information regarding right-of-way permits, several maps, updated Traffic Study, and a letter regarding the Decommissioning Plan. He stated all of the items were scanned into the file, totaling over 900 pages, and he confirmed the information provided by the applicant does not lead to any changes in the staff recommendation. Further responding to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Gathman read the letter regarding the Decommissioning Plan into the record, and confirmed there was no financial assurance or bonding requirement provided with the letter. Janet Carter, Department of Public Works, stated staff has reviewed a large amount of information for this project, and she will review the traffic impacts relating to this facility. She indicated the access to the site will be from State Highway 71 and Weld County Roads 132 and 120. She clarified the traffic count for County Roads 132 and 120 are approximately 55 and 24 vehicles per day, respectively, and the applicant is proposing up to 510 vehicle trips per day, with up to 115 vehicle trips during a peak hour. She confirmed this is an increase of approximately 900 percent during the construction phase of the project, and due to the large volume of traffic on rural roads, all traffic associated with this facility will be restricted to the designated haul routes. She confirmed the Department of Public Works has met with numerous representative groups over the past two years concerning this project, to obtain information regarding the proposed facility, and staff has requested that a designated haul route be established, to include the necessary intersection improvements for the proposed impacts to County roadways. She further confirmed the applicant has failed to provide a comprehensive haul route plan to staff, therefore, she produced a map, which she displayed. She explained the roadways which should not have any construction or hauling traffic are indicated in red, since they are roads which cannot handle the proposed increased volume of traffic. She further explained the blue dashed line on County Roads 132 and 134 indicates the areas which will require dust abatement, and the roads shall be treated with magnesium chloride throughout the construction phase of the project. She clarified all other haul routes may be treated with water throughout the construction phase, and due to the large volume of traffic, it will be difficult to ensure that construction employees travel along the designated haul routes, therefore, if staff is able to identify a significant increase in traffic on any other gravel roads, the applicant may be required to provide dust abatement on these roads as well. Ms. Carter explained the roads marked in purple indicate site distance issues, and the speed limit on these roads should be reduced to 45 miles per hour, with temporary four-way Stop signs implemented at the necessary intersections. She indicated the roads marked with a pink line indicate areas where there are naturally occurring drainage concerns, and staff is requesting the applicant provide stabilization measures for these roads, prior to the utilization of the roads. She confirmed there have been 2010-1017 PL2059 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, CIO BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. (USR-1723) PAGE 4 ten intersections which have been identified as requiring widening improvements, and County Road 133 does not currently exist, therefore, the applicant will need to enter into a Non- Exclusive Maintenance Agreement for the construction of the existing section line. She indicated the purple triangles on the map indicate the locations where staff has requested the applicant place gravel stockpiles so that any damage to the roads may be fixed as quickly as possible. She stated several narrow cattle guards along County Road 120 may create problems during hauling activities, and there are numerous areas which contain other concerns such as adjacent waterways, hills, and curves, which may limit hauling activities. Ms. Carter reiterated the large number of outstanding traffic issues makes it imperative that staff be able to review acceptable construction drawings to ensure the roads will not experience adverse impacts. She clarified the applicant has not provided a construction schedule, nor any construction drawings for both on-site and off-site work. She confirmed the construction plans, permits for the work to be performed within the right-of-way, and access permits must be submitted prior to the commencement of construction activities. She stated the applicant is required to provide written verification from several neighboring entities, which shall confirm that all requirements and regulations have been met. She clarified these entities include CDOT, regarding access permits, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, for the assumed jurisdictional waterway of Playa Lake, and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, for general permits. In response to Chair Rademacher, Ms. Carter confirmed the applicant provided a large aerial map containing arrows which depicted the direction of traffic in the area; however, the specifics of the roadways were not visible, and the map did not indicate any necessary areas for improvements, which was specifically requested by staff. Responding to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Ms. Carter confirmed approximately 40 miles of roadway will be affected during the construction of this facility. Don Carroll, Department of Public Works, stated the required Improvements Agreement does include a Road Maintenance Agreement for the designated haul route to be utilized during the construction phase. He confirmed the Agreement requires the applicant to submit collateral, in the amount of $500,000.00, to ensure the road maintenance and required repairs do not negatively impact the level of service on County roads, and following the construction phase, the applicant is required to restore the roads to their original conditions. He explained he acquired information that approximately 22,000 truckloads of gravel will be delivered to the facility, and the Department has requested a construction schedule with adequate construction drawings, site plan for the laydown yard, and the haul route information with locations of gravel and water sources. He clarified many of the gravel pits within the surrounding area are permitted only for government projects, and are not allowed to be utilized for private use. Mr. Carroll indicated there will be a large amount of construction traffic within a relatively small amount of time, including water and gravel trucks, wind turbine deliveries, and materials associated with the transmission line and other buildings associated with the facility. He stated the facility will employ a maximum of 250 people per day during construction activities, resulting in approximately 510 vehicle trips per day. He confirmed the applicant did meet with the Department of Defense, Kimball County, State of Nebraska, Laramie County, State of Wyoming, and CDOT to arrange the additional coordination of roads within the surrounding area. He clarified the Department of Defense plans to add additional gravel to its designated roads within the surrounding area, and CDOT may replace a bridge on State Highway 71 this year. Mr. Carroll indicated the applicant intends to haul water to the facility from County Roads 134 2010-1017 PL2059 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, C/O BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. (USR-1723) PAGE 5 and 125, and water will also be purchased from a supplier in Kimball, Nebraska, for the supply of the batch plant, dust control, and construction activities. He reiterated the applicant will provide three stockpiles of gravel for emergency repairs to the haul route, and a contractor has been hired by the applicant to be on-call 24 hours per day to handle any road emergencies. He confirmed the applicant is required to obtain overwidth, overweight, and special transport permits from the Department, as well as the necessary right-of-way permits before any installation or construction in county rights-of-ways, including power lines, etcetera. In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Carroll stated he is not sure if the referenced number of 250 employees includes the truck drivers. Ms. Carter clarified a maximum of 250 employees may be at the facility, and the applicant expects that a minimum of 100 employees will be on-site at any given time during the construction phase. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Ms. Carter confirmed the expected average daily traffic count of 510 vehicles is during the construction phase, which is why a detailed construction plan is crucial. She confirmed without a solid plan, staff will not be able to determine which activities are occurring each day, and there could be days when the traffic count greatly exceeds the average of 510 vehicles. Further responding to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Ms. Carter indicated the type of traffic has not been specifically delineated within the Traffic Study, and it should be included within the construction schedule. She further indicated the average daily traffic count is expected to be approximately fourteen vehicle trips per day once construction of the facility is completed. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Carroll clarified staff will ensure that the applicant has obtained the appropriate permits for both the gravel and water sources. He explained the 111c permitted pits, usually referred to as barrow pits, are associated with government projects, and may not be utilized for private use. Ms. Carter further explained the applicant identified a gravel source on the map; however, all of the pits identified within that area contain 111c permits, therefore, staff is concerned that the applicant may be intending to utilize this type of pit, which is not allowed. Responding to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Ms. Carter confirmed water will be utilized as a dust abatement measure for the roads which do not meet the trigger for the required application of magnesium chloride. She further confirmed the need for magnesium chloride is triggered by the threshold of 200 vehicles trips per day. She explained staff will be monitoring the traffic counts within the surrounding area to ensure additional dust abatement measures will not be necessary. Clay Kimmi, Department of Public Works, clarified the Department is generally supportive of the proposed project, if the necessary information is provided to ensure all of the impacts are adequately mitigated, which has not been provided, to date. He clarified staff has not had adequate time to review all of the materials which were submitted just two days ago, including the Final Drainage Report, which should address the concerns presented by Mr. Sheffler, the adjacent property owner. He explained Mr. Sheffler presented concerns regarding stormwater drainage on his site during the Planning Commission hearing, therefore, the Final Drainage Report was requested to address these concerns. Mr. Kimmi indicated the project will require two separate grading permits, which must be issued before construction activities, for the batch plant and substation laydown area, which are temporary uses, and another permit for the work necessary with the installation of the towers and haul routes. He stated the applicant is required 2010-1017 PL2059 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, CIO BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. (USR-1723) PAGE 6 to provide evidence of a Stormwater Discharge Permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, which is not addressed within the Final Drainage Report. He reiterated the applicant has not yet provided any construction drawings, and staff is unsure as to how the access improvements and drainage improvements will be constructed. He stated Playa Lake is adjacent to the intersection of County Roads 127 and 126, which may be a jurisdictional wetland; however, no correspondence has been provided by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. He clarified the map submitted in late April identified a water source located on County Road 134, between County Roads 125 and 129, and upon review of the well permits in that area, he discovered that the wells are only permitted for irrigation and oilfield support uses. He clarified there are no well permits for industrial uses, therefore, he is unsure whether the water source indicated on the map has been permitted by the Colorado Division of Water Resources. Lauren Light, Department of Public Health and Environment, explained, due to the construction activities occurring on the site, it is permissible to utilize portable toilets and bottled water; however, the site will be required to obtain a permanent water source and a sanitation system when the operations and maintenance building is completed. She clarified the application materials indicate a well permit will be obtained and a septic system will be installed, as required within Conditions of Approval #8.A and #8.B. She indicated the applicant intends to haul water to the site for on-site dust control and for the purposes of the batch plant, and a Dust Control Plan was submitted, indicating there will be two 4,000-gallon water trucks on the site. She clarified, after questions were raised at the Planning Commission hearing, a representative from Blattner Energy indicated the water will be purchased from Kimball, Nebraska, and the water will be stored within a pond on the site to be pumped as necessary. She confirmed she does not have that explanation in writing, therefore, an updated Dust Abatement Plan will need to be submitted, including the information concerning the water source. She stated the applicant submitted a Waste Handling Plan, as well as a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan, which are both acceptable. She requested the addition of new Development Standard #17 to state, "The applicant shall comply with all provisions of the State Underground and Aboveground Storage Tank Regulations." She stated an Air Pollution Emissions Notice (A.P.E.N.) will be required for the batch plant, which is addressed within Condition of Approval #2.F, and the applicant may be required to obtain an Emissions Permit. David Gonzalez, BP Wind Energy North America, Inc., represented the applicant and indicated staff gave a good overall presentation of the project, and he reviewed the benefits of the proposed project. He confirmed the project is located within a rural area of Weld County, which provides a rare opportunity for economic development, and direct rental/lease payments will be paid to 26 property owners within the surrounding area. He clarified approximately 140 acres will be utilized on a long-term basis, and the company expects to utilize less than one percent of the overall land. He explained the proposed project is a benefit to the local community as it represents an investment of over $300 million, which will benefit local schools through property taxes and other financial benefits. He confirmed it is expected that 250 people will be employed during the construction of this facility, and between 12 and 15 employees will be retained for full-time operations, which is also a benefit to the community. He clarified the presence of the employees will lead to increased traffic for local businesses due to the increased demand for materials and supplies, and personal supplies for the employees. He further clarified there will be opportunities for local businesses to place bids for some of the construction work and 2010-1017 PL2059 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, C/O BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. (USR-1723) PAGE 7 commercial operations, and the overall proposed use will create additional sales and use tax for the State of Colorado. Mr. Gonzalez explained the proposed project will produce electricity to help save electricity, without producing any air emissions, consuming any water, or producing water pollution. He clarified there are many environmental benefits associated with this facility, and he confirmed this project has been in the planning and development stages for quite some time. He confirmed representatives have been working with Department staff, as well as other Counties and agencies, to discuss potential impacts and to ensure all needs have been considered. He stated no turbines will be located on the Pawnee National Grasslands; however, discussions were held with the U.S. Forest Service, the Audubon Society, and the Nature Conservancy, to address any concerns. He further stated it was his understanding that while the proposed project was on the drawing board, flexibility existed for the purpose of adjusting the plans, as necessary. He confirmed the project will be a benefit to the region and balances all of the needs of affected property owners, therefore, BP Wind Energy expects that it will continue operations within the area for a long time. He confirmed a press release was just released this morning, indicating that a long-term Power Purchase Agreement with Xcel Energy has been completed, to set the full output of this project for a period of 25 years. Mr. Gonzalez clarified the information which was recently submitted to staff was all information which was intended to meet the requirements within several of the Conditions of Approval of the proposed Resolution. He further clarified the information was not required to be submitted as a part of the application materials, rather, the information addresses issues which must be addressed prior to the commencement of construction activities. He explained there is some confusion regarding the source of the gravel to be utilized, and he confirmed the facility will utilize an existing pit located west of Cheyenne, Wyoming. He clarified gravel will be hauled from this pit, along Interstate 80, to State Highway 71. He further clarified a good sand source exists near the proposed facility, which will be mixed in with the hauled gravel to create a high-quality product. Mr. Gonzalez indicated an agreement exists with the City of Kimball, Nebraska, for the purpose of obtaining the necessary water to be hauled to the site, and further, a surrounding property owner has indicated willingness to allow use of the well on his property, which is permitted for industrial uses, as a back-up water source. Chair Rademacher stated staff indicated many impacts have not yet been adequately addressed, and he expressed his concern that over 900 pages of documents were provided for review only two days before the hearing. In response, Mr. Gonzalez reiterated the documents provided to staff were to satisfy many of the Conditions of Approval required to be completed prior to the commencement of construction. Commissioner Conway expressed his appreciation to Mr. Gonzalez for the company's interest of investing in Weld County, and he inquired about the hiring preferences of the company. In response, Mr. Gonzalez indicated BP has historically followed its policy of hiring local residents, when possible; however, several positions require specific skills, which may not be easy to recruit within a rural area. He confirmed he will be looking to the facility operated by Cedar Creek I, LLC, as an example, and he confirmed several of the landowners associated with this facility are now full-time employees of the facility. He clarified BP has hired a general contractor to handle the construction activities on the site, and this company will also be responsible for the personnel needs during the construction phase. He explained the contractor is headquartered 2010-1017 PL2059 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, CIO BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. (USR-1723) PAGE 8 in the State of Minnesota, therefore, it will be financially beneficial for the company to utilize as many local employees as possible. In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Gonzalez indicated he will request that the contractor work with the Department of Human Services, Division of Employment Services, to advertise upcoming positions. Commissioner indicated the existing transmission line, which runs south to the Town of Keenesburg, has a capacity of 600 MW, and the previously built facility has a generating capacity of 300 MW, therefore, he does not understand why this project was scaled back to a generating capacity of 250 MW. In response to Commissioner Long, Mr. Gonzalez confirmed the capacity of the transmission line is 600 MW, and this project will tap into that existing line, which will create more efficient utilization of the line by transmitting up to 550 MW. He explained the output of the facility will depend up on the wind conditions, and on windy days, it is expected that the existing facility and this proposed facility will produce a full output. He confirmed the existing facility has not exceeded the capacity of 300 MW. Further responding to Commissioner Long, Mr. Gonzalez indicated the capacity factor is not readily shared; however, he is able to confirm the existing facility has met the required expectations. He indicated there have been wind-monitoring activities occurring, in anticipation of this proposed facility, and the expectations for this facility are solid, as well. He clarified that even in the windiest of locations, a facility can expect a capacity factor of approximately 40 percent. Commissioner Kirkmeyer indicated she understands the applicant has been working on this project for quite some time, and she is curious as to why over 900 pages of documentation were submitted just before the hearing date. She confirmed she understands a large amount of the information may not have been required to be provided with the application materials; however, a majority of the information is necessary to be considered for the purposes of approval of the project. She explained it is unknown whether an applicant will be able to satisfy all of the Conditions of Approval when the matter is reviewed by the Board, and she is disappointed that the applicant was not able to provide the information to staff at an earlier date, so that the information could be adequately reviewed. She expressed her concerns regarding the Decommissioning Plan, and questioned if the applicant intends to submit financial assurance. In response, Mr. Gonzalez clarified the proper arrangements were coordinated with the affected property owners, who were provided with details concerning the necessary obligations, as summarized within the Decommissioning Plan. He confirmed the company has a contractual obligation with these landowners. He explained financial assurance was not required for the previous facility, and it is his hope that the Board will approve similar standards for this proposed facility. Commissioner Kirkmeyer indicated she understands contract law; however, she would like to know how the applicant intends to ensure the equipment will be properly removed from the site. In response, Mr. Gonzalez confirmed the company will have an investment of over $300 million within the installed equipment on the site, and the company has a long-term obligation to supply power to Xcel Energy. He clarified, at the end of the 25-year commitment, the value of the equipment will still exceed the cost to remove all of the equipment, and at other facilities, contractors have agreed to remove all the equipment in exchange for the salvage value of the equipment. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Gonzalez confirmed the details of the construction schedule are still being finalized; however, he is more than willing to provide the details once the plans are finalized. He clarified the construction schedule is required within the Conditions of 2010-1017 PL2059 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, C/O BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. (USR-1723) PAGE 9 Approval, and he is comfortable the provided schedule will comply with staff's requirements. Further responding to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Gonzalez confirmed there is a designated haul route for the proposed facility, which is similar to the route designated on the map provided by Ms. Carter, and he confirmed traffic to the facility will enter on County Road 132, from State Highway 71, and staff has been provided with a copy of the haul route map. He further confirmed traffic studies have been completed within the surrounding area, and the total amount of traffic was provided at the Department of Public Work's request; however, the numbers were also subdivided to differentiate gravel trucks, water trucks, and heavy equipment, by monthly totals. He clarified he was under the assumption that all of the required materials had been provided to staff for review of the application, and his representatives are currently working to finalize some of the information which is required to be submitted prior to construction activities commencing. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Gonzalez indicated he has been working with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to make a determination regarding whether Playa Lake is a jurisdictional wetland area; however, the preliminary discussions indicate the area is not considered to be so. Further responding to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Gonzalez confirmed the primary source of gravel will be from an existing gravel operation located west of the City of Cheyenne, Wyoming, located adjacent to Interstate 80. He further confirmed the gravel source noted within Weld County is actually a source of sand, and the contractor in charge of construction activities is working on the arrangements for these items. He clarified the water will be purchased from the City of Kimball, Nebraska, and representatives are working in conjunction with a surrounding property owner to utilize a currently permitted well as a backup source of water. He confirmed an agreement regarding the use of the well still needs to be finalized. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Gonzalez indicated the issues regarding the landing strip have been resolved and an agreement has been finalized with the affected property owner. Commissioner Garcia questioned the proposed changes to Development Standard #7 which remove the requirement for dust abatement along the construction route. In response, Mr. Gonzalez clarified he has been working with the State regarding the required A.P.E.N. permit, and BP is contracting with other companies with batch plants which already have permits in place, therefore, he intends to rely on the existing permits. Further responding to Commissioner Garcia, Mr. Gonzalez indicated the required mitigation for dust created by traffic will be addressed within the Improvements Agreement. He confirmed the roads will be maintained during the construction process, and he will work with staff to inspect the roads and find suitable samples of roadbase. He further confirmed it has been agreed that three stockpiles of 1,000 yards of repair materials will be kept on hand, for any necessary repairs. He indicated the agreement is still being worked out to make it mutually agreeable to both parties, and there is still more information which needs to be provided. Commissioner Garcia questioned which practices were learned during the construction of the existing wind facility and how they will be incorporated into the plans for this facility. In response, Mr. Gonzalez indicated the primary difference is that the construction schedule for this facility is planned to take place during the summer months, therefore, adverse winter weather conditions should not be as prevalent during the construction of this facility. He clarified the Department of Public Works has provided direction regarding the requirements during construction of this facility, and at the 2010-1017 PL2059 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, C/O BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. (USR-1723) PAGE 10 Department's request, a contractor will be on-call 24 hours per day for any emergency situations. He further clarified a list of contact information will be provided, and all of the agreements with the various contactors contain language that the contactors have the obligation to do whatever is necessary to resolve any concerns raised by staff. Responding to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Gonzalez confirmed he is engaged in the process of obtaining the required access permits from CDOT, as well as all of the necessary hauling permits. Further responding to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Gonzalez indicated the exact locations of the turbines are currently being finalized, and he planned to obtain approval of the proposed project before sharing the exact locations with the property owners and discussing any concerns. He confirmed he has been working with the property owners to mitigate any issues regarding the placement of the turbines. In response to Commissioner Long, Mr. Gonzalez confirmed none of the haul routes will travel through the Town of New Raymer. Commissioner Long confirmed summer conditions can also create problems for rural roads, including flooding of roads after heavy rains. In response to Commissioner Long, Mr. Gonzalez confirmed he recognizes that the construction schedule will partly revolve around precipitation issues, and the schedule has been created to be flexible for adverse weather, therefore, there might be times during the summer months when no work is being completed, if it is not possible to do so. He clarified rainfall typically percolates quickly and dries up in a quick manner, and he confirmed the Improvements Agreement contains a responsibility to keep the roads passable and safe. He confirmed it is not the intention to tear up the roads during the construction and hauling phases, as he knows it is extremely expensive to rebuild roads. Responding to Commissioner Conway, Ms. Carter confirmed there have been several discussions with staff regarding the Improvements Agreement, and the applicant has supplied the necessary information, to date. David Bauer, Department of Public Works, confirmed the Improvements Agreement addresses almost every concern which has been presented today, and to finalize the agreement, there needs to be clarification regarding timing and schedules. He clarified the Department of Defense will be closing several sections of roads within the surrounding area to complete grading operations, and all of the permits required from the various agencies are defined within the Agreement. He indicated the stockpiles of emergency supplies are addressed within the Agreement, as well as the issues relating to the necessary collateral. He confirmed the Improvements Agreement shall be finalized before the applicant may record the plat. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Bauer confirmed the designated haul route is converging, and staff has investigated the roads within the area and has named the roads which shall be excluded from use. He further confirmed the Agreement will have an amendment process for the haul route so that the applicant may propose an addition to the haul route if an access issue occurs for a designated road. Mr. Gonzalez further clarified the Improvements Agreement will contain an approved haul route as an exhibit, which will become a part of the legal document; however, the exact haul route has not been approved at this point. Responding to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Bauer explained the required collateral, in the amount of $500,000.00, was a best-guess estimate provided by staff. He clarified there has not yet been a spreadsheet provided by the applicant, detailing the required improvements or 2010-1017 PL2059 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, C/O BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. (USR-1723) PAGE 11 repairs for the 40 miles of roadway to be utilized; however, he believes the amount will be sufficient. Further responding to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Bauer confirmed it may become necessary to reconsider the amount of collateral once the construction schedule is received. Commissioner Long expressed his concern regarding the narrow width of some of the roads to be utilized, and he questioned whether the applicant will be required to negotiate purchase or lease agreements for the necessary right-of-way to be obtained for the required widening improvements. Mr. Gonzalez clarified there are several areas where improvements will be required, and he confirmed the necessary right-of-way leases have been completed for the intersections where temporary improvements are necessary. Commissioner Long expressed his concern that the large equipment traveling to the facility will be hard to navigate on narrow rural roads. In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Gonzalez confirmed the concerns regarding drainage onto an adjacent property owner's property have been resolved. He clarified the property owner requested that the drainage from the detention pond be released to drain onto his land so that he is not losing any additional amounts of water. He confirmed the pond was designed to convert the water to sheetflow drainage, as requested by the property owner, and the information was recently submitted to the Department of Public Works, for approval. Kevin Oakes, surrounding property owner, indicated he resides within the Town of LaSalle, and submitted a document containing maps and photos of his property, marked Exhibit R. He clarified the map provided by the Assessor's Office indicates his parcel of land as a rectangular shape; however, historically, the boundaries of the land which he has claimed are outlined in the shape which resembles the State of Texas. He expressed his concern regarding the impact of the transmission line, which is expected to traverse the southern tip of the property. He clarified he has spoken with Mr. Gonzalez concerning the matter; however, there is an issue of contention because the transmission line does not cross the shape of the land recognized by Mr. Gonzalez as the property boundaries. He confirmed his wife grew up in the surrounding area, this is the last parcel of land which has remained within the family, and he does not desire to seek compensation for placement of the transmission line. He clarified it was recently determined that the transmission line will need to be moved to the north, so that the line is not directly on the section line, and he is requesting that the Board permit the applicant to work to lessen the impacts to his property. Chair Rademacher indicated it appears Mr. Oakes is contesting the records of the County Assessor, which the Board does not have any power to oversee. He confirmed the applicant and the Board must move forward with consideration according to the Assessor's records, and he recommended that Mr. Oakes contact the Assessor's Office to determine the correct way to address the boundary line issue. In response, Mr. Oakes confirmed he prefers not to seek litigation of the matter, rather, he is requesting that the Board allow the applicant to make a gentlemen's agreement to resolve the matter. Gary Sheffler, surrounding property owner, stated the native grasslands within Weld County are Colorado's best kept secret, and it is his hope that the applicant is allowed to begin this project as quickly as possible. He stated the construction of the facility will require a large amount of gravel, and the sooner the site is able to be developed, during summer weather, the more of a benefit it will be to surrounding property owners. He clarified there will be roads installed on native grasslands, which is a concern of his; however, once the project is completed, he 2010-1017 PL2059 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, C/O BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. (USR-1723) PAGE 12 believes the use will be compatible with the lifestyle of the residents in the rural areas. He clarified he is happy to welcome the applicant to the area. Janyce Harms, surrounding property owner, confirmed many people were hired locally for the previous project, and the applicant held a job fair within a local school to hire as many locals as possible. She indicated many of her neighbors did work for the company during the construction activities and were able to have the best paying employment of their life. She clarified the applicant has done a good job with the commitment to employ local residents. Ms. Harms indicated she considers a vehicle count of 10 vehicles per day to be excessive in her immediate area, and she is pleased that the applicant is trying to conduct most of the construction operations during the summer months this time. She stated the applicant did experience adverse conditions during the previous project; however, the contractors were quick to clear the roads, and solve any problems experienced by the neighbors. She further stated the facility employees still clear the snow from the necessary roads before Weld County staff is able to get out to the area because it is necessary for them to maintain access to the turbines. She expressed her appreciation to the applicant for addressing concerns and she indicated she is confident the applicant will provide great care to her as a neighbor of the proposed project. Tom Carr, surrounding property owner, indicated he operates the Colorado Cattle Company, which is a working guest ranch. He clarified he was initially concerned that the proposed project would have a negative impact on his business and the lifestyle of the residents within the surrounding area. He indicated he has spoken with guests at the ranch throughout the past year, with 40 percent of the guests being from overseas, and he was surprised to find that virtually all of the guests gave a positive response to the proposed turbines. He stated he is in the third week of the guest season for this year, and so far, there have been no negative comments received concerning the proposed project. Mr. Carr indicated he expressed his concern to the applicant regarding County Road 141, which is the only access to his property, and he has been constantly reassured of several ways in which the company will work through any issues which may arise. He confirmed the applicant has been easy to approach and easy to work with regarding his concerns, and he is confident they will be able to work through the issues. Dan Hoops, surrounding property owner, indicated he resides in the City of Denver; however, he owns lands which is adjacent to the proposed laydown site and substation. He confirmed he acquired the property as an inheritance from his grandfather, and his property will be impacted the by the transmission line crossing. He clarified he speaks for his entire family which supports this project and all of the positive benefits it represents, and he urged the Board to approve the project. Larry Kindvall, surrounding property owner, confirmed he owns approximately 2,400 acres within the surrounding area, and he is favor of the project, therefore, he requested the Board approve the application. Marlene Oakes, surrounding property owner, confirmed she is the wife of Mr. Oakes who spoke previously, and she questioned the location of the area of wetlands previously mentioned. Mr. Gathman indicated the placement on the map provided, and in response, Ms. Oakes 2010-1017 PL2059 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, C/O BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. (USR-1723) PAGE 13 confirmed the area does function as a wetland, even if it is not designated at one, and contains a large amount of wildlife, therefore, the area should be protected as a wetland. In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Kimmi confirmed the applicant has indicated that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has been contacted regarding this issue; however, staff has not received any correspondence regarding the determination. He clarified a determination may take several months, depending on the complexity of the issue being studied. In response to Ms. Oakes, Chair Rademacher confirmed the Corps of Engineers will address the impacts to the area, and the applicant will be required to comply with the findings of the report. Ms. Oakes clarified the area is a big water hole during summer months, and she reiterated she is requesting that this area not be ignored. Commissioner Kirkmeyer clarified the area will most likely be treated as wetlands and the applicant will be instructed to provide the proper mitigation measures. Commissioner Long confirmed he has driven through the area and indicated the applicant may have to be flexible with the plans to utilize the road. In response to Commissioner Long, Ms. Carter confirmed the existing road will remain; however, if the road were to be widened, there will be impacts to the ecology of the area. She confirmed staff will continue the current maintenance schedule on the road and the decision will have to be made as to whether improvements are possible, or, if it is still effective for the applicant to utilize the road if improvements cannot be completed. Chair Rademacher indicated it is up to the Corps of Engineers to determine what will need to be done, and it may be possible that additional wetlands could be created to replace any portion that needs to be removed. William Rasmussen, surrounding property owner, clarified his grandfather owned surrounding property, and he has since passed away. He confirmed it has been a pleasure to deal with the applicant's representatives, especially Mr. Gonzalez, and he is impressed with the way that the company has dealt with the concerns, as they have been presented. There being no further discussion, the Chair closed the public input portion of the hearing, and issued a recess for the purpose of a lunch break. Upon reconvening, Chair Rademacher expressed his interest in the applicant being required to provide some type of financial assurance in conjunction with the Decommissioning Plan. Responding to Mr. Gonzalez, Chair Rademacher confirmed the amount of collateral required through the Improvements Agreement does provide some sense of security for him; however, he believes additional financial assurance, above and beyond the required collateral, is necessary. Mr. Gonzalez confirmed each individual property owner affected by this project has indicated they are comfortable with the proposal, and has not requested additional assurance. Commissioner Kirkmeyer clarified the financial assurance should be addressed within the Decommissioning Plan, and she confirmed other similar industries are required to provide financial assurances. She explained the Board would like to ensure that if the company goes away, that all of the equipment on the site will go away as well. She confirmed staff may negotiate the details of the Decommissioning Plan as a Condition of Approval. Responding to Mr. Gonzalez, Mr. Gathman confirmed the Condition should be required prior to recording the plat, rather than prior to construction activities. Chair Rademacher indicated he realizes the language and requirements will be worked out by staff; however, he would like it on record that Condition of Approval #2.0 needs to require some type of financial assurance. Commissioner Kirkmeyer clarified she agrees and provided direction to staff that the financial assurance must be a part of the required Decommissioning Plan. In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Barker 2010-1017 PL2059 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, C/O BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. (USR-1723) PAGE 14 confirmed the Board's direction has been made a part of the record, and it will be acceptable for staff to determine the appropriate amount of financial assurance to be included within the Decommissioning Plan. Commissioner Kirkmeyer indicated a designated haul route needs to be identified, and she understands the haul route will be attached to the Improvements Agreement; however, the Resolution needs to contain language that a haul route must be established, as approved by the Department of Public Works. Chair Rademacher concurred with Commissioner Kirkmeyer. Responding to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Gonzalez explained he struggles with the issue presented by Mr. Oakes because there is already an agreement in place with the recorded property owner on whose property the transmission line crosses. He confirmed the proper title research work has been completed which confirms the property ownership, and it will be a great amount of work to have to reposition the transmission line in this one area. He confirmed he has indicated to Mr. Oakes that this area will not contain any physical structures on the ground, as the line will span the property; however, he does not believe the transmission line may be repositioned to completely avoid this section of property. Commissioner Conway indicated he realizes the big issue is who actually owns the land in question; however, he would like to be assured that Mr. Gonzalez is willing to work with Mr. Oakes. Mr. Gonzalez confirmed he is willing to work with Mr. Oakes to the extent of a reasonable solution, and Commissioner Conway expressed his appreciation to Mr. Gonzalez. Mr. Gonzalez clarified it is his understanding that the haul route will be included within the Improvements Agreement, which will require separate approval as an Exhibit to the Agreement. He confirmed there will be an acceptable haul route in place prior to the approval of the Improvements Agreement. Commissioner Kirkmeyer reiterated the haul route will be a part of the Improvements Agreement; however, it is important that the Resolution contain a Condition of Approval which addresses the need for a designated haul route, so that the requirement does not get lost in the future. She suggested the addition of language to state, "The applicant shall provide a designated haul route, agreed upon and approved by the Department of Public Works." In response to Commissioner Long, Mr. Barker confirmed the haul route will be a part of the Improvements Agreement, which is a separate document approved by the Board during a future Board meeting once the document is finalized, therefore, the matter will not come back for public discussion since notice of the meeting will not be provided. He confirmed it is acceptable for the Board to require the designation of a haul route as a Condition of Approval. Responding to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Barker clarified the Conditions of Approval within a Resolution may not be satisfied at the time of the hearing before the Board, therefore, it is acceptable to require a Condition to be completed prior to recording the plat. At the request of Chair Rademacher, Ms. Carter requested the addition of a new Condition of Approval #2.J to state, "A designated haul route shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works, for review and approval." She clarified the Road Maintenance Agreement does allow for the process to amend the haul route, if it becomes necessary to do so. Responding to Chair Rademacher, Ms. Carter confirmed the amendment process will be contained within the Improvements Agreement. 2010-1017 PL2059 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, C/O BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. (USR-1723) PAGE 15 Commissioner Kirkmeyer indicated Condition of Approval #5.E needs additional clarification regarding the requirement of the gravel stockpiles. Mr. Carroll suggested the addition of the words "road base" to describe which type of gravel. Commissioner Kirkmeyer suggested Condition of Approval #5.E be modified to state, "The applicant shall provide three (3) gravel road base stockpile locations and stock each with 1,000 cubic yards of gravel, which may be used for road repairs, in accordance with County and Department of Defense specifications." The Board concurred with the modification, as described by Commissioner Kirkmeyer. Responding to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Ms. Carter explained if the Corps of Engineers determines the area in question is not a wetland, the road will still require stabilization, and staff will work with the applicant to determine the proper construction activities. In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Gonzalez confirmed a wetland delineation has been completed by a qualified consulting firm, and the data has been submitted to the Corps of Engineers for their determination. He clarified he hopes to present the information received from the Corps of Engineers as soon as it is received. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, the Board concurred with the modification of the last sentence of Condition of Approval #6.F to state, "Setback and offset distances shall be determined by Section 23-3-50 of the Weld County Code.", as suggested by Mr. Gathman in Exhibit O. Further responding to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Kimmi confirmed a Stormwater Discharge Permit is required through Development Standard #16, therefore the first sentence of Condition of Approval #7.A may be modified to state, "A State of Colorado Stormwater Discharge Permit shall be required...". The Board concurred with the modification, as proposed. Ms. Light reiterated her request for the addition of a new Development Standard #17 to state, "The applicant shall comply with all provisions of the State Underground and Aboveground Storage Tank Regulations."; and the Board concurred with the addition. Responding to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Gathman indicated the location of the turbines will be determined in accordance with Section 23-3-50, as addressed within the amendment to Condition of Approval #6.F. Mr. Gonzalez confirmed the recorded plat will have all of the details of the location of the turbines. Responding to Mr. Gonzalez, Chair Rademacher confirmed the Board has referred the matter of financial assurance with the Decommissioning Plan to the Department of Planning Services, and if the Department cannot work out an acceptable agreement, the matter may be reconsidered by the Board. Mr. Barker concurred and requested a modification to Condition of Approval #2.D to state, "The applicant shall submit four(4) copies of the Decommissioning Plan to the Department of Planning Services, for review and approval, which shall include collateral in the amount sufficient to ensure removal of all wind turbines from the site, upon cessation of wind generation operations." The Board concurred with the amendment, as proposed by Mr. Barker. Responding to Mr. Gathman, Mr. Barker clarified if staff is not certain that a particular amount of collateral is sufficient for the Decommissioning Plan, the matter may be reviewed by the Board for a final determination. In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Gonzalez indicated he has reviewed, and concurs with, the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards, as amended. 2010-1017 PL2059 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, C/O BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. (USR-1723) PAGE 16 Commissioner Long indicated he supports approval of this project, and he expressed his appreciation to Mr. Gonzalez for his collaboration with the Departments of Planning Services and Public Works. He clarified, for the record, that even though the roads intended to be utilized for this project are not heavily travelled, the viability of these roads is very important to the residents which depend on them for their transportation needs. He confirmed it is important for the applicant to recognize the safety of these roads equates to the safety and well-being of the residents within the surrounding area. He indicated he believes the rest of the process will be positive, as long as the roads are maintained to the adequate standards, and he is pleased that many of the neighbors within the surrounding area are in support of the project. He further indicated he believes the placement of the towers will be done in a manner sensitive of the environment, and the applicant will maintain the proper stewardship. Commissioner Garcia expressed his appreciation to Mr. Gonzalez for his presentation and efforts to clarify and address any concerns presented. He clarified Weld County is a center of the energy economy, and he is proud that this company has provided the ability to utilize energy for the benefits of the citizens. He commended Mr. Gonzalez for his concise answers concerning the roads to be utilized and for the effort he put forth in working with members of the community. He further expressed his appreciation to the members of the community who provided their thoughts and comments today, and indicated he is pleased when neighbors are able to work together. Commissioner Conway concurred with the comments provided, and expressed his appreciation to all of the surrounding property owners who provided comments. He confirmed it is very reassuring and refreshing to hear that the applicant strives to be a good neighbor, and he is looking forward to a positive working relationship. Commissioner Kirkmeyer confirmed she supports approval of the application, and she expressed her appreciation for all of the comments provided. She confirmed it is rare for the Board to hear comments of support for a proposed project, and she appreciates that many people took the time to come provide support for the applicant. Chair Rademacher concurred he also appreciates the comments provided by those in attendance, and the Board received a large amount of good feedback today. He reiterated he is disappointed that several issues were not addressed before today's hearing; however, he is confident that the applicant will be diligent to work out all of the concerns presented. He stated he supports the project, and he believes in the overall goal. Commissioner Long expressed his appreciation to the citizens for their patience. Commissioner Long moved to approve the request of Cedar Creek II, LLC, c/o BP Wind Energy North America, Inc., for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit#1723 for a Major Facility of a Public Utility (a wind energy facility with a generating capacity up to 250.8 megawatts (MW) along with a 230-kilovolt (kV) electric transmission line, an interconnection facility to tie into an existing 72-mile transmission line, existing collector transmission lines, up to five (5) permanent 80-meter meteorological towers, one (1) substation, an operations and maintenance building/facility, along with one (1) temporary batch plant and construction facility) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District, based on the recommendations of 2010-1017 PL2059 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, CIO BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. (USR-1723) PAGE 17 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 Condition of Approval #2.D to state, "The applicant shall submit four(4) copies of the Decommissioning Plan to the Department of Planning Services, for review and approval, which shall include collateral in the amount sufficient to ensure removal of all wind turbines from the site, upon cessation of wind generation operations."; the addition of Condition of Approval #1.J, with the required re-lettering, to state, "A designated haul route shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works, for review and approval."; the modification of Condition of Approval #5.E to state, "The applicant shall provide three (3) gravel road base stockpile locations and stock each with 1,000 cubic yards of gravel, which may be used for road repairs, in accordance with County and Department of Defense specifications."; the modification of the last sentence of Condition of Approval #6.F to state, "Setback and offset distances shall be determined by Section 23-3-50 of the Weld County Code."; the modification of the first sentence of Condition of Approval #7.A to state, "A State of Colorado Stormwater Drainage Permit shall be required for a development/ redevelopment/construction site where a contiguous or non-contiguous land disturbance is greater than, or equal to, one acre in area."; and the addition of Development Standard #17, with the required re-numeration, to state, "The applicant shall comply with all provisions of the State Underground and Aboveground Storage Tank Regulations." The motion was seconded by Commissioner Conway, and it carried unanimously. There being no further discussion, the hearing was completed at 1:35 p.m. This Certification was approved on the 24th day of May, 2010. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS rZ,l LD CO INTY COLORADO ATTEST: -- 1861 ('-Q"4s�. �� I: •ademac er, C'air Weld County Clerk to the Boar. .:•i� — ' �.ara Kirkmeyer, •ro-Te Dep Clerk ".,�he Board l `� Sean P. Cell ay i ham F. Garcia EXCUSED DATE OF APPROVAL David E. Long 2010-1017 PL2059 EXHIBIT INVENTORY CONTROL SHEET Case USR-1723 - CEDAR CREEK II, LLC, C/O BP WIND ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, INC. Exhibit Submitted By Description A. Planning Staff Inventory of Items Submitted Resolutions of Recommendation (dated 05/18/2010 and B. Planning Commission 03/16/2010) Summary of Hearing (Minutes dated 05/18/2010 and C. Planning Commission 03/16/2010) D. Dianne Lobmeyer E-mail of Support, dated 04/12/2010 E. JoAnn Stephenson E-mail re: Updated SPO address, dated 04/12/2010 E-mail and Draft of proposed changes to Resolution, F. Planning Staff dated 04/22/2010 E-mail and Draft of proposed changes to Resolution, G. Planning Staff dated 05/12/2010 H. Applicant Packet of updated documents, dated 05/14/2010 I. Applicant Final Drainage Report, dated 05/14/2010 (also on disc) J. Applicant Updated Traffic Impact Study, dated 05/03/2010 Packet of updated Construction/Studies documents, K. Applicant dated 05/17/2010 (also on disc) L. Kevin Oakes E-mail of Concern, dated 05/17/2010 M. Millennium III Partnership E-mail of Support, dated 05/17/2010 Affidavit for Supplemental Publication w/map (filed N. Jim Borgel under Legals) Memo re: Revised Condition of Approval #6.F, dated O. Planning Staff 05/18/2010 P. Planning Staff Certificate and photos of sign posting Q. Planning Staff Certificate and photos of sign posting R. Kevin Oakes Map of property w/ photos S. T. U. V. W. " 9 cos, 0 1 t-2 l � , P - �l Q 0 a c ‘-‘I g c90 O '.n ,r\" ,� M �� L. � rc- . � Do ,r Z Vii" Li e-, ` ` c 4 V • n" ti U GI N \i) (1 M ` ` 9 i j L W E ai lamr S M i M " v 4.0 i W o C z �1 ' TN 0 2 W R y AJ ( r ' H �• W k- - J w O C d 0) 11Th , r -;--, c s -� c ,. i_ x co r o 3 pL. r\1 V) � k- p a o W o rd 1 0 en 5 �� Q N m V 2 Z l7 v L 00 . r� c ICI) A c 0 Cr) 1, kj rri\ Ni P�' (i of r c� 1�• .v u> w Q c co F co J C in 2 o and oo -a d > go 4.c' J o L L V U o d (.. sd u. OO U a) 9 �� '---- -4 E O 1 rb o / • O W O O T v� F c� ri '� co ... Qr o y , i _ f S '_ o 4t % d j o� Z W W y 0 i - • _ , L _ Q Q UU w < o CA L� � C 2 0 0 d Z LA N, H 0C « 9 / / t C':' 6o ( 1„ \ \ ~ 4i24 g 0 a O cs_ \ �� ■ \ \ , - 2 a) \ \ � ® ` . a tu re § / / - 2 j e N . z « % . / cm � i- \ \ \ \ / \ $ 2 { 2 ) ) \ § \ \ \ , w © 2 0 2 # 2 \ e y \ [ a 0. 0 2 % . _ 6 / « ° en Eo S a Z \ / % x w 7 7 © » , k . ] k ) ) / k / 2 \ ca k § | ■ « c e o ) k B \ k § / \ \ \ J ; • # > a � U. ID° k ! �� Z Ui \--14 2 y \ 1 7 2 CO Q2 ! > Q \ )- CO 2 LU L al w a r ; .« _ : » .4 ( \ w § { , «\ _ 0g n d2 Hello