HomeMy WebLinkAbout20100676.tiff SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
A special meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held in the Weld County Department of
Planning Services, Hearing Room, 918 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by
Chair, Tom Holton, at 1:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL ABSENT ..
r ,
E... 'i
Tom Holton
Mark Lawley �s 2 i.,
Nick Berryman = .
Erich Ehrlich
Robert Grand f� _j
Bill Hall r-•. N? 'L'_.,;
Roy Spitzer
Alexander Zauder O
Jason Maxey
Also Present: Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services; Don Carroll, Janet Carter, Clay Kimmi, and
Dave Bauer, Department of Public Works; Lauren Light, Department of Health; Cyndy Giauque, County
Attorney, and Kris Ranslem, Secretary.
Robert Grand moved to approve the March 2,2010 Weld County Planning Commission minutes,seconded by
Alexander Zauder. Motion carried.
The Chair read the case into record
CASE NUMBER: USR-1723
APPLICANT: Cedar Creek II (BP Wind Energy North America Inc.)
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit 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.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Wind Energy Facility Transmission Line of the 6th P.M.,Weld County,Colorado.
LOCATION: Wind Generator facility is generally located in an irregularly shaped area south of
and adjacent to CR 138; North of and adjacent to CR 120 and west of CR 153.
The section of transmission line lying outside of the boundaries of the Wind
Generator Facility is located north of CR 118 and west of and adjacent to CR 382.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, stated that this is an application for a 1041 facility;therefore a hearing with
the Board of County Commissioners is also scheduled.
This facility is located east of the existing wind generator facility (Cedar Creek I) that was approved in 2006
under USR-1563. If approved,this proposed facility will be under separate ownership. The applicant is also
proposing a 230 kV transmission line that will connect this facility with the existing 72 mile transmission line
also approved in 2006 under USR-1562 that connects to the Keenesburg substation (an Excel energy power
grid).
One temporary batch plant construction staging area is proposed while the facility is constructed along with
one(1)permanent substation, and an operations and maintenance facility within the boundaries of this USR.
The original application materials requested a wind generator facility for up to 300 MW to be built in three
phases within the boundaries of the wind farm. The applicant has since modified this request and is
requesting that this facility be built in one(1)phase in just over 250 megawatts with one substation site. Any
expansions of this facility in the future will require an amended or new Use by Special Review Permit.
rcJ zno 1-s-/0 2010-0676
Because it is to be built in one phase, up to 250 people will be involved with the construction stages of this
project rather than 125 people, per the original phased approach.
The facility is proposed to be located on approximately 26,927 acres. Of this area,approximately 146 acres of
the site would be disturbed on a long term basis by the wind generator facility. The application indicates
approximately one acre of the site on the ground would be disturbed on a long term basis by the transmission
line facility.
The proposed wind farm facility is located at the eastern end (Pawnee Buttes Grasslands area) between
Cedar Creek I wind farm to the west and also another wind farm facility further east in Logan County. The
wind farm is predominately located on a bluff escarpment area that rises above lands to the south. The
majority of the area is grazing land and ranch land and there is also some crop land in the area as well.
The proposed substation and operations and maintenance building location along with the temporary
construction staging yard and batch plant area is located approximately '/< to 1/2 mile south of an existing
residence that is to the northwest. The owner of this residence also owns the land that this construction yard
and substation area is proposed to be placed upon.
Twenty-four referrals were sent to outside agencies; seven (7) referral agencies responded with comments
and one (1) referral agency responded without comment.
The applicant was directed to meet with outside referral agencies such as the Department of Defense,
Colorado Department of Transportation,Kimball County Nebraska,and Laramie County Wyoming in regard to
coordinating and addressing impacts on haul routes and roads associated with the construction of the facility.
The applicants were also directed to meet with the Colorado Division of Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife.
The applicant did provide summaries of these meetings or at a minimum a list of attendees and dates of
meetings with the application materials.
Referral responses were not received from the Department of Defense, Colorado Department of
Transportation, Kimball County Nebraska and Laramie County Wyoming. Referral responses were received
from the Colorado Division of Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife and conditions of approval have been
incorporated that the applicant demonstrates an attempt to comply with the requirements of both of these
agencies.
Staff received an updated referral from the Colorado Division of Wildlife on March 8,2010. The applicant had
made some minor modifications to the corridors that are shown on the USR site and there were a couple of
areas where the diameter of the turbine blades would be going outside of the corridor areas. The Division of
Wildlife indicated no concerns with that given that those locations were not in sensitive areas in regard to
wildlife. They still wish to continue correspondence and meet with the applicant to address their conditions.
Five letters have been received from surrounding property owners in regard to this project. One letter from a
property owner near the eastern end, but not in the boundaries of the facility, expressed concerns along with
long term impact of the turbines and transmission line on the soils in the area. They also expressed concern
about the long term viability of wind energy in this area. The property owners were predominately concerned
about the wind generators encroaching on their runway. They wish to keep this runway area and are
concerned that any turbines could interfere with this.
Additional emails were received from four parties. These emails expressed support predominately due to
boost to the local economy. Also, another letter expressed support in the idea of having alternative energy in
general.
In regard to a power purchase agreement for this particular project,the applicant has indicated that at this time
it is not known if there is a power purchase agreement in place. There are some confidentiality issues as to
whether Excel Energy has accepted an agreement; therefore a condition of approval has been attached
requiring evidence of a power purchase agreement or other form of evidence that power has been or will be
purchased for this facility prior to the commencement of any construction activities or hauling of materials in
regard to this project. Per the Weld County Code, if approved, the code states that construction or use
pursuant to approval of a Use by Special Review Permit shall be commenced within 3 years from the date of
approval unless otherwise specified by the Board of County Commissioners when issuing the original permit
or the permit shall be vacated.
Staff attached a specific condition of approval that the applicant shall submit a decommissioning plan for
review and approval prior to recording the plat for this facility. This is in regard to if the facility goes away or
has to be removed at some future date.
The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of the application along with the attached
conditions of approval and development standards.
Mr. Gathman commented that there were some proposed modifications to staff comments that have been
attached in a memo. Most of those comments are in response to requests from the applicant. A lot of the
language is more for clarification purposes and is dealt with in criteria of approval. There are two items that
specifically address conditions of approval. One item addresses the fact that there is an existing Use by
Special Review permit in Section 22 where there is an existing guest ranch facility. This USR was approved in
1999 and Mr. Gathman indicated that you cannot have overlapping USR boundaries; therefore there is a
condition that the boundaries of this USR would go around this 5.5 acre parcel.
The other clarification is that the substation and also the tap area where they would tie into the 72 mile
transmission line are required to be approved through a Subdivision Exemption (SE) process. It is an
administrative process through the Department of Planning Services. That condition has not only been
clarified to include the substation area but also the tap area because they are leasing a one(1)acre site where
they will tap into the existing 72 mile transmission line.
In addition, Development Standard 1 originally read 300 megawatts and should be amended to 250
megawatts as proposed.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, stated that in this case the construction will take up to a year and are
allowed to use portable toilets, handwashing units and bottled water because it is the construction aspect of it.
They will need permanent water and sewer for the operations and maintenance building. The application
states that they will apply for a well and an engineered designed septic system for that building. The
application also states that water will be trucked in for dust control during construction and for the batch plant.
Since they are going to provide the well for the operations and maintenance building, staff has no concerns;
however the applicant will need to provide where the water being trucked in is coming from.
A dust control plan is required for the onsite dust during construction as well as after construction. A waste
handling plan is also required to ensure that there will not be any trash blowing around in that area. An air
emissions permit is required for the batch plant prior to the operation of that plant.
Don Carroll, Public Works,commented that the Improvements Agreement includes a maintenance agreement
for the designated haul routes that will be utilized during the construction of the facility. The Improvements
Agreement will require collateral to ensure the road repairs and road maintenance do not impact the level of
service for county roads and that following construction the roads are restored to the same original condition.
Public Works is requiring $500,000 in collateral to guarantee that this performance is in place.
The applicant shall obtain any over-weight, over-width or over-length special transport permits. These are the
permits which would allow them to bring in the tower sections, blades, substation units, construction trailers,
turbines and anything that is not a legal load.
BP Wind Energy representatives have met with the Department of Defense(Warren Air Force Base), Kimball
County Nebraska, Laramie County Wyoming, and CDOT in regard to haul routes. Additional coordination for
roads during construction will be required.
The applicant is proposing to haul water purchased from out of state suppliers for the concrete batch plant and
dust control during construction of the facility.
Gravel is proposed to be hauled from out of state(Nebraska or Wyoming). The Improvements Agreement will
address all the haul routes. Approved haul routes are not yet in place; therefore staff is requiring this prior to
the Improvements Agreement to be able review it. Mr. Carroll added that they need to review the safety
issues in regard to access and how all the roads will work.
Public Works is requesting no more than three (3) emergency material stock piles for repair material of the
haul route roads that will be staged throughout the project. BP Wind Energy will have a contractor on-call 24/7
for repairs. They will have 24 hours to acknowledge the problem and another 24 hours to repair the problem.
The high power transmission lines will be buried in the right-of-way and this will also require permits from
Public Works. The applicant shall obtain right-of-way permits before installation or construction of everything
in Weld County rights-of-way.
The applicant will have permanent or temporary access to County roads. The applicant will need to provide
how wide the access points are, any improvements to the intersections, and drainage culverts.
Mr. Carroll commented that they wish to work with the applicant on the permanent impacts such as access
and drainage at the substation site, the tower access roads and intersection to Weld County roads. In
addition,the applicant will need to interact with the Air Force on the use of roads for National Defense and the
location of utility lines, closure of roads or detours.
Public Works has not seen a construction schedule yet as well as construction drawings.
Mr. Carroll stated that the key things to have in place are the Improvements Agreement, post collateral, haul
routes, construction drawings and scheduling, and finalizing the traffic and drainage reports. He added that he
had worked with all the applicants during the Cedar Creek I project and said that there is a lot of traffic and
therefore there were road problems as these roads are not built for this type of traffic. He stressed that it can
be done but they need to stay on top of it.
Commissioner Holton referred to Page 13 Item Din regard to the assumption that trucks on gravel roadways
travel at an average speed of 30 mph and asked for clarification. Janet Carter, Public Works,commented that
in the traffic study the applicant proposed that they would have all their trucking for the project to travel at 30
mph. She responded that that number is an unrealistic estimate on any of the county roads. Ms. Carter said
that the applicant has informed her that they will only be instructing their traffic to travel at 30 mph.
Commissioner Grand referred to Development Standard 26 in regard to noxious weeds and asked if this is in
regard to the entire parcel or just where the specific pads are located. Ms. Carter said that it is each individual
property where the lay down area is located.
Ms. Carter said that the applicant is proposing approximately 510 round trips per day with up to 115 peak hour
trips. Due to those large traffic volumes associated with this project, Public Works requested that they restrict
the traffic to the designated haul routes. No parking or staging of commercial vehicles on roadways is
requested and stop signs will be required at project accesses.
Public Works also requested that due to the increased traffic volume during the construction phase of the
project, County Road 132 between State Highway 71 and County Road 135 and also County Road 135
between County Roads132 and 130 be treated with magnesium chloride and all other routes that are
designated as haul routes be water treated so dust does not become an issue. The applicant will need to
obtain access permits for any and all permanent and temporary accesses on the county roadways.
Commissioner Lawley wished to clarify if the magnesium chloride is required on all of the haul routes. Ms.
Carter said that the magnesium chloride is only on the roads she just stated because those roads will trigger
over 200 trips per day. All of the other haul routes are requested to be treated with water. Mr. Lawley asked
why it isn't required when those other roads are still designated haul routes. Ms. Carter said that it could;
however it may be a requirement by the Board. She added that the amounts of traffic on the other portions of
the haul route may not be significant enough to reach the volume of 200 trips and it is also a sign of flexibility
to try and work with the applicant.
Ms. Carter stated that there is a meeting scheduled next week to discuss the designation of the haul route and
once that is determined they will be able to identify those roads that should be treated with magnesium
chloride more clearly. This designation was made from what the applicant volunteered within their traffic
study.
Commissioner Berryman noted in the materials supplied by the applicant there was some disagreement with
employees using that haul route and asked where that stands today. Ms.Carter commented that the applicant
has indicated that they will instruct their employees to use the designated haul route; however if Public Works
notices any use on roadways that are not included in the haul route they would be requested to treat those
roadways.
Clay Kimmi, Public Works, commented that they are asking for a final drainage report to address the red line
comments that staff provided. Detention of runoff at the substation and batch plant sites is required. There
will be two grading permits that are required prior to the start of construction. The applicant will need to supply
stormwater permits that they have obtained from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.
Public Works is also requesting construction drawings on the detention ponds that the applicant will be
installing at the substation.
Commission Holton referred to the memo handed out by Mr. Gathman and asked to clarify the changes. Mr.
Gathman said that most of the changes are clarification points. He added that the major amendments are on
Page 13 regarding the addition of the Cedar Creek I substation tap. In addition, on Page 14,adding Item 4.F
in regard to no overlapping of the boundaries of USR-1723 and USR-1213. Mr. Gathman stated that he has
verified that this location is outside of the proposed turbine corridors as shown on their plan.
Commissioner Holton asked if the applicant has seen these changes. Mr. Gathman said that they have
received them prior to this meeting.
David Gonzalez,Senior Wind Developer for BP Wind Energy North America, commented that the landowner
participants will have a big benefit from the project. Their land,for the most part, is used for ranching currently
and can be a tough and difficult business. When the project is built, they will be receiving rental payments
from the turbines that are on their land. He added that most of the land is still available for ranching and the
cattle can roam right up to the base of the project.
Mr. Gonzalez stated that another benefit comes from the investment itself. He commented that they are
looking at an investment in excess of$300 million dollars in the area. This type of investment will kick off a lot
of tax dollars and will provide additional financial resources to the local school as well as Weld County.
Another benefit is job creation of approximately 250 jobs for construction and 12 to 14 permanent jobs during
commercial operation. Mr. Gonzales added that they will try to hire locally for the construction to the extent
that they can. This project will also create an increased demand to the local business community, such as the
gas stations, grocery stores, restaurants, hotels, etc. It will also create demand for local materials(i.e.gravel,
concrete, etc.).
Mr. Gonzales stated that they will be paying sales and use tax on the equipment which will benefit the State of
Colorado. This project has a variety of economic benefits tied to it.
This project will produce useful electricity which is used in all of our homes and businesses. That electricity
will be produced without producing any type of emissions. There will be no air or water pollution. Mr.
Gonzalez commented that when the wind blows the grid operator actually shuts back the fossil fuel plants and
so the emissions from those plants are removed from the air. Therefore this project will help Colorado meet
its legislative goals to have 20% renewable electricity by 2020. When this project is built, Colorado will
continue to be a leader in the renewable field.
Mr. Gonzalez commented that they recognize that this project has a lot of impact on organizations and people
in the area. Therefore they have taken a tremendous effort to reach out to some of those stakeholders. He
added that they have spent a lot of time working with the Planning Department and Weld County Public
Works. In addition to that,they have met with the Public Works Department in Laramie County Wyoming and
Kimball County, Nebraska several times as well as with the Towns of Grover and New Raymer and the New
Raymer Volunteer Fire Department.
Mr. Gonzalez commented that they hope they have a project acceptable to the community and will continue to
work with all the stakeholders and public entities involved in the project during the construction and operation
of this development.
Commissioner Grand referred to a response from a gentleman who has concerns with regard to his property
with an airstrip and asked how the applicant plans to resolve this issue. Mr. Gonzalez said that they have
received all final FM approvals and they have been sensitive in the spacing of the location of the turbines. He
added that they have also complied with all of the requirements with regard to setbacks according to the Weld
County Code.
Mr. Grand asked if the gentleman will be able to use his facility. Mr. Gonzalez said that they have had ongoing
discussions with this gentleman and are hopeful that they can resolve this issue. He added that no agreement
has been reached yet; however they are sensitive to the matter and are willing to work something out.
Commissioner Maxey asked if the transmission line is overhead or underground. Mr. Gonzales said that the
230 kV line will be overhead and there will be some underground collections lines that are at a lower voltage
(34.5 kV).
Mr. Maxey asked what the easement widths are proposed for those lines. Mr. Gonzalez said that the 230 kV
line has a 150 foot easement during construction and then during commercial operation it is 100 feet.
Mr. Maxey asked what the safety measures are for marking those underground lines. Mr.Gonzales said that
they will comply with Weld County's request to mark those lines.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Janice Harms, 52715 CR 136, Pine Bluff,WY. Ms. Harms commented that they had land in the Cedar Creek I
project as well as this proposal. She added that normal traffic in that area might be one car per day so this
project does impact their roads. She expressed no problems or concerns with this project.
Tom Carr, Colorado Cattle Company, 70008 CR 132, commented that he owns the guest ranch previously
mentioned under USR-1213. The previous owner of the ranch wished to have a letter read into record. Mr.
Carr read the letter into record and provided a copy as evidence.
Mr. Carr stated that he purchased the property a week ago and had a concern initially about operating the
guest ranch and what the impact of turbines in an area where people expect an open range would be;
however his guests were happy with the proposal and that the County and landowners were forward thinking
enough to look for renewable resources.
Matt Pollart, North Central District Manager of Colorado State Land Board. Mr. Pollart commented that on
December 18, 2009, the State Land Board approved issuance of a wind energy production lease to BP Wind
Energy North America Inc. on six different sections of state trust land in the project area. He added that the
State Land Board wished to express support for the application.
Monty Youngland commented that the airstrip is on his family's property. He added that it is not in use right
currently but it doesn't mean that it won't be in use in the future. Mr.Youngland commented that Mr.Gonzalez
made an offer and they have not come to an agreement yet; however he is pleased to hear that the applicant
is willing to work out a resolution to the matter. Mr. Youngland stated that he does oppose the wind farm as
he believes it is short-term.
Gary Scheffler,65295 CR 132, commented that the proposed substation is located on his land. He wanted to
note that that particular intersection has a lot of water runoff and said that when this project is designed some
culverts should be put in so it doesn't run across the road. He added that this water crosses his pasture and
wants to make sure that it will remain that way.
The Chair closed the public portion of the meeting.
The Chair called a recess at 2:37 pm and reconvened at 2:47 pm.
Commissioner Ehrlich asked the applicant to elaborate on the sustainability of the equipment. Mr. Gonzalez
said that one of the requirements of this approval is showing proof of a power purchase agreement. He added
that they are under contractual obligation to keep this facility running for at least 20 years. He said that they
plan to be a long-term owner and operator. The equipment that is being purchased is commercially proven
and has been put into use in thousands of locations around the world. There is a long operating history
associated with this machinery. He stated that they feel comfortable that these assets will last at a minimum
of 20 years and are hopeful that it will last longer than that.
Commissioner Lawley referred to all the economic positives for Weld County and asked the applicant if they
are purchasing the products from Vestas. Mr. Gonzales said that they hope to start this summer and if they
do they will utilize some pre-existing contracts for the supply of the equipment. If they are not able to start
construction this summer it is possible that they could purchase the equipment from Vestas.
Commissioner Maxey referred to concerns of fish and wildlife and asked if there are plans for any avian
protection. Mr. Gonzalez said that they have spent a lot of time with the Division of Wildlife and U.S. Fish and
Wildlife and so they have incorporated their requests into this project. In addition to putting in buffers around
sensitive environmental habitats, they have talked about doing post monitoring after commercial operation.
Mr. Maxey asked what amount of noise comes from these units. Mr. Gonzales said that the noise is made
from the gear box and is between 55 and 60 decibels,which are at normal conversation levels. With distance
the sound dissipates; more of what you hear is the whooshing noise of the wind going over the blades.
Mr. Maxey asked for clarification from a previous comment regarding pollutants from other power plants and
added that this will not replace power plants. Mr. Gonzales said it will not replace power plants. He added
that when the wind is blowing and the wind farm starts producing electricity the grid operator starts scaling
back the existing facilities. Therefore, this will decrease the emissions produced from those plants.
Commissioner Holton referred to the amendments handed out by the applicant during the recess break and
asked if these are minimal changes or if these are substantial changes. Mr. Gathman stated that some of
them are substantial changes. Mr. Holton commented that perhaps this should be tabled until it is resolved by
staff and the applicants. Mr.Gathman said the changes proposed by the applicants were submitted to staff for
review last week. Several of the amendments,which Mr. Gathman agreed to, have been incorporated in the
memo that was handed out by staff at the beginning of the meeting. He added that there are a number of
items with regard to the Public Works section that they may not agree on.
Public Works asked for a recess to work out some of these issues with the applicants. The Chair recessed
the meeting at 3:07 pm and reconvened at 3:38 pm.
Dave Bauer, Public Works, commented that they have worked through the amendments and would like to
present them to the Planning Commission. A global change to the document is to change"Road Maintenance
Agreement"to"Improvements Agreement" because this project has onsite improvements for the substation
and the lay down yard.
The following are additional proposed changes:
Starting on Page 11, existing Condition of Approval 2.H would be moved to Condition of Approval 6.G, Prior to
Release of Building Permits. A new Condition of Approval 2.H shall be added which states "The applicant
shall submit written evidence detailing where the hauled water will be obtained".
Condition of Approval 2.J amend to read "An Improvements Agreement will address these following issues:
1. Collateral
2. An acceptable Final Drainage Report
3. An acceptable Final Traffic Study
4. Construction drawings
5. Construction schedule
6. Haul routes
7. Haul route amendment process
Conditions 2.K, 2.L, 2.M and most of 2.N would be deleted. Condition 2.N.k would remain attached.
Condition 2.P would be amended to replace"Public Services"with "Planning Services".
Condition 2.O is proposed to be moved to Condition 5.H
On Page 18, Development Standard 18 would be amended to read"The Developer will comply with the terms
and conditions of the Improvements Agreement".
Development Standards 20 and 21 are proposed to be deleted.
Development Standard 23 is amended to read "The location of access roads shall be addressed in the
Improvements Agreement and through the access permitting process".
Development Standard 31 will be amended to read "Tracking pads are required at all construction locations
where there is heavy traffic coming from the site onto a County road. The purpose of the tracking pads is to
keep mud and debris from leaving the site and tracking on existing county roads contaminating the existing
gravel road(s)with mud and debris".
The Chair asked the applicant if they are in agreement with the amended Development Standards and
Conditions of Approval. The applicant replied that they are in agreement.
Robert Grand moved to amend the Development Standards and Conditions of Approval as stated by staff,
seconded by Mark Lawley. Motion carried.
Robert Grand moved that Case USR-1723 be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the
amended Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's
recommendation of approval, seconded by Erich Ehrlich.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Nick
Berryman, yes; Erich Ehrlich, yes; Robert Grand, yes with comment; Bill Hall, yes; Alexander Zauder, yes;
Jason Maxey, yes; Roy Spitzer, absent; Mark Lawley, yes; Tom Holton, yes with comment. Motion carried
unanimously.
Commissioner Grand commented that he comes from Keenesburg which is the south end of the power
distribution system and wished to thank the residents who participated with the Department of Defense
and with this process.
Commissioner Holton commented that he would like to see the issue of the airstrip resolved prior to the
Board of County Commissioner hearing._
The Chair asked the Planning Commission members if there was any new business to discuss. No one had
any further business to discuss.
Meeting adjourned at 3:51 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
4' v-Le_)fate/Id-ter)
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
Hello