HomeMy WebLinkAbout20101563.tiff HEARING CERTIFICATION
DOCKET NO. 2010-23.A
RE: SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT#1741 FOR AN AGRICULTURAL SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT PRIMARILY
ENGAGED IN PERFORMING AGRICULTURAL, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, OR
HORTICULTURAL SERVICES ON A FEE OR CONTRACT BASIS, INCLUDING A
LIVESTOCK CONFINEMENT OPERATION (EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING DAIRY TO
A TOTAL OF 1,400 ANIMALS, INCLUDING MILKING COWS, DRY COWS, HEIFERS,
AND CALVES) IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT - ROSWELL AND
KERRY CHECKETTS
A public hearing was conducted on July 21, 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 - EXCUSED
Commissioner David E. Long
Also present:
Acting Clerk to the Board, Jennifer VanEgdom
County Attorney, Bruce Barker
Planning Department representative, Chris Gathman
Health Department representative, Troy Swain
Public Works representative, Heidi Hansen
The following business was transacted:
I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated May 11, 2010, and duly published May 13, 2010,
in the Windsor Beacon, a public hearing was conducted on June 23, 2010, to consider the
request of Roswell and Kerry Checketts, for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by
Special Review Permit#1741 for an Agricultural Service Establishment primarily engaged in
performing agricultural, animal husbandry, or horticultural services on a fee or contract basis,
including a Livestock Confinement Operation (expansion of an existing dairy to a total of 1,400
animals, including milking cows, dry cows, heifers, and calves) in the A (Agricultural) Zone
District. At said hearing the Board deemed it advisable to continue the matter to July 21, 2010,
to allow adequate time for the Planning Commission to review the matter in a hearing was which
continued from June 1, 2010, to July 6, 2010. At said hearing on July 21, 2010, Bruce Barker,
County Attorney, made this a matter of record. Chair Rademacher advised the applicant's
representative, Tim Naylor, AGPROfessionals, LLC, that he has the option of continuing the
matter to a date when the full Board will be present. However, if he decides to proceed today,
the matter will require three affirmative votes, or in the case of a tie vote, Commissioner Garcia
will review the record and make the determining vote. Mr. Naylor indicated he would like to
proceed today.
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
written. He stated there is a pending zoning violation on the site due to the number of animals
C . cA, P L 1-41- i PtU 2010-1563
S 3 N D PL2067
HEARING CERTIFICATION - ROSWELL AND KERRY CHECKETTS (USR-1741)
PAGE 2
on the site which exceed the amount allowed as Use by Right, and the violation will be closed
upon approval of this application; however, if the application is denied, the matter will be
forwarded to the County Attorney's Office. In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Gathman
indicated the applicant is allowed to have up to 320 animal units, as a Use by Right; however,
he is unsure of exactly how many animal units were at the facility when the violation was
initiated. He stated the site is located within an agricultural area, with four single-family
residences to the west and south, and two single-family residences to the north, with the
Latham View Subdivision in close proximity. He clarified the requirement of a Landscape and
Screening Plan, as well as a Lighting Plan, will address impacts to surrounding properties, and
the applicant will be required to adhere to all regulations of Confined Animal Feeding Operations
(CAFO). He stated fourteen referral agencies reviewed the application materials, and eight
provided comments which have been addressed within the Conditions of Approval and
Development Standards. Mr. Gathman indicated staff has received two letters of opposition,
with concerns regarding impacts to the groundwater, excessive flies, decrease of property
value, compatibility issues with residential uses within the surrounding area, an inadequate
amount of buffering/landscaping, and the proximity of the location to the Town of LaSalle's
growth boundary and transportation plan. He confirmed the site is located within the three-mile
referral area for the Town of LaSalle; however, it is not located within the Urban Growth
Boundary as recognized within the Coordinated Planning Agreement. He indicated the
proposed facility is located 1.25 miles southeast of the secondary growth boundary for the
Town, and in a referral response, the Town stated the expansion of the facility could decrease
the desirability of future residential development within the growth boundaries. He confirmed
the Town indicated additional concerns regarding odor nuisances, the large number of other
feedlots within a two-mile radius of this facility, and the potential negative impact to the
Transportation Plan. Mr. Gathman displayed photographs of the site and the surrounding area,
and confirmed the site does slope from west to east. In response to Chair Rademacher,
Mr. Gathman indicated the property directly east of the facility is also owned by the applicant,
and the water from the facility does drain to the east. Further responding to Chair Rademacher,
Mr. Gathman stated the applicant has been in business at this location since 2004, and he
believes the Latham View Subdivision was approved in either 2002 or 2003. He confirmed staff
has not received specific complaints regarding the facility.
Heidi Hansen, Department of Public Works, stated the site will continue to utilize the existing
accesses on County Road 43, which is classified as a collector status road. She clarified
County Road 43 currently contains 60 feet of right-of-way, requires 80 feet of right-of-way at full
buildout, and has an average daily traffic count of approximately 544 vehicles. She indicated
the main access to the site is currently located adjacent to the residence; however, the
applicants intend to now make the northern access the main access, and the proper tracking
control will be required to prevent tracking debris onto County Road 43. She indicated the
storm drainage on the site must follow CAFO regulations, and in response to Chair
Rademacher, Ms. Hansen confirmed there will be one access to the residence on the site and
one to the dairy facility. She reiterated the applicant is proposing to make the north access the
main access to the dairy, and she confirmed there will not be any new accesses to the site.
Troy Swain, Department of Public Health and Environment, stated Development Standards #5
through #21 contain the typical requirements of the Department, in addition to several of the
Conditions of Approval. He confirmed he checked the history of the facility, and the Department
2010-1563
PL2067
HEARING CERTIFICATION - ROSWELL AND KERRY CHECKETTS (USR-1741)
PAGE 3
did receive one complaint regarding excessive flies on June 22, 2007; however, upon
inspection, the complaint was closed and no incident was recorded in the file. He indicated
there have not been any on-going issues at the facility; however, staff did receive a complaint
on June 1, 2009, concerning the disposal of cattle at another facility. He clarified staff
investigated the complaint, and found that the disposal of three cows was an illegal waste
disposal. He indicated the applicant revised the Nuisance Control Plan, which requires the
maintenance of disposal records. He confirmed the facility will have to maintain compliance
with CAFO Regulations, which were incorporated into the Development Standards.
Mr. Naylor stated the requested expansion is for the milking of up to 700 cows, with a total of up
to 1,400 cattle on the applicant's 80-acre parcel, which is located north of County Road 44,
directly adjacent to County Road 43. He reviewed his PowerPoint presentation, marked Exhibit
F, and explained the current and proposed configurations of the facility, indicating the pen
system, will be upgraded as well as the north access. He clarified the applicants have concerns
with the dairy traffic utilizing the south access in front of the residence; however, the south
access must remain open because it provides the access to Lot A of the Recorded Exemption.
He confirmed the applicant intends to keep the same number of cattle currently at the facility,
and the upgrades will require moving the pens and complying with wastewater regulations. He
indicated the manure storage will be moved from the southeast corner of the site to the location
of the corrals, and all of the buildings on the site will remain in use, with no proposed additional
buildings. Mr. Naylor confirmed the facility is located within an agricultural area, with several
other animal operations in close proximity, and he reviewed the seven obligations of the
applicant contained within Section 23-2-230.8 of the Weld County Code. He explained the
stormwater runoff on the site will be contained, water running onto the site will be eliminated,
and the pond will be upgraded and lined. He stated the facility will generate over 6,300 tons of
manure on an annual basis, which is currently given away, and he reviewed the specifics of the
Nuisance Management Plan.
Mr. Naylor indicated the amount of traffic to the site will not be modified, and one milk truck, up
to two commodity trucks, and up to two manure/bedding trucks are expected on a daily basis.
He clarified the facility will have up to seventeen employees, working in shifts, and the applicant
owns an additional contiguous 80 acres, therefore, the number of cattle allowed as a Use by
Right at the facility is 640. In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Naylor indicated the property
is divided as a flagpole Recorded Exemption, and the south access must remain available for
access to Lot A. He further indicated the access road on the site will be improved, and the pond
will be required to be lined.
Beverly Orr, surrounding property owner, indicated she lives directly across from the applicant's
driveway, and she submitted nine photographs for the record, depicting the excessive amount of
flies at her property. She clarified she is a very clean person, and it has been frustrating for her
to be required to deal with the excessive amount of fly feces in and around her residence. She
indicated the applicant's representative spoke about solving her concerns during the Planning
Commission hearing; however, a timeline was not provided, and she would like to know when
the fly situation will be resolved. She stated the applicant previously indicated the manure
would no longer be piled within the pens, and she confirmed she is opposed to living next to a
feedlot. She questioned the fairness of the effects of the dairy operation on the surrounding
property owners, and she indicated she has been told by many people that the Board of County
2010-1563
PL2067
HEARING CERTIFICATION - ROSWELL AND KERRY CHECKETTS (USR-1741)
PAGE 4
Commissioners is prejudiced, and will always vote to approve dairies. Ms. Orr clarified the
applicants have been very nice neighbors in general; however, she feels like she has been
slapped in the face with a rude awakening because of the request to allow a large commercial
dairy. She requested that signs be placed along the road to warn truck drivers of the new
entrance, once the improvements are completed, and she believes the applicant should have
been required to complete a traffic study. She submitted an additional photograph, depicting a
post in front of her residence which is knocked over at least once per year by traffic in the area.
She indicated she would like the Board to fight for her personal property rights, and in response
to Chair Rademacher, she confirmed she has lived in the area for almost 30 years.
Responding to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Naylor confirmed the applicant has operated the dairy
since 2004, and the amount of animals on the site will not actually increase since the dairy
parlor is already at maximum capacity. He confirmed the improved designs which will be
implemented at the facility will help to minimize any negative effects. Chair Rademacher
indicated excessive flies tend to be a problem at almost every dairy and he questioned whether
the applicant intends to utilize spraying activities or possibly release wasps. In response,
Mr. Naylor explained that minimizing the habitat for the flies will help reduce the overall number,
and he is not aware of the applicant's plans to utilize biological controls; however, they could be
implemented. He confirmed the manure will be removed from the site regularly, and it is
expected the manure will now only be moved once, instead of being stored in piles. In response
to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Naylor indicated the manure will be stored within the east pens, and
will be land applied during fall or winter months. He further indicated the access will be gated,
and there are not signs currently proposed along the truck route. Further responding to Chair
Rademacher, Mr. Naylor indicated the level of the water within the pond will be kept to a
minimum, and it will not be treated; however, the water will be land applied throughout the
summertime.
Responding to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Naylor confirmed the second access will be gated
and will only be utilized by the oil and gas companies. He explained the gate at this access will
force all other traffic to the site to utilize the north access, which also provides access to one of
the existing wells on the site. Commissioner Conway expressed his concerns regarding the
large amount of flies experienced on Ms. Orr's property and he confirmed she has lived in the
area for a very long time. In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Naylor confirmed the
nuisance has been addressed within the newly created Nuisance Management Plan, and in
response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, he indicated the placement of the manure storage on the
map provided. He clarified the stockpiled manure will be kept within the pens so that it is uphill
from the wastewater facility, and in response to Chair Rademacher, he confirmed the amount of
wastewater coming into the pond has been minimized. Chair Rademacher indicated it is
important for the applicant to work as a good neighbor and try to minimize the fly habitat
originating from the facility. In response, Mr. Naylor confirmed the applicant has indicated he is
willing to fog the dairy facility, as well as Ms. Orr's residence, with her permission.
In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Naylor confirmed the total of seventeen employees
referenced within Development Standard #4 is adequate and does not require modification.
Further responding to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Swain confirmed a noise standard is not
appropriate for a dairy facility, therefore, Development Standard #18 should be deleted, and the
Board concurred with the deletion. Chair Rademacher questioned the need for a Screening
2010-1563
PL2067
HEARING CERTIFICATION - ROSWELL AND KERRY CHECKETTS (USR-1741)
PAGE 5
Plan, and in response, Mr. Gathman indicated a plan was included due to the proximity of the
residences in the area. He clarified there are existing trees which help to provide screening and
a buffer, and it would be acceptable for the applicant to install an additional row of trees.
Mr. Naylor clarified the applicant has owned this facility since 2004; however, the dairy has been
in operation since 1910, when the original milking parlor was built. Responding to
Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Naylor confirmed there are many other dairies and feedlot
facilities within the surrounding area. Further responding to Commissioner Kirkmeyer,
Mr. Gathman confirmed the Screening and Lighting Plans were required to help mitigate
conditions for surrounding property owners, specifically Ms. Orr's property, since it is located in
very close proximity. Commissioner Kirkmeyer clarified this is an agricultural operation which is
located within an agricultural area; therefore, she is not sure why the applicant is supposed to
provide screening on the site. Commissioner Conway concurred; however, he would like for the
applicant to be allowed to provide a positive impact for the Orr property. Responding to
Commissioner Conway, Mr. Naylor explained the addition of vegetation typically tends to attract
additional nuisances, such as flies. At the request of Chair Rademacher, the Board concurred
with the deletion of the requirement for a Screening Plan, as referenced within Development
Standard #30, Condition of Approvals #1.C.7, and #1.1, and Criteria of Approval #2.a and #2.c.
In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Gathman confirmed the lighting on the site must be
downcast and shielded, and Mr. Naylor confirmed it is the intention for the lighting to only
illuminate the facility.
In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Naylor indicated he, and the applicants, have reviewed,
and concur with, the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards, as modified.
Commissioner Kirkmeyer moved to approve the request of Roswell and Kerry Checketts for a
Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit #1741 for an Agricultural
Service Establishment primarily engaged in performing agricultural, animal husbandry, or
horticultural services on a fee or contract basis, including a Livestock Confinement Operation
(expansion of an existing dairy to a total of 1,400 animals, including milking cows, dry cows,
heifers, and calves) 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. Her motion included the deletion of the reference to a
Landscape and Screening Plan within Criteria of Approval #2.a and #2.c; the deletion of
Conditions of Approval #1.C.7 and #1.1; and the deletion of Development Standards #18 and
#30, all with the required re-numeration and re-lettering. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Long.
Commissioner Kirkmeyer expressed her appreciation to Ms. Orr for attending the hearing and
providing her comments. She indicated she understands that flies can be exasperating, and the
fly problem at the facility would most likely continue even if the USR permit was not approved
during today's hearing. She clarified the approval of the USR permit will allow the County to
require the applicant to provide abatement measures to eliminate the fly population to the extent
possible. She further clarified it is possible that flies are being generated by other facilities
within the surrounding area as well; however, the applicant has committed to working to
minimize the impacts of the flies from his facility, which creates a better situation.
Commissioner Long confirmed that in many instances, the requirements associated with the
2010-1563
PL2067
HEARING CERTIFICATION - ROSWELL AND KERRY CHECKETTS (USR-1741)
PAGE 6
approved expansion of a dairy help to mitigate the nuisance conditions at the facility. He
concurred that not all of the flies are being generated by this specific dairy; however, with the
efforts put forth by the applicant, Ms. Orr should be able to trace a reduction in the amount of
flies experienced on her property. He confirmed Ms. Orr should work directly with the applicant
in the future to address any nuisance issues experienced.
Commissioner Conway expressed his appreciation to Ms. Orr for her testimony and the
photographs she provided. He indicated he understands the frustration of the fly situation and
he believes as the facility complies with the regulations as set forth in this permit, the conditions
in the surrounding area will improve. He requested that the applicant continue to act as a good
neighbor and do whatever is necessary to help surrounding property owners abate any fly
situations. He confirmed flies do come from everywhere; however, he appreciates that the
applicant is willing to provide fogging at Ms. Orr's property. Chair Rademacher confirmed the
facility will be monitored by the State regarding the groundwater, in accordance with the CAFO
regulations. There being no further discussion, the motion carried unanimously, and the hearing
was completed at 2:30 p.m.
This Certification was approved on the 26th day of July, 2010.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
ATTEST: y ; 'JJ ��` -►] _Le —
Do :I Rademach=r, ' hair
Weld County Clerk to the oa
rbara Kirkmeyer Pro-Tem
BY:
Deputy Clerk to the Bo Uccc
`
' Sean Conway
EXCUSED
'-m F. Garcia
coc
David E. Long \i
2010-1563
PL2067
EXHIBIT INVENTORY CONTROL SHEET
Case USR-1741 - ROSWELL AND KERRY CHECKETTS
Exhibit Submitted By Description
A. Planning Staff Inventory of Items Submitted
B. Planning Commission Resolution of Recommendation
Summary of Hearing (Minutes dated 07/06/2010 and
C. Planning Commission 06/01/2010)
D. Planning Staff Certificate and photo of sign posting
E. Bev Orr Ten photographs
F. Applicant Copy of PowerPoint presentation
G.
H.
J.
K.
L.
M.
N.
O.
P.
Q.
R.
S.
T.
U.
V.
W.
`'1
ki
0 k31
J N
J
N (N
3 ril (C)
��
•
rt W
O N i 'A 1
U 3 N , \ 1
w ai ^ tt
fY c S N v .s r� L-
w r ..in % 9. 3 ' a J
0 r co y U `�
m o 2 v �
z LL 2 r ' ,
°' d
w O t m o. Cl) r J �
F- r my E y 3 � 1- ` e�
a O CJY V a' Z ON r \anf. \
y j)
s w Qr
y -3-
V V N
2 aicl RI
F- C N YZ .C 17 L.
7
Cn CO-ICO O �J
iii `�
0 E d w °' % x a
U to -(5; ` ‘ Q,'
CD 1 1 1 C �' ^ ' QG ,
a inn) 3 S a, ar? 1. �'+ V 1
z F- F F- isi O Off�.C z�'4 -9
YYY U) Ill �c Vea, c\ J'-- , i\�
a 000 o
2 00o d z -)
Hello