HomeMy WebLinkAbout20090764.tiffRESOLUTION
RE: ACTION OF BOARD AT PROBABLE CAUSE HEARING CONCERNING USE BY
SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT AND AMENDED USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT #1493 - COPART, INC./STEPHAN BRANCUCCI
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, pursuant to
Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of
administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and
WHEREAS, on the 17th day of November, 2008, a Probable Cause Hearing was held
before the Board to consider setting a Show Cause Hearing to determine whether or not Copart,
Inc./Stephan Brancucci, do Glen Droegemueller, 1035 37th Avenue Court, Greeley, Colorado
80634, was in compliance with certain Conditions of Approval and Development Standards
contained in Use by Special Review Permit #1493 for a Commercial Junkyard and Salvage Yard
in the 1-3 (Industrial) Zone District, as well as certain Conditions of Approval and Development
Standards contained in Amended Use by Special Review Permit #1493 for a Use Permitted as a
Use by Right, Accessory Use, or Use by Special Review in the Commercial or Industrial Zone
District (commercial junkyard and salvage yard) in the 1-3 (Industrial) and A (Agricultural) Zone
Districts, and
WHEREAS, the alleged violations were said to be occurring on property described as part
of the NE1/4 SE1/4, and Lots A and B of Recorded Exemption #3932; being part of Section 30,
Township 1 North, Range 66 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado, and
WHEREAS, at said hearing on November 17, 2008, the Board deemed it advisable to
continue the matter to March 30, 2009, at 9:00 a.m., and
WHEREAS, on March 30, 2009, after hearing testimony from the Departments of Planning
Services and Public Works, the Board finds that there is not sufficient probable cause to schedule
a Show Cause Hearing to consider whether or not said Permits should be revoked for failure to
comply with certain Conditions of Approval and Development Standards, and deems it advisable
to dismiss said probable cause.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld
County, Colorado, that the Probable Cause hearing concerning Use by Special Review
Permit #1493 for a Commercial Junkyard and Salvage Yard in the I-3 (Industrial) Zone District, as
well as Amended Use by Special Review Permit #1493 for a Use Permitted as a Use by Right,
Accessory Use, or Use by Special Review in the Commercial or Industrial Zone District (commercial
junkyard and salvage yard) in the 1-3 (Industrial) and A (Agricultural) Zone Districts, issued to
Copart, Inc./Stephan Brancucci, be, and hereby is, dismissed.
2009-0764
PL1769
(11 --/ S --d)
DISMISS PROBABLE CAUSE - COPART, INC./STEPHAN BRANCUCCI (USR/AMUSR #1493)
PAGE 2
The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted by
the following vote on the 30th day of March, A.D., 2009.
ATTEST:
Weld County Clerk to the
BY
Dedu Cler • the Board
APPROVED A -a-CORM:
Coun Attorney
Date of signature. g l 1 /o
Douglas Rademac
Th
P. Conway
arbara Kirkmeyer
David E. Long
UNTY COMMISSIONERS
CQUI�i"Y), COLORADO
William F. Garcia, Chair
Ckt 1Ik<MCf c44.1—
er, Pro-Tem
Put
cr,Lx
2009-0764
PL1769
Wi�YcCOLORADO
November 3, 2008
Glen Droegemueller
1035 37th Avenue Court
Greeley CO 80634
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES
Planning Division
SOUTHWEST OFFICE
4209 CR 24.5
LONGMONT, CO 80504
jhatch@co.weld.co.us
PHONE: (720) 652-4210, Ext. 8730
FAX: (720) 652-4211
Subject: Copart Inc. USR-1493 and AMUSR-1493, Pt of NE4 SE4 and Lots A and B of RE -
3932 of Section 30, T1 N, R66W of the 61h P.M., Weld County, CO.
Dear Mr. Droegemueller:
Notice is hereby given that the property listed above, is not in compliance with the Development
Standards and Conditions of Approval of USR-1493 and AMUSR-1493 (Special Use Permit for
a Commercial Junkyard or Salvage Yard) for Copart Inc. Compliance was supposed to occur
by September 30, 2008 but a continuance was granted until October 31, 2008 to allow more
time. A Probable Cause public hearing, pursuant Chapter 23, Article II (2), Division 4, Section
23-2-270 of the Weld County Code, has been scheduled for November 17, 2008.
The purpose of the Probable Cause Hearing will be to review case number USR-1493 and
AMUSR-1493, for compliance with the Development Standards and Conditions of Approval, as
approved by the Board of County Commissioners on March 30, 2005 and September 13, 2006
respectively, to determine if probable cause exists to hold a hearing on revocation of the
permits.
If it is determined at the public hearing that there is probable cause that you are not in
compliance with USR-1493 and AMUSR-1493, the Board of County Commissioners will
schedule a Show Cause public hearing to consider revocation of the Use by Special Review
permits.
Inspections by representatives of the Department of Public Works on August 7, 2008 confirmed
that stormwater was not appropriately handled on site. On August 28, 2008 representatives
from Copart met to discuss the site. At that meeting, Public Works and Copart's representative
agreed that the detention pond and outlet structure would be constructed as shown on the
Construction Plans dated June 25, 2008.
On September 24, 2008, the Departments of Public Works and Planning Services inspected the
property and found that the site is not in compliance. On October 10, 2008, Public Works
received the Final Drainage Report and Revised Construction Drawings showing revisions to
the Plan that was approved on August 28, 2008. Public Works provided comments and
approval of the revised plans on October 10, 2008. On October 29, 2008, Copart's
2009-0764
,11
representative provided an email containing PDF files of the signed drainage easements. The
applicant has stated that the signed drainage easement would be recorded on October 31,
2008. On October 31, 2008, the Departments of Public Works and Planning Services inspected
the property to verify that construction had started on the detention pond and storm sewer
facilities. As shown in the attached photos, no construction work has been started. As of
November 3, 2008, Public Works has not received a copy of the construction schedule. The
applicant has submitted the mylar for recording on October 31, 2008 but some of the Conditions
of Approval as outlined below have not been completed at this time. The mylar will be recorded
once the items listed below have been addressed.
Inspections by representatives of this office have determined that the site is not in compliance
with the following Development Standard from USR-1493:
40. The Use by Special Review area shall be limited to the plans shown hereon and
governed by the foregoing Standards and all applicable Weld County regulations.
Substantial changes from the plans or Development Standards, as shown or stated,
shall require an amendment of the Permit approved by the Weld County Board of
County Commissioners, before such changes from the plans or Development
Standards will be permitted. Any other changes shall be filed in the office of the
Department of Planning Services.
41. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with all of the
foregoing Development Standards. Noncompliance with any of the foregoing
Development Standards may be reason for revocation of the Permit by the Board of
County Commissioners.
The site is also not in compliance with the following Condition of Approval and Development
Standards from the AMUSR-1493:
Conditions of Approval:
1. Prior to recording the plat:
A. The applicant shall address the requirements from the Department of
Public Works, as stated in the referrals dated May 30, 2006 and June 21,
2006. Evidence of approval shall be submitted to the Department of
Planning Services.
4. In accordance with Weld County Code Ordinance #2005-7, approved June 1,
2005, should the plat not be recorded within the required thirty (30) days from the
date of the Board of County Commissioners Resolution, a $50.00 recording
continuance charge shall be added for each additional three (3) month period.
Since approved by the Board of County of Commissioners on September
13, 2006 the late recording fee will be $400.00.
5. The Amended Use by Special Review activity shall not occur, nor shall any
building or electrical permits be issued on the property, until the Amended Use by
Special Review plat is ready to be recorded in the office of the Weld County
Clerk and Recorder.
Development Standards:
13. If applicable, the applicant shall obtain a Stormwater Discharge Permit from the
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Water Quality Control
Division.
40. The Amended Use by Special Review area shall be limited to the plans shown
hereon and governed by the foregoing Standards and all applicable Weld County
regulations. Substantial changes from the plans or Development Standards, as
shown or stated, shall require an amendment of the Permit approved by the Weld
County Board of County Commissioners, before such changes from the plans or
Development Standards will be permitted. Any other changes shall be filed in
the office of the Department of Planning Services.
41. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with all of the
foregoing Development Standards. Noncompliance with any of the foregoing
Development Standards may be reason for revocation of the Permit by the Board
of County Commissioners.
If it is determined at the public hearing that there is probable cause that you have not met the
Conditions of Approval, the Board of County Commissioners will schedule a Show Cause public
hearing to consider revocation of the Special Review permit.
Any information you have that may help to resolve this matter will be helpful. Should you have
any questions regarding this letter, or if you need any further information, please feel free to
contact me at the above address, telephone number or e-mail address. If you wish to see me
personally, please call to schedule an appointment so that I may reserve a sufficient amount of
time with you.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at the above number.
Respectfully,
Jacqueline Hatch-Drouillard, Planner III
cc. Copart Inc
7f
__ 5 a t.
r4
4
i
1
4
j•
(((('`
1 t J t f i *is 1
• t tiri _
„,•
•
a f
t
I Mme / LT d l
f
Page 1 of 1
Esther Gesick
From: Esther Gesick
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 8:35 AM
To: rd.everson@hotmail.com
Cc: Jacqueline Hatch; Esther Gesick
Subject: FW: COPart Hearing
Attachments: DSC00309.JPG
Good Morning Rosalie,
Thank you for your comments and questions. I am forwarding your concerns to the Planner on this case, Jacqueline Hatch,
by way of a copy of this E-mail. Your E-mail and photograph will also be included in the Board's case file as Exhibit A, and
as always, you are also welcome to attend on the 30th and present your concerns in person. If you have any other
questions, please let me know.
Thanks!
Esther E. Gesick
Deputy Clerk to the Board
915 10th Street
Greeley, CO 80631
(970)356-4000 X4226
(970)352-0242 (fax)
From: Rosalie Everson [mailto:rd.everson@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 9:39 PM
To: Esther Gesick
Subject: Fw: COPart Hearing
Hi Esther,
Maybe you can answer this question --her email said you are the one to contact in her absence. Thanks,
Rosalie Everson
Original Message -----
From: Rosalie Everson
To: jvanegdom@co.weld.co.us
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 9:35 PM
Subject: COPart Hearing
Hello,
I'm not sure how to approach this --There's a hearing March 30th before the commissioners for COPART
and am concerned about the company. I live on WCR 4 and drive to and from Fort Lupton every day so I
have lots of opportunity to see their operations. My concern is that they use the side of the road for parking
of carriers and tow trucks, and the area in front of the fence for loading, unloading, and fixing vehicles.
My other concern about the drivers of the trucks. I've seen them pull out in front of oncoming traffic, pull out
without looking, park on the east side of the road and turn in without signaling --a lot of them just are not
good drivers.
Here's my question..what's the protocol for sending the information to the commissioners? Does it need to
go through your office? I've attached a 'sample' photo that I took last week, so you can see what I'm talking
about, it was just parked there!
Thanks, Rosalie Everson
EXHIBIT
A`
F
3/20/2009
Page 1 of
Jennifer VanEgdom
From: Rosalie Everson [rd.everson@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 9:35 PM
To: Jennifer VanEgdom
Subject: COPart Hearing
Attachments: DSC00309.JPG
Hello,
I'm not sure how to approach this --There's a hearing March 30th before the commissioners for COPAR
and am concerned about the company. I live on WCR 4 and drive to and from Fort Lupton every day s
I have lots of opportunity to see their operations. My concern is that they use the side of the road for
parking of carriers and tow trucks, and the area in front of the fence for loading, unloading, and fixing
vehicles.
My other concern about the drivers of the trucks. I've seen them pull out in front of oncoming traffic, p
out without looking, park on the east side of the road and turn in without signaling --a lot of them just
are not good drivers.
Here's my question..what's the protocol for sending the information to the commissioners? Does it nec
to go through your office? I've attached a 'sample' photo that I took last week, so you can see what I'i
talking about, it was just parked there!
Thanks, Rosalie Everson
3/23/2009
Page 1 of
Jennifer VanEgdom
From: Rosalie Everson [rd.everson@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 2:14 PM
To: Jennifer VanEgdom
Subject: Re: COPart Hearing
Attachments: DSC_3650.JPG; DSC00299.JPG; DSC00304.JPG
Thanks, I have lots of photos, these are the ones that are on my desktop from two weeks ago when
there seemed to be a lot of outside the gate activity.
The big truck parked on the east side of the road is not an isolated case; that kind pulls over there a lo
the car with the hood up, they were fixing it, another frequent event and the two cars parked were
there for several hours, again, hardly rare.
Not sure how many photos would be overkill --I've taken some that have upwards of 10 cars in a row,
with teams of mechanics hard at work.
I've also witnessed two near -misses, one with a car carrier that was parked NB on 27, and decided to
turn into COPARTs, a SB pickup had to swerve into the graveled area beside COPARTS to avoid him; th
second was a tow truck pulling out without signaling right in front of a SB car.
About two years ago, I talked to the manager about it and he started putting up cones and signs and t
problem got better. It's gotten worse in the past months, so maybe there's a new manager. The
manager also told me that the fence was on the right of way, don't know if it's true or not.
The drivers aren't necessarily the best on the road --they come in from different states and often appea
lost, so they sort of meander in. Sometimes they signal, sometimes they don't. Sometimes they speed
sometimes they find their destination and slam on the brakes.
My very first encounter with the whole operation was when they first opened and my children and I we
waiting to turn north on 85 from 104th. We, and a WB car, had the green light and a truck with a load
of wrecked cars blew through the red light. He was going my way, straight to COPARTS.
This has not been an asset to drivers who use WCR 27, nor is acres and acres of prison wire -
topped white fence an asset to the area, and I would hope that expansion would not be permitted.
Rosalie Everson
Original Message
From: Jennifer VanEgdom
To: 'Rosalie Everson'
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 11:53 AM
Subject: RE: COPart Hearing
Ms. Everson,
I have printed out your previous e-mail and the attached photo, and have added the documents to the case file. If
you have any additional photographs (or comments) you would like to be added to the record, please e-mail the
photos/comments to either my e-mail address, or to Esther Gesick at egesick@co.weld.co.us, before Friday afterno+
(March 27), and our office will add any correspondence to the file for the Commissioners to review at the hearing o
Monday, March 30.
Let me know if you have any other questions.
Jenny VanEgdom H Deputy Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners Weld County, Colorado (970) 356-4001
3/23/2009
Page 1 of 1
Esther Gesick
From: Jacqueline Hatch
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 12:53 PM
To: Esther Gesick
Subject: FW: Response to parking complaint adjacent to Copart property
Attachments: Letter to Jacqueline Hatch 3-26-09.pdf
Esther,
This is the response I have received from Glen regarding the complaint emails.
Thanks!!
Jacqueline
From: Glen Droegemueller [mailto:glen@glendroegemueller.com]
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 12:44 PM
To: Jacqueline Hatch
Cc: Bruce Barker; DePasquale Greg
Subject: Response to parking complaint adjacent to Copart property
Jacqueline,
Attached is the letter you requested regarding the parking complaint adjacent to Copart's Brighton's property.
I will see you Monday morning prior to the hearing.
Glen Droegemueller.
3/27/2009
GUN DROEGENUELLER
Attorney at Law
alen@glendroegemueller.com
Via E -Mail and Mail
March 26, 2009
Jacqueline Hatch, Planner 3
Weld County Department of Planning Services
Planning Division Southwest Office
4209 County Road 24.5
Longmont, CO 80504
Re: Copart, Inc.
Amended USR 1493
Dear Ms. I latch:
You have asked to me to respond to the information provided by Rosati Everson regarding
parking of trucks on Weld County Road 27 adjacent to the Copart facility.
I discussed this issue with my clients after receiving your e-mail, Copart continues to provide
any transport company with a one -page handout which I attaching to this cover letter. The
handout speaks for itself regarding notification to transport companies that the conduct of
parking on Weld County Road 27 is illegal.
It needs to he emphasized the transport companies are not employees of Copart but rather are
contracted by buyers of vehicles from the Copart facility to transport those vehicles either away
from facility after they have been purchased or are contracted by insurance companies to deliver
vehicles to the fhcility.
Copart will attempt to monitor the parking on the highway to he sure transport companies are not
parking on Weld County Road 27. Given the number of transport companies which are in and
out of the facility in a twenty-four hour basis is not realistic to expect Copart monitoring efforts
will always he successful.
As you are aware, Weld County Road 27 has recently been annexed to the City of Brighton,
Colorado. Copart is willing to contact the City of Brighton and discuss having the City place no
parking signs on both sides of Weld County Road 27 parallel to the Copart property. Because of
Brighton's proximity to the Copart site, there is a greater possibility enforcement efforts would
he more successful because the City of Brighton could provide routine monitoring of the road by
1035 37H' Avenue Court, Greeley, Colorado 60634
Telephone: (970) 304-0362 Fax: (970) 353-4040
Page 2
March 26.2009
its police department possible. I will wait for the C'ounty's response regarding Copan contacting
of the City of Brighton regarding the placement of traffic signs.
Sincerely yours,
Cr��..u.�..c.�:
Glen Droegemueller
Attorney at Law
GD:lc
Attachment
pc:
Greg L)ef asquale
1035 37th Avenue Court, Greeley, Colorado 80634
Telephone (970) 304-0362 Fax (970) 353-4040
Attention Buyers
and Transporters
All loading and unloading must occur
within Copart's perimeter fence.
Any loading, unloading or staging activity
which occurs on or near County Road 27
is illegal and will be subject to citation by
county and/or state officials.
All unattended vehicles will be towed at
owner's expense.
Adherence to this loading policy is
mandatory and failure to comply will
result the suspension of purchasing
privileges at Copart.
Page 1 of ]
Jacqueline Hatch
From: Matthew Hickox
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:15 PM
To: Jacqueline Hatch
Cc: Don Dunker; David Bauer
( J OS(
Subject: FW: Copart Auto Auctions Drainage Report and Plan Approval through Weld County
Jacqueline,
We have recieved a timeline from Chris Strawn for the completion of the Copart Auto drainage report and plans. After our
meeting with them on Tuesday and recieving this timeline, we have discussed this and are comfortable with cancelling the show
cause hearing. Their timeline appears to be reasonable with a month before resubmittal and gives Public Works staff two review
periods prior to approval. Let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks.
Matthew Hickox
From: Chris Strawn[mailto:cstrawn@jansenstrawn.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 2:07 PM
To: Brian Varrella; David Bauer
Cc: glen@glendroegemueller.com; mike.carson@copart.com; Todd Lyon'
Subject: Copart Auto Auctions Drainage Report and Plan Approval through Weld County
Hi Brian and Dave,
Thanks for taking the time yesterday to discuss the remaining issues for obtaining approval on the Copart Drainage report and
plans. As you requested, please review the following schedule for resubmittal and provide me with any comments that you may
have. I've taken a guess at your review time; please let me know if the timelines shown are acceptable.
1. Document Preparation and Owner Review for re -submittal: 4 weeks
2. Submittal to Weld County for review - April 18th.
3. Weld County Review: 3 weeks
4. Weld County Issue comments (if any) - May 9th
5. Review comments for approval: 1 week
6. Issue plans for approval: May 16th.
7. Weld County Approval Review - 2 weeks
8. Weld County Issues approval: May 30th.
These dates above are a best guess and it will vary depending on the comments and requirements from the first submittal. I do
feel that these are achievable dates and look forward to finalizing this project. Please give me a call if there are any questions.
Chris S. Strawn, PE
Jansen Strawn Consulting Engineers
2740 W. 28th Avenue
Denver, CO 80211
p.303.561.3333
f 303.561.3339
AL/7e9
03/21/2008
Co -Part Timeline for AmUSR-1493
1. May 26, 2006 — Weld County Referral for AmUSR-1493
• Included a Construction Activities Management Plan — Addendum 1 dated April
25, 2006
• Included a Final Drainage Report — Addendum 1 dated April 25, 2006
2. June 21, 2006 — Memo from Brian Varrella to Don Carroll
• Provided comments on the Final Drainage Report — Addendum 1 dated April 25,
2006
3. September 13, 2006 — Amended USR approved with conditions (copy not included,
date provided by Jacqueline Hatch)
4. September 27, 2006 — Collateral released (date provided by Jacqueline Hatch)
5. November 2, 2006 — Letter from Chris Strawn to Brian Varrella
• Responses to Drainage Report Comments Memo dated June 21, 2006
• Included a Revised Drainage Report dated November 3, 2006
6. November 8, 2006 — Memo from Brian Varrella to Chris Strawn
• Provided comments for previous comments that were not addressed
• Provided comments for the new drainage report
7. February 13, 2007 — Received a Revised Final Drainage Report — Addendum I dated
February 9, 2007
• Included a construction plan set
8. May 2, 2007 — Letter from Michael Carson to Drew Scheltinga
• Requested a variance to the detention pond release rate requirements
9. May 2, 2007 — Letter from Jeremy Gacnik to Drew Scheltinga
• Requested a variance to the detention pond release rate requirements
10. May 17, 2007 — Notes from phone call between Brian Varrella and Norm Speak
regarding damage to the ski lake property and the detention pond on Copart's
property
11. May 18, 2007 — Photos from site visit to Copart's property
• Shows that detention pond not build to engineering plans
• Shows oil and grease separator on far side of the pond away form the pond inlet
• Shows pictures of the erosion that is occurring on the Ski Lake property from
Copart's drainage
• Shows erosion occurring off of Copart's property on an adjacent property directly
north
• Shows oil and grease on the ground from vehicles
12. July 24, 2007 — Memo from Matthew Hickox to Brian Varrella
• Provides comments on the February 9, Revised Final Drainage Reports
13. September 18, 2007 — Letter from Brian Varrella to Michael Carson
• Denies the request for the variance for detention pond release rates
14. February 29, 2008 — Email from Jacqueline Hatch to Brian Varrella
• Provides a draft of the 10 day letter to Copart to get them in compliance with
AmUSR-1493
15. March 18, 2008 — Notes from meeting between Public Works and Copart
Page 1 of 3 November 13, 2008
C:ADocuments and Settings\jhatchVLocal Settings \Temporary Internet Files VOLK6ACopan Timeline Highlights through November 13
2008.doc
• A schedule for completion of outstanding issues was to be submitted to Public
Works
16. March 19, 2008 — Email from Chris Strawn to Brian Varrella and David Bauer
• Included a timeline for the completion of outstanding issues
• Document Preparation and Owner Review for re -submittal — 4 weeks
• Submittal to Weld County for Review — April 18
• Weld County Review — 3 weeks
• Weld County to issue comments — May 9
• Review comments for approval — 1 week
• Issue plans for approval — May 16
• Weld County approval review — 2 weeks
• Weld County issues approval — May 30
• Dates will vary depending on the comments and requirements of the 1 st submittal
17. April 21, 2008 — Revised drainage report received by Public Works
• Received the drainage report 3 days late (supposed to have been on April 18)
• Start 3 week clock
18. May 12, 2008 — Memo from Don Dunker to Jacqueline Hatch and Chris Strawn
• Comments were sent out 3 weeks to the day after the drainage report was
submitted
• Public Works met their deadline
19. June 27, 2008 — Revised Drainage Report received by Public Works
• Copart did not meet the timeframe deadline for returning responses and revisions
within 1 week
20. July 7, 2008 — Memo from Clay Kimmi to Jacqueline Hatch
• Comments for the revised drainage report
• Public Works met their timeframe deadline of 2 weeks by turning the comments
around in 10 days instead of the 14 allowed by the timeframe
21. August 7, 2008 — Clay Kimmi received phone call from Steve Speak regarding a
drainage complaint into the Ski Lake from a failure of Copart's detention pond
• Site visit to the Ski Lake took place
• Field notes taken
• Photos taken
22. August 12, 2008 — Letter from Clay Kimmi to Michael Carson
• Letter requesting that Copart fix their detention pond
23. August 19, 2008 — Email from Clay Kimmi to David Bauer
• Clay Kimmi performed calculations to show that the storm that caused the failure
of the detention pond was a 10 -year 6 -hour event
• Outline of calculations done to determine the magnitude of the rain event on
August 7, 2008
24. August 28, 2008 — Meeting with Copart and their representatives. Present at the
meeting were Clay Kimmi, David Bauer, Bruce Barker, and Jacqueline Hatch from
Weld County. Copart's representatives were Michael Carson, Loran Kelly, Glen
Droegemueller, and Chris Strawn. Copart given verbal notice to proceed with the
construction of the detention facilities.
Page 2 of 3 November 13, 2008
C:\Documents and Settings\jhatch\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK6\Copart Timeline Highlights through November 13
2008.doc
25. September 5, 2008 — Memo from Clay Kimmi to Jacqueline Hatch regarding the
minutes for the August 28, 2008 meeting.
26. September 23, 2008 — Memo from Clay Kimmi to Jacqueline Hatch regarding
comments on the Final Plat.
27. September 23, 2008 — Email from Bruce Barker to Jacqueline Hatch, Clay Kimmi,
and David Bauer stating that Copart was given an extension until October 31, 2008
to come into compliance. All of Public Works outstanding comments were to be
addressed. The final plat was to be recorded and the construction of the detention
facilities was to have been completed.
28. September 24, 2008 — Clay Kimmi, Jacqueline Hatch, and Janet Carter perform an
inspection on the Copart facility to determine what kind of progress had been done.
29. October 2, 2008 — Letter from Bruce Barker to Glen Droegemueller with a copy of
the September 30, 2008 Memo.
30. October 10, 2008 — Revised Drainage Report and Construction Drawings submitted
to Public Works.
31. October 10, 2008 — Memo from Clay Kimmi to Chris Strawn stating that the Revised
Drainage Report had been accepted and that 3 items needed to be addressed on the
Construction Drawings.
32. October 21, 2008 — Final copies of the Construction Drawings were received from
Chris Strawn.
33. October 29, 2008 — Email from Glen Droegemueller to Bruce Barker with
attachments for the signed drainage easements and an update on the status of the final
plat.
34. October 31, 2008 — Clay Kimmi and Jacqueline Hatch conducted a site visit to
determine what had been completed on the detention facilities. Photos were taken.
35. November 12, 2008 — Email from Chris Strawn to Clay Kimmi regarding CDOT
issuing a stop work order on the Copart storm sewer
36. November 13, 2008 — Email exchange between Clay Kimmi and Chris Strawn trying
to figure out why CDOT wanted the work stopped.
37. November 13, 2008 — Clay Kimmi and Janet Carter meet with Ron Greene and Loran
Kelly onsite to inspect the storm sewer and detention pond at 8:30 am.
38. November 13, 2008 — Phone calls between Clay Kimmi and CDOT representatives
explaining why CDOT was not in the loop on the project.
a. Copart was constructing the storm sewer on private property not in the CDOT
ROW. Historic flows will be released into a low tail water basin and then will
flow into the ROW barrow ditch along HWY 85.
b. Historic 5 year flows (4.5 cfs) are being released into the CDOT ROW. The
ROW was the historic area where the flows went.
c. State law requires the downstream landowners to accept historic flows.
d. Spoke with Steve Griffin — CDOT Hydrologist at 12:30 on November 13,
2008 regarding the issue.
Page 3 of 3 November 13, 2008
C\Documents and Settings \jhatch\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files \OLK6\Copan Timeline Highlights through November 13
2008 .doc
Co -Part Timeline for USR-1493 and AmUSR-1493
I. November 2, 2004 - Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review
Application submitted.
2. November 9, 2004 — Weld County Road Access Information Sheet submitted.
3. November 12, 2004 — Memo from Don Carroll to Jacqueline Hatch
• Access Requirements:
o One existing access to be abandoned
• Off -Street Parking Requirements:
o Pave 3 acres
o Match existing grades and adequate turning radiuses onto WCR 27
o Remaining gravel storage lot to be covered with 6 inch of gravel
• Stormwater Drainage Requirements:
o Provide a stormwater drainage report including a Stormwater Management
Plan
o Water quality detention pond to be located outside of future ROW for
WCR 27
4. December 14, 2004 — Letter from Glen Droegemueller to Jacqueline Hatch
• Ownership of the parcel identified as Copart Inc.
5. January 4, 2005 — email from Jacqueline Hatch to Don Carroll describing the changes
to the USR application prior to the Planning Commission meeting.
6. January 5 2005 — Letter from Glen Droegemueller to Jacqueline Hatch
• Letter regarding revised Condition 23 in the USR
• Revised Condition 23 refers to the types of vehicles which can be stored at the
facility
7. January 6, 2005 — Memo from Jacqueline Hatch to Referral Agencies
• Listed revisions to their original application
• USR questionnaire item 8 — describes the storm water plan
8. January 27, 2005 — Construction Activities Stormwater Management Plan and
Preliminary Drainage Report
• Written by Chris Strawn
• Proposed a 100 -year release rate
9. February 4, 2005 — Memo from Don Carroll to Jacqueline Hatch
• Follow-up to the January 6, 2005 memo and changes which occurred after the
Planning Commission Meeting
• Changes included the addition of employees and adding additional storage for
vehicles and equipment
10. February 15, 2005 — Memo from Jacqueline Hatch to Planning Commission
• Memo asking for changes to staff comments
11. February 17, 2005 — Memo from Don Carroll to Kim Ogle
• SWMP found to be acceptable
12. March 30, 2005 — Resolution to Approve Site Specific Development Plan and Use by
Special Review Permit # 1493 for Commercial Junkyard and Salvage Yard in the I-3
Zone District
13. November 30, 2005 — Received maps for USR-1493 from the applicant
14. November 30, 2005 — Memo and email from David Bauer to Don Carroll
Page I of 8 November 13, 2008
C:ADocuments and Settings \jhatchVLocal Settings\Temporary Internet FilesVOLK6ACopart Timeline through November 13 2008.doc
• Memo outlined errors in the drainage report and calculations
• The pond was undersized
• The outlet was to be redesigned to release at the proper rate
• Need an easement from offsite properties and a drainage easement for the resized
retention pond
15. December 2, 2005 — Memo from David Bauer to Don Carroll
• Follow-up to Dave's review of the drainage plan
• Asked for corrections to the drainage plan and completion of the report and
drawings.
• Corrections included details for the pond
• Need for a drainage easement for the pond and an easement agreement between
the applicant and offsite land owners pertaining to the drainage
16. December 15, 2005 — Email from David Bauer to Don Carroll
• Regarding drainage easement for Copart to discharge into the ski lake
17, December 16, 2005 — Memo from David Bauer to Don Carroll and Jacqueline Hatch
• Asking for proof of drainage easement
• Spills from the vehicles
18. January 5, 2006 — Fax from Glen Droegemueller to Don Carroll
• Cost estimate for fencing and paving
19. January 6, 2006 — Memo from Don Carroll to Jacqueline Hatch
• Improvements agreement reviewed and accepted.
20. February 27, 2006 — Memo from Don Carroll to Jacqueline Hatch
• Site visit performed on 2-24-06 to verify asphalt approach, parking lot, and
concrete pad
• Site entrance not the same as what was shown on the plat
• Turning radiuses to be installed at the appropriate location to match the sliding
gate
• Dave Bauer to handle drainage problems
21. March 1, 2006 — Improvements agreement accepted (copy not included, date
provided by Jacqueline Hatch)
22. March 8, 2006 — Email from David Bauer to Bruce Barker
• Copart unable to obtain an easement from the ski lake — what can they do?
23. March 8, 2006 — Email from Bruce Barker to Glen Droegemueller
• Copart to provide a letter stating they tried to deal with the ski lake
24. March 9, 2006 — Email from Jacqueline Hatch to Don Carroll
• Asking if the drainage has to be at historical rates
25. March 9, 2006 — Email from David Bauer to Jacqueline Hatch and Don Carroll
• Copart still required to detain the 100-yr event and release at the 5-yr historical
rate
26. March 14, 2006 — Letter from Glen Droegemueller to Jacqueline Hatch
• Letter asking that the requirement for an easement from the ski lake be removed
from the USR
27. March 29, 2006 — Resolution to Approve Improvements Agreement According to
Policy Regarding Collateral for Improvements, Authorize Chair to Sign, and Accept
Collateral for Use by Special Review Permit # 1493 — Copart Inc.
Page 2 of 8 November 13, 2008
C:\Documents and Settings \jhatch\Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \OLK6\Copart Timeline through November 13 2008.doc
28. April 10, 2006 — Plat for USR-1493 recorded (copy not included, date provided by
Jacqueline Hatch)
29. May 26, 2006 — Weld County Referral for AmUSR-1493
• Included a Construction Activities Management Plan — Addendum I dated April
25, 2006
• Included a Final Drainage Report — Addendum 1 dated April 25, 2006
30. May 30, 2006 — Memo from Don Carroll to Jacqueline Hatch
• Listed the requirements from Public Works
• Storm Water Drainage to be addressed by David Bauer or Brian Varrella
31. June 21, 2006 — Memo from Brian Varrella to Don Carroll
• Provided comments on the Final Drainage Report — Addendum 1 dated April 25,
2006
32. June 21, 2006 — Email from Brian Varrella to Glen Droegemueller
• Contain a PDF of the comments for the Final Drainage Report
33. June 27, 2006 — Email from Chris Strawn to Brian Varrella
• Concerns about the release rate from the pond
34. June 27, 2006 — Email from David Bauer to Brian Varrella
• Reasons for not allowing the 1 cfs/ac release rate
35. September 13, 2006 — Amended USR approved with conditions (copy not included,
date provided by Jacqueline Hatch)
36. September 27, 2006 — Collateral released (date provided by Jacqueline Hatch)
37. November 2, 2006 — Letter from Chris Strawn to Brian Varrella
• Responses to Drainage Report Comments Memo dated June 21, 2006
• Included a Revised Drainage Report dated November 3, 2006
38. November 8, 2006 — Memo from Brian Varrella to Chris Strawn
• Provided comments for previous comments that were not addressed
• Provided comments for the new drainage report
39. February 13, 2007 — Received a Revised Final Drainage Report -- Addendum 1 dated
February 9, 2007
• Included a construction plan set
40. March 1, 2007 — Email from Brian Varrella to Jeremy Gacnik
• Provided information to Jeremy on what was required for the variance to the 5-yr
historic release rate
41. March 2, 2007 — Letter of Transmittal from Brian Varrella to Jacqueline Hatch
• Provided a copy of the drainage report to Planning
42. May 2, 2007 — Letter from Michael Carson to Drew Scheltinga
• Requested a variance to the detention pond release rate requirements
43. May 2, 2007 — Letter from Jeremy Gacnik to Drew Scheltinga
• Requested a variance to the detention pond release rate requirements
44. May 17, 2007 — Notes from phone call between Brian Varrella and Norm Speak
regarding damage to the ski lake property and the detention pond on Copart's
property
45. May 18, 2007 — Photos from site visit to Copart's property
• Shows that detention pond not build to engineering plans
• Shows oil and grease separator on far side of the pond away form the pond inlet
Page 3 of 8 November 13, 2008
C:\Documents and Settings`jhatch\Local Settings\Tctnporary Internet Files\OLK6\Copan Timeline through November 13 2008.doc
• Shows pictures of the erosion that is occurring on the Ski Lake property from
Copart's drainage
• Shows erosion occurring off of Copart's property on an adjacent property directly
north
• Shows oil and grease on the ground from vehicles
46. July 24, 2007 - Memo from Matthew Hickox to Brian Varrella
• Provides comments on the February 9, Revised Final Drainage Reports
47. August 21, 2007 — Email from Mike Carson to Brian Varrella
• Asked for an update on the variance request
48. August 21, 2007 — Email from Brian Varrella to David Bauer
• Attempting to locate the variance request letter
49. August 23, 2007 — Email from David Bauer to Jacqueline Hatch
• Asking what the approved use for USR-1493 is
50. August 24, 2007 — Email from Jacqueline Hatch to David Bauer
• Use is for a Commercial Junkyard or Salvage Yard
• Fax of the BOCC resolution
51. August 24, 2007 — Email from David Bauer to Jacqueline Hatch
• Outlining the variance request
• Points out that Copart still has not installed adequate drainage and water quality
facilities
52. September 18, 2007 — Letter from Brian Varrella to Michael Carson
• Denies the request for the variance for detention pond release rates
53. February 29, 2008 — Email from Jacqueline Hatch to Brian Varrella
• Provides a draft of the 10 day letter to Copart to get them in compliance with
AmUSR-1493
54. March 18, 2008 — Notes from meeting between Public Works and Copart
• A schedule for completion of outstanding issues was to be submitted to Public
Works
55. March 19, 2008 — Email from Chris Strawn to Brian Varrella and David Bauer
• Included a timeline for the completion of outstanding issues
• Document Preparation and Owner Review for re -submittal — 4 weeks
• Submittal to Weld County for Review — April 18
• Weld County Review — 3 weeks
• Weld County to issue comments - May 9
• Review comments for approval —1 week
• Issue plans for approval — May 16
• Weld County approval review — 2 weeks
• Weld County issues approval — May 30
• Dates will vary depending on the comments and requirements of the 1st submittal
56. March 19, 2008 — Email from Brian Varrella to Matthew Hickox and Don Dunker
• Forward of the timeline for Copart's approval
57. March 19, 2008 — Email from Glen Droegemueller to Jacqueline Hatch and Bruce
Barker
• Timeline and request to hold off on the April 7th Probable Cause Hearing
58. March 20, 2008 — Email from Matthew Hickox to Jacqueline Hatch
Page 4 of 8 November 13, 2008
C:\Documents and Settings\jhatch\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK6\Copart Timeline through November I3 2008.doc
• Notifying Jacqueline that Public Works had received the timeline and can cancel
the Probable Cause Hearing
59. March 21, 2008 — Email from Jacqueline Hatch to Ester Gesick and Bruce Barker
• Request to cancel the Probable Cause Hearing
60. March 21, 2008 — Email from Bruce Barker to Glen Droegemueller
• FYI
61. March 21, 2008 — Email from Glen Droegemueller to Chris Strawn
• Request that Chris strive to complete the time line sooner
• Request to Mike that the construction of the detention pond be scheduled right
after approval
62. March 31, 2008 — Email from Chris Strawn to David Bauer and Matthew Hickox
• Request for copies of the comments on the last drainage report
63. March 31, 2008 — Email from Matthew Hickox to Chris Strawn
• Forwarded comments from the last drainage report
64. March 31, 2008 — Email from Chris Strawn to Matthew Hickox
• Questions regarding the redlines on the plans
65. March 31, 2008 — Email from Matthew Hickox to Chris Strawn
• More information regarding the status of the drainage report comments
66. April 21, 2008 — Revised drainage report received by Public Works
• Received the drainage report 3 days late (supposed to have been on April 18)
• Start 3 week clock
67. May 12, 2008 — Memo from Don Dunker to Jacqueline Hatch and Chris Strawn
• Comments were sent out 3 weeks to the day after the drainage report was
submitted
• Public Works met their deadline
68. May 13, 2008 — Email from Don Dunker to Chris Strawn
• Email containing an electronic copy of the comments
69. June 27, 2008 — Revised Drainage Report received by Public Works
• Copart did not meet the timeframe deadline for returning responses and revisions
within 1 week
70. July 7, 2008 — Memo from Clay Kimmi to Jacqueline Hatch
• Comments for the revised drainage report
• Public Works met their timeframe deadline of 2 weeks by turning the comments
around in 10 days instead of the 14 allowed by the timeframe
71. August 7, 2008 — Clay Kimmi received phone call from Steve Speak regarding a
drainage complaint into the Ski Lake from a failure of Copart's detention pond
• Site visit to the Ski Lake took place
• Field notes taken
• Photos taken
72. August 7, 2008 — Email from Steven Speak to Clay Kimmi
• Asking for copies of the photos and letter
73. August 11, 2008 — Letter from Jacqueline Hatch to Glen Droegemueller
• Notification to Copart that they are not in compliance with USR-1493 and
AmUSR-1493
74. August 12, 2008 — Email from Clay Kimmi to Steven Speak
Page 5 of 8 November 13, 2008
C:\Documents and Settings\jhatch\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files.OLK6\Copart Timeline through November 13 2008.doc
• Provided copies of the photos taken on August 7, 2008
75.August 12, 2008 Letter from Clay Kimmi to Michael Carson
�. Letter_ requesting that Copart fix their detention pond
76. August 14, 2008 — Email from Bruce Barker to David Bauer and Jacqueline Hatch
• Request for a meeting with Copart
77. August 14, 2008 — Email from David Bauer to Bruce Barker
• Provides before (May 18, 2007) and after (August 7, 2008) photos to Bruce
78. August 14, 2008 to August 19, 2008 — Emails between all concerned parties trying to
come up with a meeting date and time that works for everybody
79: August 19, 2008 2008 — Email from Clay Kimmi to David Bauer
• Clay Kimmi performed calculations to show that the storm that caused the failure
of the detentiowpond was a 10 -year 6 -hour event
........
• .: Outline of calculations done to determinethe ..magnitude of the rain event on
August 7,: 2008
80. August 22, 2008 - Email from Clay Kimmi to David: Bauer
• Includes photos taken on 8/22/08 of Copart's attempt.: to repair the detentl04000
81. August 22, 2008 — Email from David Bauer to Bruce Barker, Jacqueline Hatch, and
Don Dunker
82. August 28, 2008 — Email from Clay Kimmi to Dave Bauer regarding the meeting
with Copart on August 28, 2008.
83. August'28, 2008.- Meeting with Copart and their representatives. Present at the
Meeting were clay Kimmi, David Bauer, Bruce Barker, and Jacqueline Hatch from
Weld County.: Copart's representatives were Michael Carson, Loran Kelly, Glen
Droegemueller, and Chris Strawn. Copart given verbal notice to proceed with the
construction of the detention facilities.
84. September 5, 2008 — Memo from Clay Kimmi to Jacqueline Hatch regarding the
minutes for the August 28, 2008 meeting.
85. September 23, 2008 — Memo from Clay Kimmi to Jacqueline Hatch regarding
comments on the Final Plat.
86. September 23, 2008 — Email from Clay Kimmi to Jacqueline Hatch, Bruce Barker,
and David Bauer regarding a phone call received from Glen Droegemueller.
87. September 23, 2008 — Email from Jacqueline Hatch to Clay Kimmi, Bruce Barker,
and David Bauer regarding the Final Plat that was submitted by Glen Droegemueller.
88. September 23, 2008 — Email from Bruce Barker to Jacqueline Hatch, Clay Kimmi,
and David Bauer asking for Staffs opinion on extending the deadline for compliance
to November 15, 2008.
89. September 23, 2008 — Email from Jacqueline Hatch to Clay Kimmi, Bruce Barker,
and David Bauer regarding Bruce's proposal to extend the deadline.
90. September 23, 2008 — Email from Clay Kimmi to Jacqueline Hatch, Bruce Barker,
and David Bauer regarding Bruce's proposal to extend the deadline.
91. September 23, 2008 — Email from Bruce Barker to Jacqueline Hatch,; Clay Kimmi,
and David Bauer stating that Copart was given an extension until October 31, 2008 to
come into compliance. All of Public Works outstanding comments.were to be
addressed. The final plat was to be recorded and the construction of the detention
facilities was to have been completed.
Page 6 of 8 November 13, 2008
C:1Doctnnents and Settings\jhatch\Local Settings' Temporary Internet Files ',OLK6' Copart Timeline through November 13 2008.doc
92. September 23, 2008 — Email from Bruce Barker to Glen Droegemueller outlining
what Copart was to have completed by October 31, 2008 or have a Probable Cause
Hearing on November 17, 2008.
93. September 24, 2008 — Clay Kimmi, Jacqueline Hatch, and Janet Carter perform an
inspection on the Copart facility to determine what kind of progress had been done.
94. September 25, 2008 — Email from Clay Kimmi to Jacqueline Hatch, Bruce Barker,
and David Bauer outlining the results of the inspection performed on September 24,
2008. Email included photos taken during the site inspection.
95. September 26, 2008 — Emails between Staff outlining the type of letter to send to
Copart regarding their failure to get anything submitted by the end of September.
96. September 30, 2008 — Memo from Clay Kimmi to Bruce Barker outlining the
inspection of September 24, 2008.
97. October 2, 2008 — Letter from Bruce Barker to Glen Droegemueller with a copy of
the September 30, 2008 Memo.
98. October 6, 2008 — Fax from Clay Kimmi to Chris Strawn of the October 2, 2008 letter
from Bruce Barker to Glen Droegemueller.
99. October 8, 2008 — Email from Chris Strawn to Clay Kimmi regarding the anticipated
submittal date for the Revised Drainage Report and Construction Drawings.
100. October 10, 2008 — Revised Drainage Report and Construction Drawings
submitted to Public Works.
101. October 10, 2008 — Email from Clay Kimmi to Jacqueline Hatch, Bruce Barker,
and David Bauer informing them of the receipt of the Revised Drainage Plans.
102. October 10, 2008 — Memo from Clay Kimmi to Chris Strawn stating that the
Revised Drainage Report had been accepted and that 3 items needed to be
addressed on the Construction Drawings.
103. October 10, 2008 — Email from Clay Kimmi to Chris Strawn outlining the
comments on the drainage report. A PDF copy of the memo was attached.
104. October 20, 2008 — Glen Droegemueller dropped off a copy of the Final Plat to
Public Works for review.
105. October 20, 2008 — Email from Clay Kimmi to Bruce Barker, Jacqueline Hatch,
David Bauer, and Kim Ogle with comments for the Final Plat (the detention
facility was to be shown inside a drainage easement).
106. October 21, 2008 — Final copies of the Construction Drawings were received from
Chris Strawn.
107. October 21, 2008 — Email from Clay Kimmi to Chris Strawn and Glen
Droegemueller. Acknowledged the receipt of the Construction Drawings and
outlined the remaining items required for Public Works approval.
108. October 24, 2008 — Email from Clay Kimmi to Bruce Barker, Jacqueline Hatch,
Don Dunker, David Bauer, and Kim Ogle regarding an update on the outstanding
items requiring approval.
109. October 24, 2008 — Email from Jacqueline Hatch to Clay Kimmi, Bruce Barker,
Don Dunker, David Bauer, and Kim Ogle regarding her comments on the final
plat.
110. October 29, 2008 — Email from Glen Droegemueller to Bruce Barker with
attachments for the signed drainage easements and an update on the status of the
final plat.
Page 7 of 8 November 13, 2008
C:ADocuments and Settings \jhatchVLocal Settings\Temporary Internet Files VOLK6ACopart Timeline through November 13 2008.doe
111. October 31, 2008 — Clay Kimmi and Jacqueline Hatch conducted a site visit to
determine what had been completed on the detention facilities.
112. October 31, 2008 — Email from Chris Strawn to Glen Droegemueller regarding
some changes that were done to the approved Construction Drawings. Drawings
included slope changes because of the location of a natural gas line.
113. October 31, 2008 — Email from Bruce Barker to Clay Kimmi and Jacqueline
Hatch regarding the recording of the drainage easements.
114. October 31, 2008 — Email from Clay Kimmi to Jacqueline Hatch, Bruce Barker,
Kim Ogle, David Bauer, and Don Dunker regarding the site inspection that was
performed on October 31, 2008. Photos from visit included as an attachment.
115. October 31, 2008 — Email from Jacqueline Hatch to Clay Kimmi, Bruce Barker,
Kim Ogle, David Bauer, and Don Dunker regarding the receipt of the final plat.
116. November 3, 2008 — Email from Bruce Barker to Clay Kimmi, Jacqueline Hatch,
David Bauer, and Don Dunker regarding an update on the October 31, 2008
meeting between Bruce Barker and Glen Droegemueller. Email asked that
Jacqueline Hatch send out a letter setting the Probable Cause Hearing.
117. November 3, 2008 — Email from Bruce Barker to Clay Kimmi, Jacqueline Hatch,
David Bauer, and Don Dunker with attachments of the signed drainage
easements.
118. November 3, 2008 — Email from David Bauer to Clay Kimmi, Jacqueline Hatch,
Bruce Barker, Kim Ogle, and Don Dunker asking how we would make sure that
Copart followed through with the construction.
119. November 10, 2008 — Email from Ron Greene to Clay Kimmi with the
construction schedule for the installation of the storm sewer pipe.
120. November 10, 2008 — Email from Clay Kimmi to Chris Strawn, Glen
Droegemueller, Bruce Barker, Jacqueline Hatch, and David Bauer requesting
more information in the construction schedule.
121. November 12, 2008 — Email from Ron Greene to Clay Kimmi with the attached
construction schedule for the construction of the detention pond.
122. November 12, 2008 — Email from Chris Strawn to Clay Kimmi regarding CDOT
issuing a stop work order on the Copart storm sewer
123. November 13, 2008 — Email exchange between Clay Kimmi and Chris Strawn
trying to figure out why CDOT wanted the work stopped.
124. November 13, 2008 — Clay Kimmi and Janet Carter meet with Ron Greene and
Loran Kelly onsite to inspect the storm sewer and detention pond at 8:30 am.
125. November 13, 2008 -- Phone calls between Clay Kimmi and CDOT
representatives explaining why CDOT was not in the loop on the project.
a. Copart was constructing the storm sewer on private property not in the CDOT
ROW. Historic flows will be released into a low tail water basin and then will
flow into the ROW barrow ditch along HWY 85.
b. Historic 5 year flows (4.5 cfs) are being released into the CDOT ROW. The
ROW was the historic area where the flows went.
c. State law requires the downstream landowners to accept historic flows..
d. Spoke with Steve Griffin- CDOT Hydrologist at 12:30 on November 13,
2008 regarding the issue.
Page 8 of 8 November 13, 2008
C:\Documents and Settings\jhatch\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK6\Copart Timeline through November 13 2008.doc
Hello