HomeMy WebLinkAbout20090559.tiffSUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
A regular 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, Doug Ochsner, at 1:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL ABSENT
Doug Ochsner
Tom Holton
Nick Berryman
Paul Branham
Erich Ehrlich
Robert Grand
Bill Hall
Mark Lawley
Roy Spitzer
Also Present: Kim Ogle, Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services; Dave Snyder, Department of
Public Works; Lauren Light, Department of Health; Bruce Barker, County Attorney, and Kris Ranslem,
Secretary.
Robert Grand moved to approve the February 17, 2009 Weld County Planning Commission minutes,
seconded by Paul Branham. Motion carried.
The Chair read the first case into record.
CASE NUMBER: 3RD AMUSR-542
APPLICANT: DCP Midstream
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development and Third Amended Use by Special Review for a
Mineral Resource Development Facility, including an Oil and Gas Support and
Service Facility (oil and gas processing facility) in the A (Agricultural) Zone
District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the SE4 and more particularly described as Lot B of Corrected RE -3203
of Section 35, T4N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to CR 38; west of and adjacent to CR 35.
Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services, stated that the applicant, represented by Patrick Groom, has requested
a continuance of this case to the April 7, 2009 Planning Commission hearing so that they can provide 30 -day mineral
notice.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application being
continued. No one wished to speak.
Paul Branham moved that Case 3rd AmUSR-542 be continued to the April 7, 2009 Planning Commission
meeting, seconded by Robert Grand. Motion carried.
CASE NUMBER: 4TR AMUSR-552
APPLICANT: Duke Energy Field Services
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Fourth Amended Use by Special Review
Permit for a Mineral Resource Development Facility for Oil and Gas Support and
Service, including a Natural Gas Processing Facility, in the A (Agricultural) Zone
District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot A and B of RE -614 (located in part of the W2SE4) and a portion of a strip of
land 150 feet wide, being 75 feet each side of centerline located in part of the
W2SE4 both in Section 28, T6N, R65W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: 1/2 mile north of CR 64; approximately 1/8 mile west of CR 43
6-y,n,nw ,cs.`*.O 3-I/-1.009
.,_12cY9— OSS?
Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services, stated that DCP Midstream is requesting that this case be
continued to the April 7, 2009 Planning Commission hearing so that they can provide 30 -day mineral
notice. Staff supports this request.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application being
continued. No one wished to speak.
Robert Grand moved that Case 4th AmUSR-552, be continued to the April 7, 2009 Planning Commission
meeting, seconded by Roy Spitzer. Motion carried.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1687
APPLICANT: Journey Ventures, LLC
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review for mineral
Resource Development Facilities including: Open Pit Mining and Materials
Processing and Asphalt and Concrete Batch Plants in the A (Agricultural) Zone
District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots A & B of RE -4744; located in the SE4 and SE4NE4 of Section 7, T5N,
R64W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: West of and adjacent to CR 51 and North of and adjacent to CR 58.
Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services, commented that the applicant's representative, J.C.
York, is requesting that this case be continued until April 7, 2009 to address surrounding property owner
concerns as well as concerns with the Ditch Company.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application being
continued. No one wished to speak.
Paul Branham moved that Case USR-1687, be continued to the April 7, 2009 Planning Commission meeting,
seconded by Roy Spitzer. Motion carried.
The Chair read the following case into record.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1680
APPLICANT: North Weld County Water District
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for Major
Facility of Public Utility or Public Agency (two 5 million gallon water storage
tanks) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B of AmRE-2992; located in SW4 of Section 6, T7N, R67W of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: Approximately 1/8 mile east of CR 13 and 1/2 mile south of CR 86.
Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services, stated that the proposed site is located approximately
600 -feet northeast of the nearest single family residence. The next nearest residences are located
approximately 1,200 to 1,500 to the west, southwest and northeast of the site. The area is rural residential
and agricultural in nature. A platted subdivision with two to three lots built upon is located to the south. The
tanks are proposed to be located in a triangular area bordered on the south by an overhead electric
transmission line and a standard electrical line on the east. The site lies on an elevated bench that
generally slopes from south to north. Based on visits to the site, it appears that the proposed location of
the tanks will be partially concealed by a certain extent from properties to the south by the edge of the
bench.
Ten referrals were sent out and nine referrals with comments were received. There were no referral
comments received from the Colorado Division of Wildlife.
The site is located within the 3 -mile referral area for the Towns of Severance and Larimer County. Both
the Town of Severance and Larimer County indicated no conflicts with their interests.
The North Weld County Water District intends to install two 36 -inch transmission lines in addition to the
2
two water tanks to connect to the water system. One transmission or fill line location has been determined
and it runs in a 20 -foot easement along the proposed access road into the facility. The location of the
other water transmission line is still being determined. The Department of Planning Services is requesting
that a condition of approval be attached that the applicant provides evidence of a waterline easement for
this transmission line prior to construction of the water tanks.
The applicant reviewed three (3) potential locations for this facility through a 2007 transmission line
analysis. This location is 1/2 mile north of County Road 84 and east of County Road 13. Another site is
located near County Road 15 and County Road 84. An additional site is located near the existing North
Weld County Water District tank site on State Highway 14 just west of State Highway 257. The applicant
determined the proposed site %3 mile north of County Road 84 and east of County Road 13 was the best
location based on site elevation and proximity to existing North Weld County Water District distribution
lines that currently have additional capacity.
Several e -mails opposing the project were received from five citizens and surrounding property owners as
well as one (1) letter in opposition and a petition in opposition signed by twenty-five (25) surrounding
property owners has been submitted. Another letter was received February 13, 2009 from Douglas Konkel
who is an attorney representing the owner of the land to the north of the project, Ms. Schneider. They are
requesting that the application address additional or more substantial landscaping be installed along the
north and east and that the access road be constructed to county standards and that storm drainage and
construction issues be adequately addressed.
Mr. Gathman has forwarded the e -mails received and has provided a copy of the e -mails, letters and the
petition prior to the meetings.
Reasons for Opposition and concerns listed in the other correspondence included:
• The tanks are a visual obstruction/interfere with vistas and views to the west and east.
• There are other more isolated locations for the tanks/tanks could be located where there are
already obstructions (adjacent to microwave/radio towers).
• The tank will be located adjacent to a ridge line.
• Sufficient analysis was not provided regarding all of the site alternatives/ not a specific
quantification of costs between the alternatives
• No attention in the analysis was paid to impacts on housing, population and property values.
• How can safety of adjacent homes be guaranteed if those tanks were to fail/flooding concerns
The applicant has submitted a site map and landscaping plan. They have updated their landscape plan to
address some of the concerns that have been received. The original plan had 31 Austrian Pines and has
bumped that number up to 50 and they are proposing to plant additional trees along the north.
Locations for landscaping along the east and to the southwest are constrained by an existing 20 -foot
electrical easement and a 75 -foot overhead power line easement. The applicant is proposing to plant 52
trees (50 Austrian Pines and 2 Thornless Honey Locust Trees) along the south, west and north of the
tanks and east of the proposed detention pond. Additionally the applicant is proposing to plant 34 shrubs
as well. The applicant will be required to submit an on -site improvements agreement and collateralize the
amount of trees/shrubs to be planted prior to recording the plat. This would also address on -site
improvements such as parking, access and detention improvements that are proposed under this
application.
The Department of Planning Services has determined that there are adequate provisions for the
protection of health, safety, and welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood and County. The
Department of Planning Services is recommending approval of this application.
The Chair invited the applicant to make comments. Bruce Barker, County Attorney, asked that a copy of
the powerpoint presentation that the applicant will make be submitted for record. Chysten Hinze stated
that she would be happy to provide a copy of the presentation.
Chrysten Hinze, Lind, Lawrence & Ottenhoff, commented that her colleague and she represent the applicant,
3
North Weld County Water District. She said that she will give a presentation of the project and then Mr. Alan
Overton, who is an engineer with North Weld County Water District, will give more specific details of the
workings of the district and the specific needs for the tanks. Then a short presentation from Torn Olman will
address the health, safety, and welfare questions raised by some of the neighbors. He is a registered
professional engineer with expertise in water distributions systems.
North Weld County Water District is a special district of the State of Colorado. They provide domestic water to
a 325 square foot area. Most of that area is in Weld County. They provide water to not only agricultural
residences but also agricultural businesses such as dairies and communities within Weld County. Specifically
these communities include Ault, Eaton, Galeton, Gill, Nunn, Pierce, Severance and Windsor. The applicants
also provide fire flows for fire protection districts.
As the County has experienced very critical growth within the last 15 years, so has the District. Approximately
eight years ago the District began looking at the question of how they are going to manage this growth. They
have to acquire lands and build infrastructure. If they do not do that some serious things can happen such as
lines breaking or storage capacities are too low. Ms. Hinze indicated that storage capacities are too low now
and that is the purpose behind this application.
Water storage tanks provide much more than just the storage of water. The goal is to provide at least a day's
storage. The reason is that if there is a problem with a line break under a road in Larimer County, you can
imagine it takes a little more time to repair a breach than if it is simply out in the County and doesn't have to
contend with a paved road. In a situation like that there is water loss and concern that use would be
interrupted. That is one of the many concerns that the District has about keeping a day's usage in hand. The
District expects that by 2012 there will be a 16 million gallon per day usage. Right now they can't keep half of
that in storage.
Tanks also equalize the system. They prevent pressure buildup, protect the system against emergency
maintenance issues and generally guard the health, safety and welfare of the people using the water system.
To choose a site for tanks you have to look at the grading of the site to make sure the tanks will sit correctly.
You have to check elevation with respect to where the lines go from the tanks and how they distribute the
water. Other considerations are for distance for connecting into this system. There is an existing main
distribution corridor along County Road 13; therefore they are using that as a base point. The best location for
the tanks is closest to the distribution main because you don't have to lay additional mains. It involves
additional cost and also additional acquiring of properties.
Another consideration is to look at development patterns. You look at where the residential and commercial
development patterns are both in terms of whether the tanks fit but also in terms of development patterns
being served by the District.
You look to avoid irrigating crop land and taking that out of use. You look at the soil structure that will support
the two 5 million gallon water tanks. You have to check to make sure that there is no significant interference
with wildlife, unique natural resources, historical landmarks or archeological sites.
Finally, it has to be accessible. There are big trucks that have to come in to construct the tanks as well as
maintaining these tanks once every ten years.
In 2001 North Weld County Water District isolated three potential areas where they might locate these tanks.
Ms. Hinze indicated on a visual map the three sites which were analyzed. They chose this site because it
makes use of a parcel that had no access to County Road 13. The District did acquire an access for the utility
lines and to build this site. This site is not irrigated crop land. One of the considerations is how visible the
tanks can be. This site has a ridge and is nestled in a little bit better than they could be in other areas.
This site is near the 36 -inch transmission line and limits what additional land has to be acquired and what
additional expense has to be made to be connected into this main.
Ms. Hinze pointed out that there is residential development surrounding Site 2 as well. There is only a 24 inch
4
main which isn't as desirable for the anticipated needs. Again there is more that has be done to acquire lands
and lay line.
Site 3 was not as desirable because of the distance and the visibility and encroaching of both commercial and
residential development.
This proposed site is already encumbered with power lines. It seemed to blend in with some of the
development that was already in place at the time.
Ms. Hinze commented that there has been a lot of work done in getting to this point for this site: the site
analysis, topographical surveys, geotechnical report, drainage analysis, recorded exemption, and acquiring the
access and now they are in the process of purchasing the parcel.
The tanks will be fenced and gated for security. There will also be some electrical on site. A concrete ball
vault adjacent to each tank will contain a sonar device, electrical panels unit and radio receiver transmitters.
The reason for those items is so the District is able to remotely monitor this site from their office. There is a
sonar that sends a signal and they get real time monitoring so they know at all times what is going on at this
site from their office. There will be two hydrants for fire flows and a 4 -inch domestic water line is proposed to
bring domestic water so that the landscaping can be watered.
Ms. Hinze stated that there will be no noise, no septic, and it is an unmanned site. There is little traffic in day
to day operations; once a week a couple of employees will come to the site to visit.
The construction phase will include approximately 12-15 people. Steel sheets will be delivered by semi truck
which will be approximately 25-30 trips over the course of a couple of months. A crane will be delivered and
returned. Heavy trucks will generally use County Road 13 to the north and since it is not paved the District will
follow the construction trucks with the water trucks to keep the dust down. Construction and post -construction
is estimated to take approximately 15 months. Post construction consists of painting and finishing the tank.
This project is really critical to protect the health, safety, and welfare of people who use the service.
Construction of the tanks will be by industry standards. The tanks will be new steel tanks regularly inspected.
Weekly site visits will help monitor the tanks at all times. There will be a drainage plan to address any storm
water flows. There will be real-time monitoring of the site.
Alan Overton, North Weld County Water District, showed the audience on a visual slide the service area that
they cover. He stressed that the District is experiencing a 12 million gallon per day summer demand from
June through August. During the winter time they deliver approximately 6 million gallons a day.
They are requesting the storage tanks as their filter plant is 12 miles away from the beginning of their
distribution system. Currently they only have one pipeline that is running the 12 miles. In the event they would
have a break under I-25 the whole District would be out of water after a day. They have 3500 individual
accounts and many of those are dairies, feedlots, and livestock who are dependent on the District.
Mr. Overton commented that the large 36 -inch transmission line will deliver growth for the next 15-20 years. It
is important to connect to that line. It is located on County Road 13 and goes up through the Pheasant Crest
development which is south of the proposed site.
The main line that travels 12 miles to the Filter Plan is a 24 -inch line and fills their current 6'% million gallons of
storage located at Highway 14 and Highway 257. If there is a line break they have Y day to repair it. Mr.
Overton indicated that they can get some additional water from East Larimer County Water District and the
City of Ft. Collins but on a temporary basis.
Mr. Overton indicated that they are looking to build a new pipeline from the filter plant and plan to construct a
1/3 of the pipeline in the fall of 2010. Eventually they will have a new pipeline but it will take several years and
multimillion dollars of investment to get another pipeline through the City of Ft. Collins.
This site fits in with their distribution piping and the elevations are matched to the existing tanks on Highway
14. There are good outfall elevation grades so that they don't have to worry about installing a booster pump.
5
Mr. Overton commented that as they received comments through the planning process they've tried to
address as many concerns as possible. They've updated their landscape plan. He added that they still need
to determine the alignment for the outlet pipe. He added that the WAPA (Western Area Power Administration)
easement is a very large power line and cuts the property at an angle. They were taking the triangle piece of
the parcel. He indicated that they had reasonable negotiations with the landowner and felt they were in a
win/win situation at that time to purchase the property have a willing cooperative landowner to sell them the
property to build the tanks on rather than having to go through a condemnation process.
Mr. Overton showed a 3-D presentation of where the tanks will be according to the surrounding area. He
added that when the Pheasant Crest Subdivision was built the District participated with the development to
install part of the 36 -inch line to provide fire flows for the development which was their condition of approval.
Mr. Overton mentioned that there have been questions of burying the tanks. They do not prefer to have buried
tanks due to visual inspections. If the tank is buried they cannot perform inspections to the foundation unless
they dive the tank and that is not something they want to do every week. Tanks can be buried but then you
get into concrete at that point and concrete tanks are prone to have more long term problems and failures that
are unseen until they become an issue.
Ms. Hinze introduced Thomas Olman. He is a professional engineer registered in Colorado and Wyoming and
is also principal of the Engineering Company. He has over 37 years of experience in water and wastewater
engineering, hydraulic analysis of water distribution and wastewater collections. He has a Bachelor of Science
in Civil Engineering from the University of Colorado. He has taken graduate work in wastewater and water
courses at Colorado State University. In addition to North Weld County Water District, his clients include East
Larimer County Water District, Ft., Collins/Loveland Water District, Central Weld County Water District, Little
Thompson Water District, Morgan County Quality Water District, City of Greeley, City of Johnstown, Town of
Eaton, Town of Windsor and so he has good well-rounded knowledge of the use of water storage within both
municipalities and in rural areas.
Tom Olman, Engineering Company, has worked with North Weld County Water District since 1978 on an
ongoing basis. He has been involved with a number of their existing tanks. He has been asked to address
the safety of the steel tank. He commented that in his entire experience and working history he does not know
of a single catastrophic failure of a welded steel water tank. Typically steel water tanks failure modes are
through corrosion. Corrosion will show up as a rust spot on the inside or outside of the tank. The District
inspects the tanks every year. If there is a rust spot that shows up they clean and repaint it. The District has a
number of these steel tanks in service since 1963 with no problems.
Mr. Overton commented that everything below Highway 14 is gravity fed from their filter plant; therefore no
pumps are involved. Everything north of Highway 14 is pumped and they are trying to save energy by not
having to pump as much water as they can which is why the tank size is critical with the elevation.
Commissioner Berryman asked what the tank height is. Mr. Overton replied that steel tank is 32 feet high;
however they will have to do a little bit of elevation grade so the total height will be approximately 40 to 45 feet.
Commissioner Spitzer asked what the diameter of the tank is. Mr. Overton said that the diameter is 165 feet.
Commissioner Holton asked Ms. Hinze if the District has purchased 50 acres for this site. Ms. Hinze stated
that they are buying 5.7 acres. Commissioner Holton asked her to clarify the information in their packets
regarding the condemnation. Ms. Hinze commented that the condemnation is for the access to the parcel;
however they are in the process of buying the 5.7 acres. The access was not part of the parcel.
Commissioner Ochsner asked if both of the tanks are being constructed at the same time. Ms. Hinze replied
no and added that the first tank is critical so they will try to have the construction started as soon as possible
(within the next 3 years) and plan to construct the second tank within the next 10 years after completion of the
first tank.
Commissioner Ocshner inquired about the additional lines being brought in or out of this location. Ms. Hinze
said that as part of connecting to the existing infrastructure there will be an extension of the existing main.
6
They also need to have a distribution back to the system from the tank site and they have not yet determined
where that will be located.
Commissioner Ochsner asked what the thickness of the metal is. Mr. Overton replied that it is approximately
1 inch at the bottom and gets less as you go up. Mr. Ochsner commented that many of the stop signs in the
area have bullet holes and asked if there was any past history of that happening to the tanks. Mr. Overton
said that he hasn't experienced anything like that with their other 7 tank sites; however it may penetrate if it
was dead on. He deferred to Mr. Olman. Mr. Olman commented that he has seen a number of tanks where
people have taken shots at it. It will cause a dimple but it will not penetrate.
The Chair asked for comments from Public Works.
David Snyder, Public Works, said that County Road 13 is a major arterial with 140 feet at full build out. There
is currently 60 feet of right-of-way. The most current road counts from County Road 13 are 207 ADT that were
taken in April 2008. The right-of-way is currently shared 50/50 with Larimer County; however Larimer County
has jurisdiction of maintenance over that section of County Road 13. The only major impacts will be during
construction otherwise after construction the applicant has indicated that there will be 2-4 trips per week so
there is very minimal impact. The site is not located within a FEMA 100 -year floodplain. Public Works is
requesting that all documents be stamped by a registered professional engineer.
Commissioner Ochsner commented that it was mentioned that during construction there is a gravel road
leading to the access. He clarified if the applicant is going to apply water for dust control. Mr. Snyder
commented that there is no condition of approval included and this portion of County Road 13 is maintained by
Larimer County. He added that the section of road immediately by the access is paved.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, commented that they are not requiring permanent water and sewer on
site since it is a facility that will not have any employees located there. Staff is requesting portable toilets and
bottled water during construction. A water truck will used to control the dust on site. Ms. Light stated that
there are no concerns with this request.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Randy Fabrizius, 7825 CR 78, representing his mom Margaret Schneider. He stated that his mom's husband
died one year ago and was in ill health and couldn't do many of the negotiations. Mr. Fabricious has been part
of the majority of the negotiations. He wished to clarify that County Road13 has magchloride by Larimer
County. There is about 150 foot of pavement that goes over the bridge.
Mr. Fabrizius stated that Judge Klein condemned the portion of their property for the right-of-way of the 36 inch
line, access road and the 4 inch line. He doesn't understand why they went through condemnation with
something before Planning Commission gave approval of this project. He added that it looks like the cad is
ahead of the horse.
Mr. Fabrizius said that there has been talk of other locations. There was another location on County Road 84
and County Road 13. They have a 26 inch line there and a building. The farm was previously known as the
Rodenburg Farm and is currently owned by the City of Greeley. It seemed to him that with government
entities getting along that would be a perfect location.
The proposed site was once irrigated ground and was dried up in the early 1980's.
Mr. Fabrizius indicated that they have talked about a 4 inch proposed water line. He said that their land was
condemned on August 7'h and a 4 -inch water line was installed on September 15th. He believes that the 4 -inch
water line runs to the red barn and they condemned their land for other private entities.
Mr. Fabrizius understands that the fill line works on a gravity system. He asked where the outlet lines are
going to be located.
Ancel Lewis, 6510 CR 86, lives east of the proposed tanks. These tanks will be between his view of the
mountains and his home. The site will be within several hundred feet of his eastern property line. They have
7
a spectacular panoramic view which they purchased 10 years ago and the property is greatly enhanced by the
view from their place.
He expressed that use of the area will be changed from agricultural to industrial. As landowners they are
getting nothing from this. Their property value will be decreased. He is particularly concerned with the
Kerchenfaut property as these tanks will be in their back yard. He and the surrounding property owners are
getting no compensation for having their property values decreased.
Mr. Lewis commutes daily on County Road 13 to and from Ft. Collins and can imagine what it is going to do to
the traffic and quality of life with the construction of these large tanks in the neighborhood.
He feels that there are some better sites that aren't close to homes. This site greatly affects a number of
people in this neighborhood who object to this and they will lose property rights value. It is definitely an
eyesore and a nuisance for the neighborhood. He feels that there may be some good basis taking the kind of
action if this proceeds.
Mr. Lewis asked that another site be selected — not one that would affect so many in the neighborhood.
Commissioner Branham asked Mr. Lewis how far his residence is from the proposed location. Mr. Lewis
replied that his property line is approximately 500 feet away and his house is an additional 200 feet away.
Sue Kerchenfaut, 41490 CR 13, said that her property will be directly underneath these tanks if they are built
and added that this is a very emotional issue. She felt that the Water District has been less than forthright with
the neighborhood. She said that their property will definitely loose value. They have a beautiful view of the
Rockies. Her view will not be affected except that when she turns in her driveway there will be a big pink tank
there. She has no quarrel with the District wanting to put up tanks and she sees the need for it. She is urging
the Planning Commissioners to deny this project in their neighborhood. They are opposed to it and do not
want this industrial installation. There are other sites where it can be built.
With regard to the outlet, Ms. Kerchenfaut indicated that the District wants to go across her 10 acre field. She
said that if she ever does want to sell off some land for a house site for future income that it will definitely
destroy her property value. She said that she has talked to Mr. Overton about it but she understands that they
condemn what they want and it will go there. She expressed that her lifestyle will be turned upside down by
this. She expressed that she was surprised to find out that today the tanks will be 45 feet high as they were
informed 32 feet. She feels that the other sites should be considered. There will be over 25 homes that will be
affected by the view of these tanks. She is requesting to take all these peoples lives into consideration and
hopes that this application will be denied.
Doug Nagel, Lot 1 Pheasant Crest, bought the lot over a year ago and his plan is to build on it in the next
couple of years. He really feels for the people who have been there for a long time and invested their lives in
that area. What bothers him more than the tanks is that there is deception going on here. When he reads the
application he has to believe that intelligent people that are engineers and attorneys have common sense. He
hopes that the people on the Planning Commission are as honest as him because some of the comments in
the application he feels are not fair and honest.
With regard to the two 32 feet high, 165 feet in diameter massive tanks, you could drop these into Invesco
Field and it would cover the entire field. To say that they will blend in and that they are not a visible problem is
that honest? Would you want them in your backyards? He feels that there is some deception.
Mr. Nagle asked who is going to inspect the bottom of the tanks or the underground pipes to see if they leak.
His research on the internet indicated that many of these tanks leak without any anyone knowing about it.
There are concerns about safety. He expressed that this proposal will devalue everyone's property around
those tanks.
Mr. Nagle asked if they are paying for this through their property values. There are 17 families who feel their
property will be devalued. How much will be compensated to those people for the devaluation of their
property? He has to question the honesty if they are to believe that there is little to no impact?
8
He quoted from the application that the proposed facility will serve to positively impact the existing and future
development of the surrounding area. He wants to know how it is positively going to impact his house.
Mr. Nagle commented that the landscaping is planned for the following spring. What if the plan fails? Are
those trees going to be 20-30 feet when they are planted or 10 feet and wait for them to grow for 15-20 years?
Mr. Nagle said that they did a thorough analysis on the tanks and where they are going to put them but they
don't know where they are going to put the final transmission lines. He asked "Do you believe that they don't
know where those final lines will be?"
What kind of insurance do they have to buy in the incident that something happens. He borrowed a lot of
money for that land that will go down in value.
Mr. Nagle said that no one is arguing that we need the water; we just don't need to have the tanks there.
Dan Overton, 6500 CR 86, commented that he has a spectacular site. He lives on the ridge line and from his
angle it is different than Mr. Lewis's view as it is higher.
The impact has been well stated and they are concerned what it will look like and what it will do to their
property values. He understands the need for water and the constant need to expand this water system to
have an adequate backup. But like at our property we try to hide our equipment in places that have the least
impact.
Mr. Overton agreed with the previous comments that some of the other sites are visually more compatible.
Maybe those sites cost a little more money for the district but with the analysis looking at not only the districts
costs but also the depreciation value of the neighbors and brought all that into a total project cost he suspects
that those other sites will be similar in cost to this site.
Mr. Overton asked that if approved to give some visual breakage on the east side of the proposed tanks to
diminish the site of the tanks from his view.
Ken Kerchenfaut said that these tanks will be in back of his house. He added that it seems that the Water
District is sacrificing their community. It has always been a rural and farming community. He commented that
initially they were told it would be 5 years down the road before anything would be talked about with regard to
this growth and now they are told they want these tanks now. It will change the entire aspect of their way of
life and asked the Planning Commissioners to consider that. Mr. Kerchenfaut asked where the water is going
to come from to fill those tanks and further asked if there will there be enough water for the growth in the
future.
Margaret Schneider, 41632 CR 32, commented that she has land where the District wants to put the tanks.
She added that they were told that they are in the Timnath Plan for growth. If they would annex to Timnath
they could put up roughly 136 houses. She does not approve of this project.
The Chair closed the public portion of the meeting and called a recess at 3:12 p.m.
The Chair reconvened the meeting at 3:21 p.m. and asked the applicant to come forward and address the
concerns of the public.
Mr. Overton mentioned that the comment about the site at County Roads 84 and 13 should probably be
referenced to County Roads 84 and 15. He added that that the site at County Roads 84 and 13 is too low of
an elevation for them. It is key for them to match their existing tanks on Hwy 14 and 257; they need to have
the same elevations to make it work.
The first tank is needed now so as soon as the funding is in place and they receive approval of this application
and design is done then it will be constructed. The second tank is more for growth. If there would be no
growth then they might not build that tank; however they hope that the economy will turn around thereby
increasing growth. They also recognize that there may be future demand with the Luprino Cheese Factory in
Greeley so they are anticipating additional demands even if they are not residential.
9
Mr. Overton reassured the public that the 4 inch water line is not a private line; it is North Weld County Water
District's water line and it can provide water service to anyone that would happen to live adjacent to it. It will
also provide service for the landscaping around the tanks.
The out piping has not been determined yet. Mr. Overton said that they have been going through this process
and they have considered some favorable routes and then there are also some other optional routes. They
have three routes to leave the tank; two of them involve the Kerchenfaut property and one does not. They will
take a look at that and run through all of their design criteria and make that decision. Mr. Overton commented
that is why they made the easement on the Schneider property for access. They had to show access to the
site to present the USR.
Mr. Overton mentioned the comments of "not in my backyard". If it is moved to the other alternative sites then
it is moved into some other people's backyards. Mr. Overton showed a pan of the other sites to indicate the
other developments and other neighborhoods in the area.
Tanks are a part of the necessity of providing public water. If there were no tanks water service wouldn't be
available and that would affect land values.
Mr. Overton stressed that they are not out here as a private enterprise. They are here to serve the public the
best they can. Cost is an important issue for their customers and if they add additional monies it will go back
into the water rates and no one likes to see the water rates increase. The District is looking at the best site for
their customer base.
Commissioner Grand said that it is apparent that you think for a variety of technical and economic issues that
this is the most optimum location. He said that the comment about not impacting the area a little
disingenuous. He added that those 25 land owners have an impact. Effectively you are asking the 25
homeowners in some way or form to subsidize that. From a business view point there is a cost associated
with doing business that you are asking these people to participate in some valuation impact on their property.
He is not sure how you figure that out but there will be some. He does not know what the mechanism is to
determine what is fair, but assuming to serve the public good that this is the best location he believes that
there has to be some consideration for the fact that these people will be impacted. Whether you plant bigger
trees or paint the tanks or you reach a financial arrangement with them that basically doesn't treat them as
unwilling participants in supporting the development of the water program.
Mr. Overton commented that they have tried to establish that with the landscaping. The tank color is always a
question of what blends in the most. He believes that the District would be willing to give an outreach and
have a poll on what the tank color would be. They want to make it minimal.
Commissioner Grand asked what consideration goes to the 25 homeowners that surround that site. Mr.
Overton said it is a good question but can't say how much a tank will diminish or increase their property. It is a
hard thing for them to objectively put a number too. Mr. Grand said it sounds like you have ignored it. Mr.
Overton said that they have not ignored it; they talked to an appraiser when they acquired the easement about
tanks affecting land values and the appraiser's experience did not show any impacts of the tanks to the land
values.
Commissioner Branham commented that a way to relieve the pain and anguish is through the landscaping.
He asked to clarify how high the trees will be when they are put in and how high will they grow. Mr. Overton
replied that the plan is to plant the trees within the year in advance of construction of the tanks. He doesn't
have the information today on the sizes of the trees as he didn't develop the landscaping plan.
Mr. Gathman said that they indicated on the site map that they are going to plant two (2) Thornless Honey
Locust trees in the northwest corner of the site 50 to 70 feet in height and spaced 50 to 70 feet apart. There
will be 50 Austrian Pines 20 to 30 feet apart and 10 to 15 feet in height. Mr. Brahman asked if that was at
maturity or when they will be planted. Mr. Gathman believes that it is at time of planting but would like
confirmation.
Commissioner Hall asked if there is a possibility of going with a lower height and a more volume sized tank.
10
Mr. Overton said that they couldn't lower the height at this site because hydraulically they have to match the
high water level of the other tanks.
Commissioner Spitzer asked for the number of residential and commercial taps. Mr. Overton said that they
serve approximately 7000 individual taps. The majority of that is residential taps. They have 100-150 large
industrial sized taps that service dairies and feedlots and various industries in the District. They also have 7
wholesale taps that service the towns.
Commissioner Holton asked how they will determine where the output line will go. Mr. Overton said that they
will look at lengths and costs to go in but then they also look at alignment issues. They recognize that there is
one landowner who does not want them to cross their property; therefore they will try to negotiate with another
landowner. If neither landowner wants it there then they will have to make that decision. Mr. Holton
commented that is one of his biggest concerns as he does not like eminent domain. Mr. Overton said that
they don't want to have to use eminent domain but they also have to be able to supply reliable water. They do
their best in the negotiations to work something out. Unfortunately when they cover 325 square miles they
don't have the luxury of the municipalities where they can force the development to make the improvements.
Commissioner Holton asked if the transmission lines are reviewed by staff. Mr. Gathman said that water
transmission lines are a use by right. He clarified that if the electrical transmission lines are over 115 kV they
would go through the 1041 process through the county.
Commissioner Holton indicated that the landscaping plan shows trees on the north, east and southwest
portion of the property and asked why the entire site is not covered with trees. He further asked what an
Austrian Pine is and how high it gets at maturity. Mr. Gathman said that they are proposing to plant the trees
10 to 15 feet high. He suggested possibly planting Poplars during the interim before the Austrian Pines reach
maturity. The Poplars are more of a temporary planting but they grow really fast and that would cover the
spaces in between the Austrian Pines. The Austrian Pines grown up to 60 feet in height. Mr. Gathman
commented that we can have the applicant submit an amended landscape plan to address the interim
planting.
Commissioner Branham asked the applicant if they are comfortable with the discussion of the landscaping.
Mr. Overton said that they would be happy to add the Poplars in with the Austrian Pines.
Commissioner Holton said he would like to have that condition prior to recording the plat. Mr. Gathman
suggested to place this as condition of approval 2.F and re -letter accordingly. The new condition 2.F would
read "The applicant shall submit the landscape plan that accomplishes the short and long term screening and
buffering of the facility for review and approval by the Department of Planning Services."
Tom Holton moved to add the new condition of approval 2.F as read by staff and re -letter accordingly,
seconded by Paul Branham. Motion carried.
Mr. Overton turned the remaining comments over to his counsel.
Ken Lind, 355 Eastman Park Dr, Suite 200, Windsor CO. His firm has represented North Weld County Water
District for over 10 years. North Weld County Water District was created in the early 1960s mainly by farmers.
Mr. Lind stressed that a water line or water district out in the country has absolutely no negative impact; it has
an extremely positive impact. North Weld County Water District while it does serve many communities and
close to 100,000 people is very public conscious. There have only been four (4) condemnation proceedings
by North Weld County Water District in almost 50 years of history. A lot of rights -of -way are given by property
owners because of the positive impacts.
Unfortunately North Weld County Water District does not control rural developments or locations of dairies,
feedlots or other users. That is all done through the County. The County looks at and approves and then it is
up to North Weld County Water District to accommodate that growth.
A 1/2 day of water for a huge district like this is extremely problematic and is a dangerous situation. Without
this tank the District would probably have to consider alternatives and possibly impose a water tap moratorium.
11
This moratorium would be north of Highway 14 detrimentally affecting all of the people who have concerns
with their property values.
Another alternative would be to restrict the usage of water to in-house use only. Again, imagine what that
would do to a property value.
Another alternative is to shut off all fire hydrants in our rural water system which is not a good alternative. That
may mean a shut down of building permits by Weld County or alternatives with the Fire Protection Districts.
Another important item is if you do not have gravity tanks then you have pumping stations which increase the
costs and it also results in structures that you can't landscape.
Ms. Hinze commented that this is very regional and you will have some of the same folks in here objecting
again at the other alternative sites. She added that they can't get around it and so they looked to the least
impacted site. She apologized that the District seems insensitive but it really isn't that; it boils down to a need
that has to be met. They are trying to do the best they can.
Ms. Hinze reiterated that reasonable efforts have been made to avoid irrigated crop land and to minimize
impact on crop land.
She stated that they understand that there is a visual impact but there is no undue adverse impact on the
existing and future development. Both Larimer County and the Town of Severance were contacted on this
concern and they both indicated no concerns.
This is a quiet site, very little traffic and no air emissions or pollution. In general they hope to show that these
sites co -habit well with development.
They will continue to address the landscaping concerns to add whatever additional screening that can be done
with the site.
Dust will be controlled during construction and maintenance. The site will be maintained to control soil
erosion, dust and growth of noxious weeds.
Reasonable measures to protect health, safety, and welfare have been addressed by the application. The
above ground tanks will be constructed according to the industry standard. There will be security fencing and
gates. There will be inspections and regular maintenance of the tanks, weekly site visits, 24 hour monitoring
of the site at the office.
The adequate water supply for the site is through the 4 inch water line which will allow for domestic water to
water the landscaping and that is the only need for the site. Reasonable steps have been taken to minimize
the negative impacts on ag uses and lands.
Reasonable alternatives have been adequately assessed. Alternative sites were considered in terms of
protecting irrigated farmland, irrigated crop land, visibility impact, development patterns, elevation and grading
and the feasibility of tying into the main at County Road 13 and additional lands that would have to be acquired
to connect to the corridor. The use of this parcel to serve the 325 square miles of district serves the best use
of the County enabling the district to maintain their water use and to still allow for future development in the
county.
The facility will not unreasonably interfere with any significant wildlife habitat nor affect any endangered wildlife
species, unique natural resources, historical landmarks, or archeological sites within the affected area. No
such areas of concern have been identified at this site.
Finally, the applicants have submitted a Colorado Engineered Certified Drainage Plan which provides for the
prevention of surface drainage from leaving this site in excess of historic runoff flows.
The Chair reminded the members of the Planning Commission that staff is asking to add a development
12
standard #4 which states "The applicant shall submit a copy of a recorded waterline easement for the 36 -inch
distribution line prior to construction of the water tank(s)."
Roy Spitzer moved to add new development standard #4 as requested by staff and renumber accordingly,
seconded by Tom Holton. Motion carried.
The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the amended Development Standards and Conditions
of Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in agreement.
Mark Lawley moved that Case USR-1680 be approved along with the amended Conditions of Approval and
Development Standards, seconded by Tom Holton.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Nick
Berryman, yes; Paul Branham, yes; Erich Ehrlich, absent; Robert Grand, yes with comment; Bill Hall, yes with
comment; Mark Lawley, yes with comment; Roy Spitzer, yes with comment; Tom Holton, yes; Doug Ochsner,
yes. Motion carried.
Commissioner Spitzer commented that he has lived on a rural residential property for over 20 years and
he does have rural water service. He added that it was a deciding factor in purchasing the property that
he did. He appreciates the benefits of the rural water districts. He thinks that we have reached a point
where "not in my backyard" means in somebody else's backyard. In Mr. Overton's presentation he
recognized the water tank which was in Niwot surrounded by multi -million dollar homes and he noticed
how well landscaped the tank was. He recommended that the applicant take pains to make sure that the
landscaping plan gets implemented and works. He recommended that they try as much as possible to
prevent condemnation for the new transmission line as it creates hard feelings in any community.
Commissioner Grand commented that from a technical side the 325 square miles that it serves and the
100,000 people will be very positively affected by this. He is concerned for individual property rights and
echoed that nobody likes it in their backyard; however it is a necessity of having it. He hopes that the
District will make all efforts to produce an environment that will have minimal impact on those 25 property
owners.
Commissioner Hall concurred with Mr. Spitzer and Mr. Grand's comments. He added that he is a
customer of North Weld County Water District and he does appreciate their water service and the
reasonable rates. He believes that if they can adhere to the landscape plan it would be great.
Commissioner Lawley commented that the applicant has shown compliance with the Weld County Code.
The Chair asked the Planning Commission members if there was any new business to discuss.
Commissioner Holton mentioned that maybe they want to look at setting standards for water transmission
lines. Tom Honn, Planning Director, commented that it is typically oil and gas lines that are regulated. He
asked if there is a particular standard that they would want to limit. Mr. Holton commented that he wasn't sure
but suggested 24 or 36 inch lines. Mr. Barker suggested making this a topic discussion at the next Planning
Commission meeting which would allow the board members to think about it and direct staff on what to write
up. Staff can then bring it back to the Planning Commissioners for consideration for recommendation to the
County Commissioners. Mr. Lawley commented that he would be interested to see if there are other counties
who have similar codes in place.
Commissioner Berryman raised a question on eminent domain. He asked if it was a common practice and
when it is used. Mr. Honn said that it is not a common practice; however in some cases after approval the
value of some of those things will potentially go up immensely for a variety of reasons. It is a risk for them as if
they don't receive approval then they have paid out all costs and fees associated with that. Many times it's a
need to secure what they need to have when they come in for an application because there is a list of
conditions that need to be met.
Commissioner Berryman commented that they are often presented with the argument about property values.
He suggested the possibility of having an appraisal specialist give a presentation on what impacts property
13
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
values.
Commissioner Ochsner suggested that with the new mapping, irrigation ditches be marked on the maps for
ease of information. Mr. Honn asked where we would find the contact names as they are not easy to find. Mr.
Ochsner commented that some of the ditches have a listing of all the laterals that they can supply. Mr. Honn
commented that the GIS department may be able to work on that and create that resource.
Meeting adjourned at 4:42 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
14
Hello