HomeMy WebLinkAbout20092836.tiff•
•
Weld County Planning Department
E SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECI'A1EELEY OFFICE
REVIEW (USR) APPLICATION AUG 0 3 7nOq
FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE
RECEIPT # /AMOUNT # /$
APPLICATION RECEIVED BY
DATE RECEIVED:
CASE # ASSIGNED:
PLANNER ASSIGNED:
,VEq
Parcel Number ly-}1-a-}-0000-51 /IW+I - - IOoo'•13
(12 digit number - found on Tax I.D. information, obtainable at the Weld County Assessor's Office, orwww.co.weld.co.us. )
4 Legal Description Si IA4 oc SE I14-1 C. poi4rovt a f r1 E tijSection }} Township I North, Range to i.West
Flood Plain: tit A. Zone District: of C -t , Total Acreage: 10 , Overlay District: f c..
Geological Hazard: vt la- , Airport Overlay District: v1 IA.
FEE OWNER(S) OF THE PROPERTY: I I\
Name: I�V-S+tvt coital ?a Red Clar-L. C ple&se see ca +cLeot Easevuevtt)
•
Work Phone # Home one # Email /
Address:
Address:
City/State/Zip Code
Name: t4orvtta Tec.v%
Work Phone #
Address:
Address:
City/State/Zip Code
12tkt
Home Phone #
C pla_4se see oArt-cL e ok
Email
t-nc.QNot evt-�- 1
Name:
Work Phone # Home Phone # Email
Address:
Address:
City/State/Zip Code
APPLICANT OR AUTHORIZED AGENT (See Below: Authorization must accompany applications signed by Authorized Agent)
I'
Name: Mark Mvcrc V I Tr; - S-i-a�;t c c T
Work Phone # SOS- >S4 -54-1I Home Phone # Email Mri.wrray Ci 3r4 s+r, 4eq+•orq
Address: 1100 W. :Unit—lAtte. CC: bevtise et.s 3 .JiWcov
Address:
City/State/Zip Code
PROPOSED USE:
Wes-Ems:As-k - I CO Soa34
?ef wn tY
T"T avtsvn,ssidvn
Tv-i - slack.
dr4tbbous@i-v-tsFed
3o3 - as -Li -3a-
0.55 %.%LkS of a, clo%Able.
lane tvt Weld Ctou.n-Li
I (We) hereby depose and state under penalties of perjt.
with or contained within the application are true and corre
owners of property must sign this application. If an Author
owners must be included with the application. If a corpora
included indicating that the signatory has to legal authority
et
:r -1-4S at
C..truAA* a3o
a�
•
Sr,.rG- . wt. , e vtSr~- Q ce.
OTRI-STATE GENERATION AND
TRANSMISSION ASSOCIATION
DENISE GIBBONS
Senior Permitting and Land Rights Specialist
1100 W. 116th Ave.
Westminster, CO 80234
P.O. Box 33695
Denver, CO 80233-0695
E-mail: dgibbons@tristategt.org
A Touchstone Energy'Cnopr rarive'4Tg
Main (303) 452-6111
Direct (303) 254-3229
Cell (303) 880-2694
FAX (303) 254-6063
2009-2836
Identify Results Page 1 of 3
Afbnt#: R6270686
WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR
PROPERTY PROFILE
Parcel#: 147127000031
Tax Area: 2524 Bordering County:
Acres: 71.78
Township Range Section Quart. Sec.
01-66-27-0
Owners Name & Address:.
CLARK DUSTIN
15759 COUNTY RD 4
BRIGHTON, CO 80603
Additional Owners:.
CLARK PAIGE
Business/Complex:
Sale Date
9/29/2008
Sale Price
$350,000
Subdivison Name Block# Lot#
Property Address:
Street: 15759 4 CR
City: WELD
Sales Summary
Deed Type
WD
Legal Description
Reception #
3582411
15967E NE4SE4/N3/4NW4SE4 27 1 66 ALSO A STRIP OF LAND 30' WIDE ALONG THE E SIDE OF TRACT DESC IN BK599 REC #1521285
•
Land Type
Agricultural
Agricultural
Agricultural
Land Subtotal:
Abst Code
4147
4147
4147
Bldg# Property Type
1
2
3
4
Mobile Home
Out Building
Out Building
Out Building
Improvements Subtotal:
Total Property Value
Land Valuation Summary
Unit of Number of
Measure
Acres
Acres
Acres
Units
8.54
39.05
24.19
Actual Value
Assessed
Value
71.78 $1,430 $410
Buildings Valuation Summary
Actual Value
Assessed
Value
$34,871 $2,780
$36,301 $3,190
Building Details
Account#: R6270686 Parcel#: 147127000031
Airs Name & Address: Property Address:
CLARK DUSTIN Street: 15759 4 CR
15759 COUNTY RD 4 City: WELD
BRIGHTON, CO 80603
http://maps2. merrick.com/Website/Weld/setSgl.asp?cmd=QUERY&DET=PP&pin=147127... 10/26/2009
Identify Results
Page 1 of 1
ient#: R1742402
WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR
PROPERTY PROFILE
Parcel#: 147127100043
Tax Area: 2507
Acres: 20.21
Township Range Section Ouart. Sec.
01-66-27-1
Bordering County:
Subdivison Name Block# Lot#
Owners Name & Address:
RITCHEY NORMA JEAN
550 JUDY LN
LEXINGTON, KY 40505-1748
Business/Complex:
Sale Date
Sale Price
$0
Property Address:
Street:
City:
Sales Summary
Deed Type
Legal Description
Reception #
PT E2E2NE4 27-1-66 LOT B REC EXEMPT RE -1545 DESC AS SLY 1338.21'
ype
Agr ultural
Land Subtotal:
•
Abst Code
4147
Land Valuation Summary
Unit of Number of
Measure Units
Acres 20.21
Actual Value
20.21 $507
No Buildings on Parcel
Assessed
Value
$150
http://maps2.merrick.com/Website/Weld/setSgl.asp?cmd=QUERY&DET=PP&pin=147127... 10/26/2009
I
• •
•
•
•
Henry Lake
Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4 of the Weld County Code
Substation Expansion and Electric Transmission Line
Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4 of the Weld County Code
Sec. 23-2-240. Design standards.
A. An applicant for a Use by Special Review shall demonstrate compliance with the
following design standards in the application and shall continue to meet these standards
if approved for DEVELOPMENT.
1. Adequate water service in terms of quality, quantity, and dependability is available to
the site to serve the USES permitted.
Not applicable. The use being permitted is a 230 -kilovolt (kV) double -circuit
transmission line.
2. Adequate sewer service is available to the site to serve the USES permitted.
Not applicable. The use being permitted is a 230 -kV double -circuit transmission line.
3. If soil conditions on the site are such that they present moderate or severe limitations
to the construction of STRUCTURES or facilities proposed for the site, the applicant
has demonstrated how much limitations can and will be mitigated.
Not applicable. All of the soils in the Project area have low shrink/swell potential.
There are no soils inside the Project area that have moderate, high, or very high
shrink/swell potential. See Section 21 -3 -330.8.15 —Hydrologic, Atmospheric,
Geologic, Pedologic, Biotic, Visual, and Noise Impacts.
4. Adequate fire protection measures are available on the site for the STRUCTURES
and facilities permitted.
The proposed transmission line is designed with overhead ground wires and
grounded towers to protect the system from damage from lightning. See Section 21-
3-330.B.5.g—Hazards and Emergency Procedures, for additional fire protection
measures.
5. USES shall comply with the following stormwater management standards:
a. Stormwater retention facilities shall be provided on site, which are designed to
retain the stormwater runoff from the fully developed site from a one -hundred -
year storm or as otherwise required by the Department of Public Works. In the
case of a LIVESTOCK CONFINEMENT OPERATION (L.C.O.), wastewater
collection, conveyance and retention facilities shall be designed and constructed
in accordance with the Confined Animal Feeding Operation Control Regulations
(5 CCR 1002-19).
1
Henry Lake
Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4 of the Weld County Code
Substation Expansion and Electric Transmission Line
Construction of the Project would not create runoff in excess of previous site
levels and would not change existing topography or adversely affect drainage.
There would be no alteration in the pattern or intensity of surface drainage as a
result of construction and operation of the interconnection facility. A range of
measures to ensure that the Project does not impact water quality is listed in
Appendix B, and prior to construction, a Storm Water Permit for Construction
Activities would be acquired from the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment. See Sections 21 -3 -330.6.12 —Air and Water Pollution Impacts and
Control Alternatives, Air Pollution Impact and Control, and 21 -3 -330.B.16 -
Surface and Subsurface Drainage.
b. The drainage facilities shall be designed to release the retained water at a
quantity and rate not to exceed the quantity and rate of a five-year storm falling
on the UNDEVELOPED site.
Construction of the Project would not create runoff in excess of previous site
levels and would not change existing topography or adversely affect drainage.
There would be no alteration in the pattern or intensity of surface drainage as a
result of construction and operation of the interconnection facility. A range of
measures to ensure that the Project does not impact water quality is listed in
Appendix B, and prior to construction, a Storm Water Permit for Construction
Activities would be acquired from the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment. See Sections 21 -3 -330.8.12 —Air and Water Pollution Impacts and
Control Alternatives, Air Pollution Impact and Control, and 21 -3 -330.B.16 —
Surface and Subsurface Drainage.
6. All parking and vehicle storage shall be provided on the site; parking shall not be
permitted within any public right-of-way. An adequate parking area shall be provided
to meet the parking needs of employees, company vehicles, visitors and customers.
As discussed in Section 21 -3 -330.8.2.b —Access to the Project Area, right-of-way
agreements include 150 -foot easements purchased from landowners along the
transmission alignment. Tri-State has recently acquired right-of-way easements on
private lands that include approximately 6.8 acres that are currently pasture land.
Only a small portion of the transmission line right-of-way would be disturbed for
structure installation and vehicle access. No new roads are needed to gain access to
where the poles would be erected.
During construction, all vehicles would park within the 150 -foot right-of-way, and no
parking areas would be constructed. See Section 21 -3 -330.B.7 —Natural and
Socioeconomic Environmental Impacts from Construction of the Electric
Transmission Line.
2
• •
•
•
•
Henry Lake
Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4 of the Weld County Code
Substation Expansion and Electric Transmission Line
7. The USE shall comply with all the SETBACK and OFFSET requirements of the zone
district.
This Project is located within the A (Agricultural) Zone District. The minimum setback
is 20 feet, and the minimum offset is 3 feet, or 1 foot for each 3 feet of building height,
as defined in Section 23-3-50 of the Weld County Code. This project complies with
the setback and offset requirements, as shown in Figure 1, Plot Plan.
8. The access shall be located and designed to be safe; ingress and egress shall not
present a safety hazard to the traveling public or to the vehicle accessing the
property. For USES generating high traffic volumes and large number of large, slow -
accelerating vehicles, acceleration and deceleration lanes may be required to
mitigate a potential traffic hazard.
No adverse effects on county roads are anticipated. Tri-State would work with the
Weld County Public Works Department to determine the appropriate construction
method for accessing the construction area. All mobile construction equipment would
be certified to operate on Interstate highways. The halting of traffic for short periods
of time on Weld County Road 4 to allow construction vehicles to enter and exit the
construction area may occur. No improvements to roads in Weld County would be
required. See Section 21 -3 -330.B.7 —Natural and Socioeconomic Environmental
Impacts from Construction of the Electric Transmission Line.
9. New accesses to public rights -of -way shall be constructed using the following as
minimum standards:
a. Size of drainage structure —twelve (12) inches in diameter.
b. Length of drainage structure —twenty (20) feet.
c. Depth of cover over pipe —twelve (12) inches.
d. Width of access —fifteen (15) feet.
e. Maximum grade of access —fifteen percent (15%).
f. Flare radius —twenty (20) feet.
g. Depth of surfacing —four (4) inches.
Standards exceeding these minimums may be required depending on the type and
volume of vehicles generated by the type of USE proposed.
Not applicable. Right-of-way agreements include 150 -foot easements purchased
from landowners along the transmission alignment. Only a small portion of the
transmission line right-of-way would be disturbed for structure installation and vehicle
access. No new roads are needed to gain access to where the poles would be
erected.
3
• •
Henry Lake
Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4 of the Weld County Code
Substation Expansion and Electric Transmission Line
10. Buffering or SCREENING of the proposed USE from ADJACENT properties may be
required in order to make the determination that the proposed USE is compatible with
the surrounding uses. Buffering or SCREENING may be accomplished through a
combination of berming, landscaping and fencing.
Not applicable. The proposed Project is adjacent to an existing substation.
11. Uses by Special Review in the A (Agricultural) Zone District shall be located on the
least prime soils on the property in question unless the applicant can demonstrate
why such a location would be impractical or infeasible.
None of the soils within the Project Area are prime soils. See Section 21 -3-
330.6.15 —Hydrologic, Atmospheric, Geologic, Pedologic, Biotic, Visual, and Noise
Impacts.
B. If the Special Review Permit for a MAJOR FACILITY OF A PUBLIC UTILITY OR PUBLIC
AGENCY is approved, the Planning Commission shall arrange for the Department of
Planning Services to record the appropriate Facilities Plan, Utility Line or Selected Route
Map with the County Clerk and Recorder. (Weld County Codification Ordinance 2000-1)
Noted.
Sec. 23-2-250. Operation standards.
An applicant for a Special Review Permit shall demonstrate conformance with the following
operation standards in the Special Review Permit application to the extent that the standards
affect location, layout and design of the Use by Special Review prior to construction and
operation. Once operational, the operation of the USES permitted shall conform to these
standards.
A. The operation of the USES shall comply with the noise standards enumerated in Section
25-12-101, C.R.S.
The Project would be constructed and maintained in accordance with Colorado Revised
Statutes 25-12-101 et seq. (Noise Abatement) and Article IX, Section 14-9-10 et seq. of
the Weld County Code. See Section 21 -3 -330.B.15 —Hydrologic, Atmospheric, Geologic,
Pedologic, Biotic, Visual, and Noise Impacts.
B. The operation of the USES shall comply with the air quality regulations promulgated by
the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission.
Construction of the Project is not expected to contribute to the air quality status in the
area. There would be no long-term air quality effects associated with routine operation
and maintenance of the proposed transmission line. See Section 21 -3 -330.B.12 —Air and
Water Pollution Impacts and Control Alternatives, Air Pollution Impact and Control.
4
•
•
•
• •
•
•
•
Henry Lake
Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4 of the Weld County Code
Substation Expansion and Electric Transmission Line
C. The operation of the USES shall comply with the water quality regulations promulgated
by the Colorado Water Quality Control Commission.
There would be no direct impacts to water quality associated with the regular operation or
maintenance of the transmission line. See Section 21 -3 -330.B.12 —Air and Water
Pollution Impacts and Control Alternatives, Air Pollution Impact and Control.
D. The USES shall comply with the following lighting standards:
1. Sources of light, including light from high -temperature processes such as combustion
or welding, shall be shielded so that light rays will not shine directly onto ADJACENT
properties where such would cause a nuisance or interfere with the USE on the
ADJACENT properties; and
No lighting is required for transmission line structures.
2. Neither direct nor reflected light from any light source may create a traffic hazard to
operators of motor vehicles on PUBLIC or private STREETS and no colored lights
may be used which may be confused with or construed as traffic control devices.
No lighting is required for transmission line structures.
E. The USES shall not emit heat so as to raise the temperature of the air more than five
degrees (5°) Fahrenheit at or beyond the LOT line.
The proposed transmission line would not raise the temperature of the air more than
5 degrees Fahrenheit at or beyond the lot line. See Section 21 -3 -330.6.5.g —Hazards
and Emergency Procedures.
F. Property shall be maintained in such a manner that grasses and weeds are not permitted
to grow taller than twelve (12) inches. In no event shall the property owner allow the
growth of NOXIOUS WEEDS.
Tri-State's Environmental Protection Measures for Construction Projects (Appendix B)
contains a description of revegetation and noxious weed control.
G. Any off -site and on -site improvements agreement shall be made in conformance with the
County policy on collateral for improvements. (Weld County Codification Ordinance
2000-1; Weld County Code Ordinance 2007-1)
Not applicable.
5
Henry Lake
Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4 of the Weld County Code
Substation Expansion and Electric Transmission Line
Sec. 23-2-260. Application requirements.
A. The purpose of the application is to give the petitioner an opportunity to demonstrate
through written and graphic information how the proposal complies with the standards of
this Chapter. The following supporting documents shall be submitted as a part of the
application except for those items determined by the Director of Planning Services, in
writing, or the Board of County Commissioners, on the record, to be unnecessary to a
decision on the application:
1. A statement which explains that the proposal is consistent with Chapter 22 of this
Code and any other applicable code provision or ordinance in effect.
The Weld County Code, Chapter 22, Comprehensive Plan, has been reviewed and
the proposed transmission line is consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive
Plan, including Land Use, Environmental Resources, and Natural Resources. See
Section 21 -3 -330.B.7 —Natural and Socioeconomic Environmental Impacts from
Construction of the Electric Transmission Line.
2. A statement which explains that the proposal is consistent with the intent of the
district in which the USE is located.
The Project area is located within the Agricultural Zone District. Major facilities of
public utilities are uses allowed within the Agricultural Zone District. See Section 21-
3 -330.6.5.a --Present Use and Zoning.
3. A statement which explains that the USES which would be permitted will be
compatible with the existing surrounding land USES.
Land to the north, east, and west of the Project area is part of unincorporated Weld
County and is zoned agricultural and is used as pasture land. Land use south of the
Project area is within the city limits of Brighton and the existing use is industrial and
low density residential (0.5 to 2.5 dwelling units/acre). This Project would be
compatible with the existing surrounding land uses. See Section 21 -3 -330.6.5.m -
Existing Land Uses of All Properties Adjacent to Parcel.
4. A statement which explains that the USES which would be permitted will be
compatible with the future DEVELOPMENT of the surrounding area as permitted by
the existing zone and with future DEVELOPMENT as projected by Chapter 22 of this
Code and any other applicable code provision or ordinances in effect, or the adopted
MASTER PLANS of affected municipalities.
This use is consistent with the future development of the surrounding area as
permitted by the existing zoning and as projected by Chapter 22 of this Code. See
Section 21-3-330.B.5.a—Present Use and Zoning.
6
• •
•
•
•
Henry Lake
Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4 of the Weld County Code
Substation Expansion and Electric Transmission Line
5. A statement which explains that the application complies with Article V of this
Chapter if the proposal is located within any Overlay District Area identified by maps
officially adopted by the COUNTY.
Not applicable. The Project area is not within any Overlay District Area as defined in
Article V.
6. A statement which explains that if the USE is proposed to be located in the A
(Agricultural) Zone District, the applicant has demonstrated a diligent effort has been
made to conserve prime agricultural land in the locational decision for the proposed
USE.
None of the Project Area is within prime agricultural land. See Section 21 -3-
330.B.15 —Hydrologic, Atmospheric, Geologic, Pedologic, Biotic, Visual, and Noise
Impacts.
7. A statement which explains that there is adequate provision for the protection of the
health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the NEIGHBORHOOD and the
COUNTY.
All Tri-State electric facilities are designed, constructed, operated, and maintained to
meet or exceed all applicable standards of design and performance set forth in the
National Electrical Safety Code. Health and safety concerns associated with the
Project, therefore, would be limited largely to electromagnetic fields (EMF) from the
transmission line. For the purposes of this study, EMF was modeled as a function of
predicted magnetic field levels, based on typical and peak loads, from the proposed
transmission line. See Section 21-3-330.B.5.g—Hazards and Emergency
Procedures.
B. The following general information shall be submitted:
1. Name, address and telephone number of the applicants.
See Section 21-3-330.B.1.c—Applicants and Consultants.
2. Name and address of the fee owners of the property proposed for the Use by Special
Review if different from above.
See Section 21-3-330.B5.i—Name and Address of the Fee Owners of the Property.
3. Legal description of the property under consideration.
See Section 21 -3 -330.6.5.j —Legal Description of the Property under Consideration.
7
Henry Lake
Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4 of the Weld County Code
Substation Expansion and Electric Transmission Line
4. Total acreage of the parcel under consideration.
See Section 21-3-330.B.5.k—Total Acreage of the Parcel, Right -of -Way or Corridor
under Consideration.
5. Existing land USE of the parcel under consideration.
See Section 21-3-330.B.5.l—Existing Land Use.
6. Existing land USES of all properties ADJACENT to said parcel.
See Section 21-3-330.B.5.m—Existing Land Uses of All Properties Adjacent to
Parcel.
7. Present zone and overlay zones, if appropriate.
See Section 21-3-330.B.5.n—Present Zone and Overlay Zones.
8. Signatures of the applicant and fee owners or their authorized legal agent.
See Section 21-3-330.B.5.o- Signatures of the Applicant and Fee Owners or Their
Authorized Legal Agent.
9. A certified list of the names, addresses and the corresponding Parcel Identification
Numbers assigned by the County Assessor of the owners of property (the surface
estate) within five hundred (500) feet of the property subject to the application. The
source of such list shall be the records of the County Assessor, or an ownership
update from a title or abstract company or attorney derived from such records, or
from the records of the County Clerk and Recorder. If the list was assembled from
the records of the County Assessor, the applicant shall certify that such list was
assembled within thirty (30) days of the application submission date.
See Section 21-3-330.B.2.a-Surface Property Owners.
10. The written certification required by Section 24-65.5-103.3, C.R.S., if applicable.
Such certification may be submitted on the date of the initial public hearing referred to
in Section 24-65.5-103(1), C.R.S.
To date, no written certification is applicable.
11. The applicant shall provide the Department of Planning Services with a certificate
from the County Treasurer showing no delinquent taxes for the parcel area.
Not applicable.
8
• •
•
•
•
Henry Lake
Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4 of the Weld County Code
Substation Expansion and Electric Transmission Line
12. Proposed LANDSCAPE plans.
A formal landscape plan is not provided, as no landscaping will be done along the
transmission line. A Seed Mix for Disturbed Lands is provided in Appendix E.
13. The applicant shall submit to the Department of Planning Services a copy of an
agreement with the mineral owners associated with the subject property. Such
agreement shall stipulate that the oil and gas activities on the subject property have
been adequately incorporated into the design of the site, OR shall provide written
evidence that an adequate attempt has been made to mitigate the concerns of the
mineral owners on the subject property.
Not applicable. See Section 21-3-330.B.2.d—Mineral Interests.
14. The applicant shall submit signed copy of the notice of inquiry form demonstrating
that the IGA municipality does not wish to annex if required by the IGA.
Not applicable.
15. A proposed plan for installation of desired signs following the standards set forth in
Chapter 23, Article IV, Division 2.
No new signage is planned.
C. A detailed description of the proposed operation and USE shall be supplied. Details for
the following items, when applicable, are required:
1. Type of USE for which the application is being made.
See Section 21-3-330.B.1.a—Name and Acreage of Proposed Use.
2. Proximity of the proposed USE to residential STRUCTURES.
There are two residences within 1,000 feet of the Project Area. See Section 21-3-
330.B.5.m—Existing Land Uses of All Properties Adjacent to Parcel.
3. The number of shifts to be worked and the maximum number of employees.
One 12 -hour shift per day would be worked during construction; the site would be
monitored remotely during operation. The maximum number of construction workers
at any one time would be 20, and the maximum number of employees during
operation would be two. See Section 21 -3 -330.B.7 —Natural and Socioeconomic
Environmental Impacts from Construction of the Electric Transmission Line.
9
• •
Henry Lake
Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4 of the Weld County Code
Substation Expansion and Electric Transmission Line
4. The maximum number of users, patrons, members, buyers or other visitors that the
use by special review facility is designed to accommodate at any one (1) time.
Not applicable.
5. Types and maximum numbers of animals to be concentrated on the site at any one
(1) time.
Not applicable. There would be no animals on the site.
6. Types and numbers of operating and processing equipment to be utilized.
The 4,000 feet of new 230 -kV transmission line would consist of approximately five to
six total structures. The transmission line would have six conductors that would be
1.345 inches in diameter and two overhead fiber optic wires for internal Tri-State
telecommunications only. The structures would be single steel pole and vary in height
based on design and topography. The transmission pole foundations would be
reinforced concrete, estimated to be 5 to 7 feet in diameter with a depth of 30 feet.
Surface disturbance around each foundation should be no more than 25 feet by
25 feet. See the Project Description for additional information.
7. Type, number and USES of the proposed STRUCTURES to be erected.
Five to six transmission line structures would be used to transmit electricity over the
230 -kV transmission line. See the Project Description for additional information.
8. Type, size, weight and frequency of vehicular traffic and access routes that will be
utilized.
See Section 21 -3 -330.B.7 —Natural and Socioeconomic Environmental Impacts from
Construction of the Electric Transmission Line.
9. Domestic sewage facilities.
Not applicable.
10. Size of stockpile, storage or waste areas to be utilized.
Enclosed containment would be provided for all trash. All construction waste,
including trash and litter, garbage, other solid waste, petroleum products, and other
potentially hazardous materials would be removed to a disposal facility authorized to
accept such materials. There would be no significant amounts of hazardous materials
stored in the Project area. See Section 21-3-330.B.5.g—Hazards and Emergency
Procedures.
10
•
•
•
• •
Henry Lake
Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4 of the Weld County Code
Substation Expansion and Electric Transmission Line
11. Method and time schedule of removal or disposal of debris, JUNK and other wastes
associated with the proposed USE.
Enclosed containment would be provided for all trash. All construction waste,
including trash and litter, garbage, other solid waste, petroleum products, and other
potentially hazardous materials would be removed to a disposal facility authorized to
accept such materials. See Section 21-3-330.B.5.g—Hazards and Emergency
Procedures.
12. A time table showing the periods of time required for the construction of the
operation.
See Section 21 -3 -330.8.5.f —Projected Development Schedule.
13. Proposed LANDSCAPE plans.
A formal landscape plan is not provided, because no landscaping would be done
along the transmission line. A Seed Mix for Disturbed Lands is provided in Appendix
E.
14. Reclamation procedures to be employed as stages of the operation are phased out
or upon cessation of the Use by Special Review activity.
Tri-State's Environmental Protection Measures for Construction Projects, included as
Appendix B, addresses site reclamation of disturbed areas.
15. A statement delineating the need for the proposed USE.
As described in the Purpose and Need Section, Tri-State is required to develop a
second source of power (i.e., another transmission line) as redundant service to the
Henry Lake Substation to:
• Increase reliability of service for the Henry Lake Substation.
• Improve load -serving capability from Henry Lake Substation and Bromley
Substation.
• Provide Tri-State transmission capacity to deliver power from Tri-State
resources.
• Create a direct, continuous, and reliable path from Tri-State resources and
minimize reliance on Public Service Company of Colorado for service.
• Improve United Power's reliability of service to the new Sipres substation, which
is proximate to the Vestas wind turbine manufacturing facility and associated
ancillary loads from this facility as well as other industrial development Projects
anticipated in the area.
•
11
• •
Henry Lake
Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4 of the Weld County Code
Substation Expansion and Electric Transmission Line
16. A description of the proposed fire protection measures.
As discussed in Section 21-3-330.B.5.g—Hazards and Emergency Procedures, the
conductors are supported by insulators mounted on grounded poles to prevent
arcing, which could start a fire. Tri-State prohibits storage of flammables, construction
of flammable structures, and other activities that have the potential to cause or
provide fuel for fires on its easements and rights -of -way. There are no explosive
substances associated with the proposed transmission line. Construction may require
the use of implosion sleeves for splicing conductors. All Tri-State electric facilities are
designed, constructed, operated, and maintained to meet or exceed all applicable
standards of design and performance set forth in the National Electrical Safety Code.
The proposed line is designed with overhead ground wires and grounded towers to
protect the system from damage from lightning.
17. Such additional information as may be required by the Department of Planning
Services, the Planning Commission or the Board of County Commissioners in order
to determine that the application meets the requirements of this Chapter and the
policies of Chapter 22 of this Code.
See Section 21 -3 -330.B.17 —Any Other Information Required by Planning
Commission.
D. Special Review Permit Plan Map.
1. The map shall be delineated on reproducible material approved by the Department of
Planning Services.
Noted.
2. The dimensions of the map shall be thirty-six (36) inches wide by twenty-four (24)
inches high.
Noted. See Plot Plan (Figure 1) and Vicinity Map (Figure 2).
3. The Special Review Permit Plan Map shall include certificates for the property
owner's signature, the Planning Commission, the Board of County Commissioners
and the Clerk to the Board. The required content of the certificates is available from
the Department of Planning Services.
Noted. See Plot Plan (Figure 1) and Vicinity Map (Figure 2).
12
•
•
•
• •
•
•
•
Henry Lake
Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4 of the Weld County Code
Substation Expansion and Electric Transmission Line
4. Vicinity Map. A vicinity map shall be drawn on the Use by Special Review Permit
Plan Map.
a. The scale of the vicinity map shall be one (1) inch equals two thousand (2,000)
feet or at another suitable scale if approved by the Department of Planning
Services.
The scale of the Vicinity Map is 1 inch = 1,000 feet. See Vicinity Map (Figure 2).
b. The vicinity map shall delineate all of the required information within a one-half
('/) mile radius of the property proposed for the Use by Special Review.
c. The following information shall be shown on the vicinity map:
1) Section, Township and range.
Noted. See Vicinity Map (Figure 2).
2) Scale and north arrow.
Noted. See Vicinity Map (Figure 2).
3) Outline of the perimeter of the parcel proposed for the Use by Special
Review.
Noted. See Vicinity Map (Figure 2).
4) The general classifications and distribution of soils over the parcel under
consideration. Soil classification names and agricultural capability
classifications must be noted in the legend.
Noted. See Vicinity Map (Figure 2).
5) Locations and names of all roads, irrigation ditches and water features.
Noted. See Vicinity Map (Figure 2).
6) Location of all residences within a one -half -mile radius, existing and
proposed accesses to the property proposed for the Use by Special Review,
any abutting subdivision outlines and names, and the boundaries of any
ADJACENT municipality.
Noted. See Vicinity Map (Figure 2).
7) Any other relevant information within a one -half -mile distance of the
perimeter property proposed for the Use by Special Review as may be
13
Henry Lake
Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4 of the Weld County Code
Substation Expansion and Electric Transmission Line
reasonably required by the COUNTY to meet the intent and purpose of this
Chapter.5. Plot Plan. A plot plan of the Use by Special Review area shall be
drawn on the Special Review Permit Plan Map.
a. The scale of the plot plan shall be one inch (1") equals one hundred feet
(100) or at another suitable scale if approved by the Department of
Planning Services.
Noted. See Plot Plan (Figure 1).
b. The plot plan shall outline the Boundaries of the parcel being considered
for the Use by Special Review.
Noted. See Plot Plan (Figure 1).
c. The plot plan shall include the location and identification of all of the
following items which exist within a two -hundred -foot radius of the
boundaries of the Use by Special Review area, as well as within the area
itself; it shall also include the proposed features and STRUCTURES of
the Use by Special Review:
1) All public rights -of -way of record (including names).
2) All existing and proposed STRUCTURES.
3) All utility easements or rights -of -way for telephone, gas, electric,
water and sewer lines.
4) Irrigation ditches.
5) Adjacent property lines and respective owners' names (may be
shown on vicinity map instead).
6) All hydrographic features including streams, rivers, ponds and
reservoirs (including names).
7) Topography at two -foot contour intervals or at intervals as
determined necessary by the Department of Planning Services.
8) Location of areas of moderate or severe soil limitations as defined by
the Natural Resources Conservation Service or by a soil survey and
study prepared by a soils engineer or scientist for the USES and
associated STRUCTURES proposed for the parcel.
14
Henry Lake
Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4 of the Weld County Code
Substation Expansion and Electric Transmission Line
9) Location and design of stormwater management devices or
STRUCTURES.
10) Complete traffic circulation and parking plan showing locations and
sizes.
11) Location, amount, size and type of any proposed LANDSCAPE
material, including fencing, walls, berms or other SCREENING.
12) Location of any flood hazard, GEOLOGIC HAZARD or mineral
resource areas.
13) The location of any sign requiring zoning approval. Distances from
property lines shall be indicated.
14) Such additional information as may be reasonably required by the
Department of Planning Services, the Planning Commission or the
Board of County Commissioners in order to determine that the
application meets the requirements of this Chapter, the policies of
Chapter 22 of this Code and any other applicable code provision or
ordinance in effect.
All requirements noted. See Plot Plan (Figure 1).
E. Supporting Documents. The following supporting documents shall be submitted as part of
the application:
1. Where an authorized legal agent signs the application for the fee owners, a letter
granting power of attorney to the agent from the owners must be provided.
Not applicable.
2. Proof that a water supply will be available which is adequate in terms of quantity,
quality and dependability (e.g., a well permit or letter from a water district).
Not applicable.
3. Copy of the deed or legal instrument by which the applicant obtained an interest in
the property under consideration.
Easements would be secured before the permit is granted.
15
Henry Lake
Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4 of the Weld County Code
Substation Expansion and Electric Transmission Line
4. A noise report, unless waived by the Department of Planning Services, documenting
the methods to be utilized to meet the applicable noise standard.
Not applicable.
5. A soil report of the site prepared by the Natural Resource Conservation Service or by
a soils engineer or scientist. In those instances when the soil report indicates the
existence of moderate or severe soil limitations for the USES proposed, the applicant
shall detail the methods to be employed to mitigate the limitations.
See Appendix F.
6. If applicable, an Improvements Agreement executed by the applicant. This
agreement shall be in accordance with the County policy and documents for
collateral for improvements.
Not applicable.
7. For a RESIDENTIAL THERAPEUTIC CENTER, submittal of a report demonstrating
the need for the facility; data about the background, experience and financial
capacity of the proposed operator; applicable licenses; and analysis of the impact of
the facility to the area and any other information relevant to evaluating the
compatibility of the proposed facility. The County may waive or modify these
requirements, particularly if there is a risk of harm to the future occupants (e.g., case
of a domestic violence shelter).
Not applicable.
16
•
•
•
November 2005
DOE/EA-1508
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Western Area Power Administration
Finding of No Significant Impact and Floodplain Statement of Findings
Beaver Creek -Hoyt -Erie 115 -kV Transmission Line Upgrade
Morgan and Weld Counties, Colorado
Summary - The Western Area Power Administration (Western) proposes to upgrade
approximately 78 miles of 115 -kV transmission line between the Beaver Creek Substation, east
of Brush, Colorado; the Hoyt Substation, west of Hoyt, Colorado; and the Erie Substation, near
Brighton, Colorado. The line is proposed to be rebuilt as a double -circuit 230 -kV transmission
line. Of the 78 miles, approximately 70 are located on private lands and 2 miles are located on
City of Brush and State of Colorado property. Western prepared an Environmental Assessment
(EA) for the proposal. A number of environmental protection measures are included with the
proposed action and alternatives to minimize potential adverse environmental effects.
Two routing alternatives are evaluated in the EA for portions of the Beaver Creek to Hoyt
transmission line: 1) the Beaver Creek -Brush Prairie Ponds State Wildlife Area (SWA) Reroute;
and 2) the Bijou Creek Crossing Reroute. In addition, the EA addresses the relocation of a
portion of the Beaver Creek to Big Sandy transmission line. All three routing alternatives are
located in Morgan County and pertain to portions of the Beaver Creek -Hoyt transmission line.
These alternatives were developed by Western in response to landowner comments and
suggestions on how to minimize impacts to land use and agricultural operations, as well as
natural resources.
The proposed action was to rebuild the transmission line on the existing right-of-way (ROW) and
to acquire additional ROW to accommodate the upgraded line. As a result of comments received
during the scoping process and in subsequent conversations with landowners and agencies,
Western identified alternative routes for two sections of the transmission line. Two routing
alternatives are examined in the EA. One reroute would place the line on approximately 7 miles
of new ROW. This alternative places the new line in an established utility corridor, reduces
impacts to irrigated agriculture and other land uses, improves visual impacts, avoids wetlands,
reduces the likelihood of impacts to waterfowl, avoids impacts to most recreational uses on the
Brush Prairie Ponds SWA, and improves Western's capability to maintain the line. The second
reroute (Bijou Creek Crossing alternative) was developed in cooperation with landowners who
wanted to improve their ability to use center pivot irrigation and to provide for expansion of their
use of their property. This reroute also reduces the number of turning structures in the line.
Western adopts the alternative routes as part of the proposed constructed project.
The availability of the pre -approval draft of the EA entitled "Beaver Creek -Hoyt -Erie
Transmission Line Rebuild Project Environmental Assessment (DOE/EA-1508)" was distributed
1
to Federal, State and local agencies, interested Native American Tribes (Tribes), and landowners
on September 30, 2005. The end of the review period was November 6, 2005.
One comment was received on the pre -approval draft EA from a landowner adjacent to the
existing easement. The commenter is the Executive Director of a not -for-profit sanctuary for
exotic and native wildlife species which have been abandoned, abused, injured or confiscated by
State or Federal wildlife agencies. The sanctuary contains large areas where the animals are
allowed to roam. Some of these areas are located adjacent to the existing transmission line
easement. The Executive Director expressed concerns that project construction activities would
upset certain species of large cats. Western is working with the Executive Director to reduce
disturbance to these animals.
Other comments received during the public review of the pre -approval draft EA were inquiries
on project schedule, and land acquisition policies and practices not related to the content or
adequacy of the EA.
Based on the information in the EA, Western has determined that the proposed transmission line
rebuild project along the existing route and alternative routes would not result in significant
environmental impacts, and the preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS) will not
be required. Mitigation measures adopted as part of the proposed project are contained in a
Mitigation Action Plan and will be implemented by Western. The basis for this determination is
described in this Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
Contacts for Further Information:
Jim Hartman
Environmental Manager
Rocky Mountain Customer Service Region
Western Area Power Administration
P.O. Box 3700
Loveland, CO 80539
(970) 461-7450
Fax: (970) 461-7213
Email: Beavercreek(uiwapa.gov
Additional information and copies of the FONSI are available to all interested persons and the
public from the person named above.
For general information on DOE National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) activities contact:
Carol M. Borgstrom
Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance, EH -42
U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Avenue, SW.
Washington, DC 20585
(202) 586-4600 or (800) 472-2756
2
•
•
•
Purpose and Need - The Beaver Creek -Hoyt -Erie 115 -kV transmission line, constructed in
1952, is an original facility in the Colorado -Big Thompson Project. Although the line has
operated reliably, its limited capacity impacts the rating of the constrained transmission path
between southeastern Wyoming and northeastern Colorado (referred to as TOT3), of which it is
a component. Due to its limited capacity, the existing transmission line reduces the capability of
the path to carry its full designed load. Increasing the carrying capacity of the Beaver Creek -
Hoyt -Erie transmission line will avoid further reduction of the path constraints. If no action is
taken on the existing line, the circuit will overload to 130 percent of the line's present thermal
capacity within 5 years. After another 5 years, the line will exceed the rated capacity by
145 percent. If the line is rebuilt as a single circuit 115 -kV line, with larger conductor (795
kcmil ACSR), it is forecast to overload within 15 years, shorter than the expected life of the
proposed 230 -kV line.
Without the proposed project, the TOT3 transfer path would have to be reduced by up to 400
MW in order to avoid future projected overloads. Western's reduction would be 25 percent
(100 MW). This scenario is not acceptable to Western as it would restrict the ability of Western
to move Wyoming hydroelectric power to Colorado Federal firm electric service loads.
The proposed transmission line rebuild will utilize larger conductors (1272 kcmil ACSR), thus
yielding greater capacity. The greater capacity of the 230 -kV transmission line will help alleviate
overloading problems already experienced on the line. The existing 115 -kV transmission lines
are also approaching the predicted useful life of the wood H -frame structures. Anticipated
maintenance costs required to continue operating the existing transmission line will be deferred
when the transmission line is rebuilt.
In summary, the proposed action will accomplish the following objectives:
• Increase the operating capacity of the Beaver Creek -Hoyt -Erie transmission line.
• Ensure that the electric system in the area will continue to operate within acceptable
reliability criteria while accommodating future load growth.
• Allow Western to continue to serve its network customers in a reliable manner.
• Ensure that customers with existing 115 -kV interconnections are served.
• Provide line -switching capability at the Morgan County Rural Electric Association's
(MCREA) Adena Substation.
• Ensure that updated communication and control facilities are provided to reliably operate and
control the transmission line.
• Ensure that the line can be operated at its full capacity without impacting other
interconnected transmission lines in the southeastern Wyoming and northeastern Colorado.
3
o Increase Western's ability to serve Colorado Federal firm electric service loads with
Wyoming hydroelectric power.
Project Description - The existing Beaver Creek -Hoyt transmission line is 32 miles long and
crosses through Morgan County, Colorado. The Hoyt -Erie transmission line is 46 miles long and
crosses portions of Morgan and Weld Counties, Colorado. Western proposes to upgrade the
existing transmission lines by removing the existing 115 -kV H -frame structures, conductors, and
hardware, and installing a double circuit 230 -kV transmission line on single -pole steel structures.
New H -frame structures would also be installed at specific locations including, among others,
four locations where the proposed 230 -kV transmission line would pass under existing
transmission lines owned by other utilities. Long term, the proposed action would result in a
reduction in the number of structures compared to the existing 115 -kV transmission line that
would be removed. Western would widen the existing ROW as necessary to allow adequate
electrical clearances. The proposed action entails the following:
Beaver Creek -Hoyt -Erie Transmission Line Rebuild (78.3 miles)
Approximately 78 miles of the existing Beaver Creek -Hoyt -Erie 115 -kV transmission line would
be dismantled. This would include the removal of 595 existing transmission structures,
conductors and hardware.
o Approximately 400 double circuit 230 -kV single pole steel structures would be installed from
the Beaver Creek Substation to the Erie Substation. The new double -circuit single -pole steel
structures would support the 230 -kV circuits. One circuit would be operated at 115 kV for
the foreseeable future in order to retain interconnection with MCREA's Adena Substation;
Tri-State Generation and Transmission Associations, Inc's, Sand Creek Tap and Prospect
Valley Substation; United Power, Inc's, Brighton Substation; and Western's Hoyt Substation.
o Approximately 18 new 230 -kV steel H -frame structures would be installed at four
transmission line crossings and 10 H -frame structures would be installed near the Beaver
Creek Substation (8 structures) and Hoyt Substation (2 structures).
o The existing Beaver Creek -Hoyt -Erie ROW would be widened as necessary to meet National
Electrical Safety Code standards and provide increased flexibility for maintenance activities
for the proposed 230 -kV transmission line. The existing ROW is typically 75 feet wide, and
would be increased to widths ranging from 85 feet to 125 feet. ROW expansion
requirements would vary depending on the width of the existing ROW, structure designs, and
whether the existing ROW overlaps with adjacent transmission line ROWs. The ROW
would be expanded to 125 feet in width at the four crossings where multiple H -frame
structures would route the line under existing transmission lines.
o No major new access roads would be constructed. Existing public and private roads would
be used to access the ROW. Within the ROW, Western would access the construction sites
and structure sites via existing roads or minor new roads, and with the use of overland
construction vehicles. Some grading within the ROW may be required to reach new
structure sites, stringing sites, or other construction areas.
4
•
•
•
o Two sections of the existing Beaver Creek to Hoyt transmission line would be rerouted as
described in the EA.
o One section of the existing Beaver Creek to Big Sandy transmission line would be rerouted
as described in the EA to place it adjacent to the rerouted section of the Beaver Creek -Hoyt
transmission line. Transmission line structures identified for this segment will not include
single -pole steel structures as described in the EA, but will include smaller H -frame
structures similar to the structures currently in use. Impacts identified and described in the
EA for the original proposal to place the rerouted section of the Beaver Creek to Big Sandy
line on single -pole steel structures would be similar or reduced by the use of the smaller
H -frame structures.
Beaver Creek Substation, Erie Substation, and Hoyt Substation Expansions and Adena
Substation Modifications
To accommodate the operation of the proposed double -circuit 230 -kV transmission IS, the
Beaver Creek and Erie Substations would be expanded to accommodate new electrical
equipment such as transformers and breakers. Line sectionalizing switches would be installed at
the existing Adena Substation.
o The Beaver Creek Substation would be expanded to the east of the existing substation. The
existing 5.3 acres would be enlarged to approximately 9 to 10 acres. A potential disturbance
area of 31.2 acres is evaluated in this EA.
o The Erie Substation would be expanded from its existing 1.5 acre substation size to
approximately 5 acres. The substation expansion would occur to the east and/or north of the
existing facility. This EA evaluates a potential disturbance area of approximately 9.5 acres.
The timeframe for expansion or additions in the vicinity of the Hoyt Substation have not been
determined. The existing Hoyt Substation is located in a floodplain. Any future 230 -kV
additions are likely to be constructed outside the floodplain. Modifications to the Hoyt
Substation are not addressed in this EA due to these uncertainties and would be subject to NEPA
compliance in the future.
The Public Process - Public and regulatory agency involvement is important for analyzing the
proposed transmission line upgrade and ensuring that relevant environmental impacts are
evaluated. During the early stages of the project planning, Western notified stakeholders of the
project and solicited information on their concerns in a scoping letter dated October 22, 2004.
Stakeholders contacted included local and State government agencies, landowners along the
existing ROW, and Tribes with historical ties to the area. Western met with the Colorado
Division of Wildlife (CDOW), the City of Brush Administration and Utilities, and the Morgan
County Water Quality District to discuss specific issues. One project update letter was sent to
local government officials in June 2005.
5
Nearly every landowner was personally contacted about the project. Landowners who requested
meetings with Western were accommodated. Western also met with landowners along the
alternative reroutes.
Additional consultation with Tribes occurred through written correspondence. The
correspondence with Tribes helps Western meet the requirements for consultation under agency
policy and as required by Executive Orders and Regulations. Much of the correspondence dealt
with survey results and recommendations for management of historical properties that are
eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).
The availability of the pre -approval draft of the EA entitled "Beaver Creek -Hoyt -Erie
Transmission Line Rebuild Project Environmental Assessment (DOE/EA-1508)" was distributed
to Federal, Sate, and local agencies; interested Tribes, and landowners on September 30, 2005.
The end of the review period was November 6, 2005.
Alternatives - Western considered several replacement options for the Beaver Creek -Hoyt -Erie
transmission line. Alternatives considered and eliminated from further study would not meet
Western's purpose and need for the project, or reduce potential adverse impacts. The 230 -kV
voltage was identified as the best solution based on electrical systems studies. Without the
proposed rebuild and upgrade project, the TOT3 transfer path between southeastern Wyoming
and northeastern Colorado would have to be reduced by up to 400 MW in order to avoid future
overloads. The greater capacity of the 230 -kV transmission line (with larger conductors -1272
ACSR) will help alleviate overloading problems that would result from the continued operation
of 115 -kV transmission line.
Alternatives considered and eliminated from further study included reconductoring the existing
115 -kV line, constructing a new 115 -kV line on wood H -frame or light duty steel H -frame
structures, and constructing a new 115/230 -kV line on lattice steel structures. The 115 kV only
alternatives would not prevent a decrease in the TOT3 total transfer capacity. The lattice steel
structure alternative was eliminated because the larger structure footprint would likely increase
impacts to both natural resources and agricultural lands as compared to single pole steel
structures. Visual impacts would also be greater with the lattice structures.
Environmental Impacts - Summary of Findings - The EA evaluates the short-term and
long-term impacts that may result from the construction and operation of the proposed action and
alternatives. Impacts are assessed on a resource by resource basis, and include the project area
that may be affected either directly or indirectly by the proposed project. All impacts have been
determined to be less than significant with implementation of Western's standard practices and
project -specific mitigation measures. The results of the resource evaluations are compared in
Table S-1 of the EA for the proposed action and alternatives. The following is a summary of the
findings for the proposed action and routing alternatives:
Air Quality - Construction along the existing alignment and routing alternatives would have
localized, short-term direct effects on air quality. Impacts would primarily be temporary and
periodic emissions from construction and maintenance vehicles, and fugitive dust generated by
construction activity. The project would have no effect on climate. The project and alternatives
6
• •
•
•
•
would not cause, nor contribute to a violation of Federal or State standards. The project and
routing alternatives would be in compliance with National Ambient Air Quality Standards and
the Colorado State Implementation Plan. There are no Federal or State permitting requirements
for this source type. There are no notable differences in air quality impacts between the
proposed action and routing alternatives. The no -action alternative would also continue to have
periodic and temporary impacts on air quality, as maintenance of the existing lines would
increase over time.
Geology and Soils - There are no known geologic hazards (i.e., areas prone to earthquake,
landslide, rockfall, or subsidence) within the project area. No active faults, inferred active faults,
or geologic hazards are documented in the project area. The project area contains a number of
facilities related to oil and gas production and coal resources. The project would not impact
these resources, however, as it would be located along existing and expanded transmission line
ROWs and at substation expansion sites.
Construction along the existing alignment and routing alternatives would mainly result in
short-term soil disturbances at localized areas within Western's ROW. Short-term impacts on
soils would result where project construction activities cause the loss of vegetation cover at
structure sites, stringing sites, and where Western's existing access roads are improved or short
spur roads to new structure sites require grading. Installation of the new steel structures would
require excavations for holes up to 30 feet deep, depending on soil and geologic conditions. Soil
disturbances would also occur at the substation expansion sites. Disturbed soils would be spread
around the proposed facilities in a manner to facilitate revegetation. Short-term disturbances for
construction are estimated to include 198.7 acres for the proposed transmission line rebuild and
less than the 40.7 acres at substation sites. Long-term soil losses are estimated to be less than
2 acres for all transmission structure sites, and approximately 15 acres for the Beaver Creek and
Erie Substation expansions.
Impacts to soils would be considered significant if the project or alternatives caused a major
acceleration of soil erosion which resulted in, or contributed to, violations of water quality or
impacts to existing water uses. Within the project area, increased soil erosion has the greatest
potential to occur in areas susceptible to wind erosion. Western would implement both standard
practices and project specific measures to ensure that disturbed areas are stabilized (e.g., seeding,
mulching, or other techniques) and indirect effects from soil erosion are minimized. Areas
susceptible to wind erosion would be monitored to ensure successful stabilization of soils is
achieved.
Impacts to soils from the alternatives would be similar to those along the existing alignment
overall; however, the Brush Prairie Ponds SWA Reroute and Big Sandy Reroute Alternatives
would cross slightly more areas susceptible to wind erosion.
Paleontology - The existing alignment and alternatives would cross geologic formations with
known paleontological resource potential, including the Pierre Shale and Denver Formation. No
resources have been documented along the existing alignment and alternatives. The likelihood
of encountering resources during construction is considered low given topsoil and agricultural
land use conditions. Western would avoid and minimize potential impacts to paleontological
7
resources during construction through data recovery procedures if fossil remains are uncovered
during construction.
Surface Water Resources - The project area is within the South Platte River watershed and would
have short-term impacts on water resources. The existing alignment crosses 22 stream channels
and 26 irrigation ditches or canals. Surface water within the project area generally meets water
quality standards for designated uses except for one stream (Beaver Creek), which exceeds state
water quality standards for selenium. Surface water use is primarily for aquatic life and
agriculture. The proposed project would have no direct impacts on surface waters and water
quality since all surface waters would be spanned, and no surface water use is proposed.
Standard construction measures, including erosion control measures, would also he implemented
to reduce the potential for sedimentation and water quality impacts. National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System Permits would be obtained as necessary.
Groundwater - Impacts to groundwater could occur during construction of foundations for
structures near the Brush Prairie Ponds Recharge Area. Seasonally saturated soils typically
require installation of deeper foundations than soils that are not saturated. The existing
alignment and alternatives cross the Beaver Creek Basin south of the City of Brush (Brush). The
Brush municipal well fields are located south of Brush Prairie Ponds Recharge Area and south of
the existing transmission line. The Beaver Creek alluvium supplies water to the Brush well
fields, as well as the Fort Morgan Reservoir and Irrigation Company. The Brush Prairie Ponds
SWA alternative route is the closest to Brush's water wells. Impacts to the groundwater could
occur and would be potentially significant if construction of the project impacted the protective
clay layer that lies approximately 40 to 60 feet below the surface. Direct impacts to the
protective clay layer are considered unlikely since the proposed structures would require
foundations from 10 to 30 feet deep. In order to ensure that impacts to groundwater resources
does not occur, Western would conduct geological investigations at each proposed structure site
within the Brush well field and/or Brush Prairie Ponds Recharge Area (structures within Sections
22 and 21 T3N, R56W and/or Sections 27 and 28, T3N, R56W). Borings would extend 5 feet
beyond the depth of the structure foundations to determine if the clay layer would be
encountered during project construction. Alternative structure designs would be used that would
allow for shallower foundations in the unlikely event that the standard foundations would reach
the clay layer. In the event that water is encountered during construction of foundations,
Western would obtain a Permit for Construction Dewatering Wastewater Discharge.
Floodplains - The existing alignment crosses floodplains at 12 locations on the Beaver Creek -
Hoyt -Erie transmission line ROW. Seven of the 12 floodplains would be spanned, thus, there
would be no direct impact to these floodplains. The remaining floodplain crossings are too wide
to be spanned. Since the spacing of the proposed structures would be greater than the spacing of
the existing structures, actual numbers of structures located within floodplains would be reduced
over the existing conditions. One structure would be required to span the Antelope Creek
floodplain and two structures could be required in the Muddy Creek floodplain. The largest
floodplains include Badger Creek, Beaver Creek, and the South Platte River, with an estimated
five structures, four structures, and three structures to be installed respectively within each of
these floodplains. Long-term disturbance would be limited to the footprint of the structures
(approximately 50 square feet per structure). Western would cross floodplains in compliance
8
• •
•
•
•
with Permit 12 (utilities) of the Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit. Western would
not propose to fill or dredge in floodplains. Western would follow Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) approved floodplain construction requirements. Western would
also require the construction contractor to implement spill control and response procedures to
control and clean up accidental spills of fuels and oils.
The impacts of the alternatives would be the same or similar to construction along the existing
alignment. The Brush Prairie Ponds SWA Reroute and Beaver Creek -Big Sandy Alternatives
cross four floodplains compared to five floodplains for the existing alignment. The Brush Prairie
Ponds SWA Reroute alternative would be located in the section to the north of the section
containing the Brush municipal well field, but it would be closer than the existing line.
Consequently, the reroute would have a greater potential conflict with the Brush municipal wells
than the existing alignment. However, since Western would implement project mitigation
measures to avoid construction of structure foundations that would impact the protective clay
layer that lies over the well field aquifer, long-term impacts would be similar to those associated
with constructing along the existing alignment.
The alternative routes would have similar potential impacts to floodplains as the existing
alignment. The Brush Prairie Ponds SWA Reroute and Beaver Creek -Big Sandy Reroute would
cross the Beaver Creek floodplain to the south of the existing transmission line and would
require three structures to cross the floodplain compared to five structures for the present
alignment. The Bijou Creek Crossing Reroute would require one intermediate structure to cross
the floodplain, compared to no structures for the existing alignment.
In summary, all impacts are expected to be of short duration and less than significant for
constructing along the existing alignment and the alternatives. There are no long-term impacts
expected to surface water, floodplains, or groundwater from the existing or the alternative routes.
Vegetation and Wetlands - The proposed transmission line would result in the short-term
disturbance of approximately 198.7 acres. The majority of disturbances (138.3 acres) would
occur in agricultural land. Predominant vegetation types affected include agricultural lands,
native prairie, and non-native grassland. The vast majority of area affected during construction
would be reclaimed following construction. Less than 3 acres would be disturbed long-term
within the ROWs. Impacts to vegetation and wetlands would be considered significant if the
project resulted in the loss or substantial impact to a designated conservation area, the
establishment of noxious weeds that reduce agricultural productivity, or wetland fill impacts of
0.5 acre or greater. The project area contains no designated conservation areas. Western would
use standard construction practices and project measures to ensure the introduction and/or spread
of invasive species or weeds are minimized to less than significant levels.
The current ROW would intersect or cross approximately 33 wetlands. Most are associated with
stream channels, ephemeral drainages, or irrigation ditches. Potential direct impacts to wetlands
would be avoided through structure placement that would allow spanning of all wetlands.
Indirect impacts could result if increases in erosion and sedimentation affected wetlands across
the Brush Prairie Ponds SWA where the existing ROW crosses nearly a mile of intermittent
wetlands and aquatic habitat. These types of indirect impacts would be minimized through
9
implementation of Western's standard practices that provide for erosion control and avoidance of
wetlands during construction and maintenance operations. Some direct impacts to
riparian/cottonwood woodlands would occur, however. Cottonwoods and other trees that could
impact the safe operation of the transmission line would be removed. Less than 0.1 acre riparian
woodlands would be affected. There would be no significant impacts to wetlands, riparian
vegetation or other potentially sensitive habitats from the expansion of the Beaver Creek and
Erie Substations. Construction of the substations would impact agricultural, native prairie, and
previously disturbed and weedy vegetation. Long-term impacts to vegetation at the substation
sites would include up to 10 acres at the Beaver Creek Substation and 5 acres at the Erie
Substation.
The routing alternatives would have similar potential for adverse impacts to vegetation as would
constructing along the present alignment. The Brush Prairie Ponds SWA Reroute would result in
fewer impacts than the existing alignment since the alternative would avoid the long-term
presence of the project near wetlands and aquatic habitat in the SWA by routing south of the
wetlands arca. The Bijou Creek Crossing would potentially have slightly greater impacts than
the existing alignment on riparian woodland habitat in the Bijou Creek floodplain.
Wildlife - The project area supports habitat for a number of wildlife species, including big game
(mule deer, white-tailed deer, and pronghorn), smaller mammals (including black -tailed prairie
dogs), waterbirds (waterfowl, shorebirds, and waders), raptors, and other birds (songbirds).
Impacts to wildlife would be significant if the project resulted in a long-term decrease in
economically or ecologically important wildlife populations or a population trend warranting
listing as Federally threatened or endangered. The construction of the project would have the
potential to result in the direct mortality of small, less mobile mammals within the corridor,
disturb active raptor nests, or disturb black -tailed prairie dog towns. The long-term direct loss of
habitat would be slightly adverse, however, given the small amount of long-term habitat loss
(less than 2 acres for the transmission line and approximately 15 acres at the substation sites).
Impacts to wildlife would be minimized with Western's standard practices and project mitigation
measures. Western's high -voltage transmission lines are designed to comply with the
recommendations of the Avian Powerline Interaction Committee and U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) for minimizing electrocution hazards to raptors. Risks of collision would be
slightly increased over the existing conditions because of the increased number of lines that
would be present with the 230 -kV transmission line compared to the existing 115 -kV
transmission line. The highest potential for waterbird collisions is where the existing
transmission line is in proximity to the Brush Prairie Ponds SWA ponds. To avoid or minimize
impacts to raptors, Western would conduct raptor nest inventories prior to construction, and
would implement appropriate mitigation to prevent the project from disrupting active nests.
Impacts to migratory bird nests would also be minimized by avoiding ground -clearing activities
in the Brush Prairie Ponds SWA during the nesting season, or conducting surveys for nests prior
to construction so that they may be avoided. The potential impacts to black -tailed prairie dogs,
nesting raptors, and waterbirds would not occur with the substation modifications since suitable
habitat does not exist in the proposed expansion areas.
10
• •
•
•
•
The impacts of the alternative routes would be similar to, or less than, those of constructing
entirely along the existing alignment. The Brush Prairie Ponds SWA Reroute would minimize
long-term risks associated with waterbird collisions with the powerlines since the reroute would
be out of the direct flight path of the birds coming into and leaving the SWA or flying between
ponds. Potential impacts to the existing black -tailed prairie dog town would be eliminated with
the Bijou Creek Crossing alternative. The new ROW for the Bijou Creek Crossing alternative
would be close to a red-tailed hawk nest and would cross a wider expanse of riparian/cottonwood
woodland habitat.
Special Status and Sensitive Species - Special status and sensitive species include those species
and critical habitats listed, or candidates for listing, under the Endangered Species Act of 1973
(ESA). Other species considered include state -listed species and species of concern listed with
the Colorado Heritage Program. The following Federally threatened, endangered, proposed, and
candidate species (TEP&C) and/or their critical habitats are known to occur within the project
area: Black -footed ferret (endangered), Preble's meadow jumping mouse (threatened, recently
recommended for de -listing), Least tern (endangered), Piping plover (threatened), Whooping
crane (endangered), Bald eagle (threatened), Plains sharp -tailed grouse (state endangered),
Mexican spotted owl (threatened), Burrowing owl (state threatened), Pallid sturgeon
(endangered), Colorado butterfly plant (threatened), and Ute ladies tresses (threatened). Western
would avoid habitats for these species either through facility placement or construction timing
restrictions.
Impacts to special status species would be considered significant if the project resulted in a
"jeopardy" biological opinion under Section 7 of the ESA, or if a population reduction is caused
by the project, resulting in its listing under the ESA. Western would implement both standard
measures and project measures to ensure impacts are less than significant. Black -footed ferrets
are believed to be extirpated in eastern Colorado. Field reconnaissance of the project area
identified two prairie dog towns as possibly meeting the criteria for potential habitat for black -
footed ferret. Western has consulted with the USFWS, and USFWS has determined that limiting
conditions are applicable to the project area that would make it unlikely to support black footed
ferrets. Consequently, no surveys are required for this species for ESA compliance. Burrowing
owls may inhabit prairie dog towns. USFWS and CDOW recommended surveys for the owls if
construction cannot be avoided between March 1 and October 31.
Western would minimize the potential to impact other TEP&C species through preconstruction
surveys and avoidance measures that include limiting construction activities during breeding
periods and avoiding construction activities within 0.5 mile of active raptor nests. Avoidance
and mitigation measures for TEP&C species are incorporated in Western's standard construction
and project specific mitigation measures. With implementation of these measures, the proposed
and alternative would not affect listed species.
Cultural Resources - Class I and Class III cultural resource surveys were conducted for the
existing alignment and alternatives. Significant cultural resources are defined as those listed on,
or eligible for listing on, the NRHP. Impacts to cultural resources would be significant if the
project impacted cultural resources considered eligible for, or listed on, the NRHP. Twenty
eligible or recommended as eligible sites were recorded on the Beaver Creek -Hoyt -Erie
11
• •
transmission line ROW; nineteen historic sites and one pre -historic site. Western's standard
construction and mitigation practices and project specific mitigation for cultural resources would
be implemented to minimize the impacts on cultural resources. These measures include avoiding
direct impacts to sites where feasible through careful structure placement and avoidance of sites
during construction. None of the historic properties along the Beaver Creek -Hoyt -Erie
transmission line currently have existing transmission structures within the site boundaries. No
known archaeological sites or historic properties exist within the expansion areas of the
substations, the Brush Prairie Ponds SWA Reroute, or Beaver Creek -Big Sandy Reroute. The
Bijou Creek Crossing Reroute is similar to the existing Bijou Creek Crossing. Since the span
length between structures would be increased with the proposed upgrade project compared to the
existing transmission line, avoidance of direct impacts to cultural resources is considered
feasible. Consequently, impacts to cultural resources are not anticipated. If avoidance of all
eligible sites is not feasible, a mitigation plan would be implemented prior to construction.
Land Use - The project crosses portions of Morgan and Weld Counties that are primarily in
agriculture related land uses. The transmission line also crosses the Brush Prairie Ponds SWA,
managed by the CDOW. Several communities and a number of dispersed rural residences are
located within 2 miles of the proposed project including Brush, in Morgan County, and the
communities of Lochbuie, Wattenberg, and Brighton in Weld County. Several utility corridors
occur in the project area. These corridors contain pipelines, transmission lines and
communication facilities. Western's existing transmission lines and ROWs have been
established land uses since the 1950's.
Impacts to land use would be significant if the proposed action or alternatives were inconsistent
with the adopted land use plans and regulations of local, State and Federal agencies, or resulted
in long-term impacts to the region's prime farmland productivity or the economic viability of
area farms and businesses. The proposed project would not conflict with the Weld County and
Morgan County land use plans. Prime farmland exists along both segments of the existing
transmission line, and is crossed by the Beaver Creek -Hoyt segment for 7 miles and the Hoyt to
Erie segment for 35.5 miles. Impacts to prime farmlands would primarily be short-term during
construction, and less than the existing 115 -kV transmission line long-term, once the project is in
operation. Long-term impacts to area businesses or farms would be similar to the existing
115 -kV transmission line that would be removed. The Brush Prairie Ponds SWA, which
provides hunting and wildlife viewing opportunities, is crossed diagonally by the existing
transmission line but would be crossed south of the wet areas by the alternative route.
Construction along the existing alignment and routing alternatives would result in short-term
disruptions to agricultural lands and practices during construction. Long-term effects to
agricultural land and operations would be less than the existing conditions since the project (and
routing alternatives) would result in fewer structures being required in cultivated farmland and
the proposed single pole structures would result in less land permanently taken out of production.
Overall, the proposed project would result in fewer structures being located on private properties
than the no action alternative, due to the greater span length of the single -pole steel 230 -kV
structures compared to the existing H -frame structures. The proposed project would have
short-term adverse impacts on farm operations (crop loss, soil compaction interference with
equipment, access roads, and irrigation systems) that would be mitigated to the extent feasible
12
•
•
•
• •
•
•
•
with Western's standard construction practices and landowner notification procedures.
Long-term impacts to agricultural land would include land permanently lost from production and
potential interference with ground equipment and aerial spraying operations. These impacts
would be less than significant since impacts would be localized and similar to the constraints
posed by the existing transmission line.
The upgrade project would result in similar impacts to the Brush Prairie Ponds SWA as the
existing 115 -kV transmission line. Short-term impacts to hunting activities during construction
would be avoided since Western would not conduct ground disturbing activities in the SWA
during the hunting season. Long-term effects to the SWA would be very similar to the existing
conditions. Construction -related impacts to local residents and communities would be short term
and adverse, and result from the intermittent presence of construction crews and vehicles and
related noise; dust and traffic that would be evident as crews work along the ROW dismantling
the existing transmission line and installing the new 230 -kV transmission line. Long term, the
upgraded transmission line would result in less frequent maintenance activities being necessary
during the life of the project.
The routing alternatives would result in reduced long-term impacts to land use compared to
constructing entirely along the present alignment. The Brush Prairie Ponds SWA Reroute would
reduce existing impacts to the SWA by moving the transmission line south of the waterfowl
concentration areas and hunting areas and avoiding some pivot irrigation systems. Similarly, the
Beaver Creek -Big Sandy and Bijou Creek Crossing alternatives would reduce on -going impacts
to several landowner's irrigation systems and agricultural fields. Short-term impacts for all
alternatives would be similar to those described for construction along the existing alignment.
Short-term and long-term impacts from construction activities at the Beaver Creek or Erie
Substation expansion sites would be similar to the impacts described above. No significant
adverse long-term impacts to existing land uses are expected from ROW changes since existing
land uses would not be prohibited or removed. There are no known conflicts with any planned
developments in Weld or Morgan Counties.
Visual Resources - The proposed project would be visible from the Brush Prairie Ponds SWA;
from major travel routes in Morgan and Weld Counties, Colorado, including I-76, U.S. Highway
85 and State Route 71; from residential areas including homes near the communities of Brush,
Wattenberg, Lochbuie, and Brighton; and from dispersed rural residences and recently
developing subdivisions in Morgan and Weld Counties. Visual impacts would be significant if
the project or alternatives caused long-term visual changes that diminished the value or use of
established parks or recreation areas of national and regional importance or designated scenic
areas with recognized regionally important viewsheds. These types of regionally important
visual resources do not exist in the project area.
Visual impacts would primarily be the direct, long-term effects that would result from the
installation of the taller 230 -kV single -pole steel structures and increased number and diameter
of conductors, as well as the removal of the existing 115 -kV transmission line. The new single -
pole structures would be approximately twice as tall as the existing H -frame structures (average
100 feet versus 55 feet); however, fewer structures would be required for the 230 -kV
13
• •
transmission line since span lengths would be increased from 700 feet to approximately 1,000
feet. Consequently, depending on individual viewing conditions, long-term visual impacts could
range from adverse to beneficial. Adverse to slightly adverse visual impacts would result to rural
residences, the Brush Prairie Ponds SWA, and at several highway crossings (I-76, U.S. Highway
85 and State Route 71), where the new structures and conductors would be visible within
foreground (within 0.5 mile) distances. The perceived visual changes would range from weak to
moderate depending on the landscape character and specific viewing conditions and distances.
Beyond 0.5 mile, the changes in visual character between the existing transmission line and
proposed transmission line rebuild would appear incremental. Construction -related impacts to
landscape aesthetics would be short-term and intermittent. Western would implement both
standard practices and project measures to ensure that ground disturbances are mitigated and
restored to pre-existing conditions following construction, and that long-term visual contrasts of
the new structures are minimized to the extent feasible.
Compared to constructing entirely along the existing alignment, the Brush Prairie Ponds SWA
Reroute and Beaver Creek -Big Sandy Reroute alternatives would result in similar or slightly
reduced visual impacts near Brush, from State Route 71, and from the Brush Prairie Ponds SWA.
These alternatives would have reduced visual impacts to area residents and highway travelers
since the alternatives would result in the consolidation of utilities to the east and south of the
Beaver Creek Substation, further away from most residents' views. These alternatives would
also have beneficial visual effects where the removal of the 115 -kV transmission line near
Beaver Creek improves views from homes and roads. Visual impacts to the SWA would
similarly be reduced since the 115 -kV structures, hardware, and conductor would be removed
from the center of the wildlife area and ponds that are used most intensely for hunting and
fishing, and instead routed further away from these recreational areas to the south. No
substantial differences in visual impacts would result from the Bijou Creek Crossing Reroute or
the expansion of the substations.
Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice - The proposed project would have no long-term
adverse impacts to socioeconomic conditions or community resources. The project would not
disproportionately affect minority or low-income populations. Short -teen impacts would be
beneficial economic activity in the project area.
Transportation - The proposed project would have significant impacts on transportation if the
project restricted public roads, resulting in adverse impacts to emergency response capabilities or
economic hardships to local businesses. No significant impacts would occur since traffic
restrictions would be very short-term and intermittent, and no businesses would be impacted by
limited access conditions. Short-term and slightly increased traffic would result on two Interstate
Highways (I-76 and I-25) and five U.S. Highways (34 and 85) and State Highways (71, 52, and
79) serving the area. Short-term increases in construction traffic and traffic delays would also
occur on local Morgan and Weld county roads.
Cumulative Effects:
Climate and Air Quality - Because of the nature of the proposed project and alternatives, any
potential air quality impacts would be minor, localized, temporary, and short term. Therefore,
there is little likelihood of cumulative impacts occurring with other sources of air pollution. If
14
•
•
•
• •
•
•
•
cumulative impacts occur, the proposed project would not cause or contribute to a violation of
applicable standards. Because the proposed project would not affect local climatic conditions
there would be no cumulative impacts on climate.
Soils - There are 12 defined projects, as well as a number of undefined projects, occurring or
proposed to occur within the vicinity of this transmission line rebuild effort. The types of
projects proposed range from residential developments to industrial parks to gravel pits. Each of
these developments would entail surface soil disturbances that would increase erosion potentials
and reduce soil productivity for various periods of time. It is assumed that surface soil
stabilization would be required for the majority of these projects, limiting soil loss due to wind
erosion. Portions of these developments that result in building construction and hard surfacing
would, in effect, eliminate soil productivity in perpetuity. The proposed disturbed acreage
associated with this project would be limited and would occur intermittently across a 78 -mile
corridor. The revegetation and mitigation activities required for this project would serve to
stabilize the surface soils and return the majority of affected soils to a productive condition
across a comparatively short timeframe. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that impacts to the
soil resource resulting from this project are minor when considered in the context of the
cumulative regional impacts associated with known regional developments.
Paleontology - With the application of appropriate standard construction measures, this project,
and other projects planned and executed with similar sensitivity to paleontology, are likely to
have only a small cumulative adverse impact on paleontological resources. This and additional
development in the region may result in paleontological discoveries that would otherwise not
occur.
Water Resources
Surface Water. The proposed project would not directly impact surface water and thus no direct
cumulative impacts would occur. The project would have the potential to contribute to indirect
effects to water quality, resulting from incremental increases in sedimentation caused by surface
ground disturbances at substation sites and structure sites. Similar impacts would be expected
from residential and industrial construction. The overall short-term disturbance area of the
proposed project construction would be approximately 197 acres and would be dispersed over
78 miles. Disturbances would occur in phases, beginning in 2006 and ending by 2010. Western
would use best management practices to avoid surface water pollution and minimize indirect
cumulative impacts to surface waters, and would therefore not contribute to any significant
cumulative impacts. Operations would not impact surface waters and thus would not cause
additional cumulative impacts.
Floodplains. Waters of the United States are protected under the Clean Water Act; many
floodplains are defined as waters of the United States. The rebuild project and each reasonably
foreseeable project described above would comply with Clean Water Act regulations to protect
these areas; therefore, cumulative impacts to floodplains and wetlands would be minor and of
short duration. Operations would not impact floodplains or wetlands and thus would not cause
additional cumulative impacts.
15
•
Ground Water. The proposed rebuild project is not expected to impact groundwater and would
not contribute to any cumulative impacts to ground water resources. The proposed project is
located near groundwater resources used by the City of Brush and Fort Morgan Reservoir and
Irrigation Company. Impacts to groundwater resources would be avoided by preconstruction
testing and monitoring to ensure structure foundations do not impact groundwater resources.
Alternative structure designs and adjustments to structure locations would be implemented as
necessary to avoid impacts to local groundwater resources and recharge areas. Any dewatering
from construction will be mitigated locally and cumulative ground water impacts are expected to
be minor and of short duration.
Vegetation, Wetlands, Wildlife, and Sensitive Species - Based on other reasonably foreseeable
projects in Morgan and Weld counties, the proposed rebuild project would contribute to a
short-term cumulative loss of native habitats if any of the other foreseeable projects are in native
habitats. However, losses of native habitat to occur with the transmission line rebuild project
would be short term since they would be reclaimed and not contribute to a long-term cumulative
loss of native habitats. No cumulative environmental impacts would occur with threatened or
endangered species since the transmission line rebuild project would not impact any populations
or habitats of listed species.
Cultural Resources - Cumulative impacts to cultural resources would be minor. Cumulative
impacts are minimized through implementation of Federal Laws and Regulations to protect
historic resources, prehistoric resources, and sites important to Native American heritage.
Land Use - The proposed project would make a minor contribution to cumulative land use
effects resulting from the reasonably foreseeable future projects shown on Table 3.16-1 in the
EA. Future actions that could impact the land use character of the region to the greatest degree
are continued residential development adjacent to the transmission line corridor. Bedroom
communities continue to expand as the price of real estate in the urban areas continues to
escalate. Impacts from these reasonably foreseeable projects will continue to occur presently.
For the short term, the proposed reasonably foreseeable projects would not have a dramatic
impact on the region. However, the proposed project would not change the land use character of
the area since the proposed project consists of replacing and modifying existing transmission
lines within established utility corridors.
The project would provide a reliable source of power that would allow future development to
occur, and the availability of adequate power supplies could contribute to growth and
development in the region. Because of the vast amount of private agricultural land in Weld and
Morgan Counties, land use activities and characteristics are likely to remain in spite of the
proposed cumulative development. The proposed project would not directly cause or contribute
to the long-term cumulative impacts to land uses.
Visual Resources - The proposed project would contribute to regional changes in land use
character and related visual quality that would result from the reasonably foreseeable projects
outlined in Table 3.16-1 in the EA. Overall, cumulative visual changes would entail the
conversion of natural and agricultural landscapes to increasingly developed urban and utility
corridor landscapes. The proposed project's contribution to these regional, long-term aesthetic
16
• •
•
•
•
changes would be very minor and incremental since Western is proposing to utilize established
utility corridors and upgrade existing facilities. As reasonably foreseeable residential and
community projects develop, there will be increased areas of visual sensitivity due primarily to
greater numbers of residents located near the ROW and utility facilities. While visual sensitivity
may increase, the project's contribution to cumulative adverse impacts would remain minor
compared to the existing conditions.
Socioeconomics and Community Resources - The proposed project would make a minor and
short-term contribution to the cumulative socioeconomic impacts that would result from
construction and operation of other reasonably foreseeable projects listed in Table 3.16-1 of the
EA. Build -out of these projects would contribute to changes in local population, employment,
housing, public services and facilities, the economy, and the transportation network. Many of
these projects would affect the overall socioeconomic environment of the project area, primarily
in the areas of increased population and employment, increased income in the project area, and
increased revenues generated particularly in Weld County, but also in the towns affected by the
developments. It is difficult to identify the secondary and induced growth effects from
commercial, industrial, and residential activity within the project area.
The Beaver Creek -Hoyt -Erie Rebuild Project would have a very minor contribution to these
cumulative socio-economic changes since project -related effects would be short term and occur
primarily during project construction in the next 4 to 5 years.
Transportation - During construction, the proposed project would result in short-term and
insignificant impacts to local transportation systems. Impacts to transportation systems would
result from the intermittent presence of construction crews and vehicles and associated increased
traffic. These effects could occur simultaneously with other proposed developments, however.
The proposed projects contribution to cumulative impacts is considered short-term, and could be
partially mitigated through the coordination with other local agencies regarding construction
plans and schedules, particularly in areas where suburban development is occurring in Weld and
Morgan County. Over the long term, the proposed project would not change traffic -related
activity throughout the project area.
Floodplain Statement of Findings:
FEMA maps show 100 -year floodplain delineations at five locations on the Beaver Creek -Hoyt
corridor and seven locations of the Hoyt -Erie corridor. A total of 33 wetland crossings were
identified within the proposed action transmission line ROWs and alternative ROWs. Most are
associated with stream channels, ephemeral drainages, or irrigation ditches, and the most
extensive wetland crossings are associated with Beaver Creek, the Upper Platte and Beaver
Canal, Brush Prairie Ponds, Horse Creek, and South Platte River areas. A "Notice of
Floodplain/Wetlands Involvement and Opportunity to Comment" was sent to Federal, State and
local agencies. One letter was received from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in response to
the Notice.
The EA includes a floodplain assessment as required by DOE's Floodplain/Wetlands
Environmental Review Requirements (10 CFR part 1022). Work within the boundaries of the
17
floodplains would be required as the proposed transmission line route would cross floodplains.
To the extent practicable, Western would avoid placing structures within the 100 -year
floodplains. Several floodplains are considerably wider than the span between transmission
structures. Western would have to place structures within the floodplains that could not be
spanned. If placement of structures within the floodplain cannot be avoided, structures would be
reinforced and engineered to withstand flood events. These structures would be designed to the
applicable standards. Transmission line structures would not significantly change the drainage
patterns of the floodplains crossed, nor would they contribute to flooding or cause worse
flooding to occur. The no action alternative would also require action within floodplains since
the floodplains currently contain structures, many of which have been in place since 1952.
Fewer structures would be located in floodplains with the proposed action because the spans are
longer for the single -pole steel structures. There is no practicable alternative to placing
structures within the floodplains that are too wide to span. The drainages occur across the route
of the transmission line requiring that they be crossed.
All activity proposed within the floodplains would be conducted in accordance with applicable
regulations and floodplain protection requirements. Based on the measures proposed for the
transmission line no direct, indirect or cumulative floodplain impacts are expected from the
proposed project.
Determination - Based on the analysis in the EA, Western has determined that mitigation
measures would reduce the potential for significant environmental impacts. The implementation
of these measures is addressed in a Mitigation Action Plan (MAP) issued concurrently with the
EA. The analyses contained in the EA, along with the mitigation commitments in the MAP,
indicate that the proposed action and alternative routes are not a major Federal action
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Western has determined that
preparation of an EIS is not required
Issued:
NOV 1 6 2005
Joel K. Bladow
Regional Manager
18
•
•
® TRI-STATE GENERATION AND TRANSMISSION ASSOCIATION, INC.
• •
HEADQUARTERS: P.O. BOX 33695 DENVER, COLORADO 80233-0695 303-452-6111
July 21, 2009
Ms. Jacqueline Hatch-Drouillard
Weld County Department of Planning Services
918 10th Street
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Subject: Responses to Completeness Review and Re -Submittal Package
Use by Special Review for Weld County 1041 Application: Substation Expansion and
Telecommunications Facilities —Henry Lake Tap
Dear Ms. Hatch-Drouillard,
Tri State is pleased to submit materials and responses to address Weld County comments provided in the
completeness review of the Henry Lake Tap Use by Special Review (USR) application. The USR was
filed in support of a 1041 application for a transmission line originally submitted in May 2009. Re -submittal
materials provided in this package include the following:
• This cover response letter
• Property easement legal descriptions (attached)
• Revised Access Sheet
• Revised application (four copies)
Weld County's comments on the USR are documented with Tri State responses below:
Planning Comments
The Department of Planning Services has reviewed the 7 -Day Completeness Review and noted the
following that will need to be corrected prior to submittal:
1. The legal description will need to be corrected.
2. A vicinity map including crossroads shall be placed on the plat.
3. Agreements with the property owners —show the agreed upon route.
4. The road access sheet will need to be submitted to including correct legal description and parcel
access.
•
July 16, 2009
Ms. Jacqueline Hatch-Drouillard
Weld County Department of Planning Services
Page 2 of 5
• •
Responses
1. The legal description will need to be corrected.
The legal description has been corrected. The specific legal location of the transmission route easement
is located on two property parcels. The easement survey plats are attached to this letter and provide
detailed survey descriptions. The general legal description is provided below and in Section 21-3-330.B5i
of the application text.
A strip of land 150 feet wide, lying 75 feet on each side of the following described
centerline:
• Beginning from the north: NE 1/4 of Section 27, Township 1 North, Range 66
West, 6th Principal Meridian
• Terminating at the south: NE IA of the SE '% of Section 27, Township 1 North,
Range 66 West, 6th Principal Meridian
2. A vicinity map including crossroads shall be placed on the plat.
A vicinity map including crossroads has been added to the Plot Plan.
3. Agreements with the property owners —show the agreed upon route.
The specific transmission line route that matches the property easements described in #1 above is
provided on the Plot Plan.
4. The road access sheet will need to be submitted to including correct legal description and parcel
access.
The road access sheet has been revised to include the correct legal description and parcel access
information.
Building Comments
The Department of Building Inspections has reviewed the 7 -Day Completeness Review and states that a
building permit will be required for any structures built or change of use of any building.
Response
The transmission line will not require any Weld County building permits for construction to commence.
This was confirmed via email correspondence with Frank Piacentino on July 14, 2009.
•
•
•
July 16, 2009 • •
Ms. Jacqueline Hatch-Drouillard
Weld County Department of Planning Services
Page 3 of 5
•
•
Public Works General Comments
Public Works recommends rejection of the application as incomplete. Please submit the additional
information requested below.
The Public Works Department reviewed the submitted application for critical items; including but not
limited to the Site Plan, Traffic Study, Preliminary Drainage Report, Geotechnical Soils Report, and Flood
Hazard Development Permit. A detailed review of these items was not completed at this step in the
process.
Comments made during this stage of the review process will not be all-inclusive, as revised materials are
submitted other concerns or issues may arise. All issues of concern and critical issues during further
review must be resolved with the Public Works Department.
Public Works Specific Comment
Site Plan: A site plan was submitted, it did not contain a preferred route for the transmission line only a
construction area. The plan lacked section numbers and cross roads.
Response
It is noted that Weld County agreed to permit the transmission line corridor during the pre -application
conference for this project. However, easements have subsequently been obtained from landowners and
a more refined route can be shown at this time. The preferred route for the transmission line is shown on
the Plot Plan and on all other figures (as appropriate) in the re -submittal package. Section numbers and
crossroads are indicated on the Plot Plan and other figures.
Public Works Specific Comment
Traffic Study: A traffic study is not required; however the estimated number of daily trips associated with
the construction of the transmission line needs to be included within the narrative. It appears that the
existing access off CR-4 is going to be used. This access will need to be shown in detail to see if
upgrades are required including but not limited to surface treatment, width dimension; 2' contours
minimum, radius, adjacent borrow ditches and construction traffic circulation.. Vehicles associated with
this application will not be allowed to stage on Weld County roadways. Weld County and the State of
Colorado require overweight/ over width special transport permits. In addition any construction in the
Right -of -Way will require a Right -of -Way permit. Please Contact Amy Burry, Weld County Public Works,
970-304-6496, Ext 3764. This application did not contain an Access Information Sheet, please provide
this information
Response
An estimate of daily trips has been added to the narrative (see the Transportation Impacts section
satisfies 21-3-330.C.2.g, Table 4). The maximum number of trips will be for concrete trucks during
foundation construction, estimated to be six to eight round trips. Other types of heavy equipment or
delivery vehicles will require one to three round trips.
•
July 16, 2009
Ms. Jacqueline Hatch-Drouillard
Weld County Department of Planning Services
Page 4 of 5
• •
County Road 4 (CR-4) will not require widening for construction of the transmission line. The transmission
line will be accessed via the existing Henry Lake Substation access.
Text has been added to 1041 Application that Weld County and the state of Colorado require
overweight/over width permits (see Section 21-3-330.C.2.g). These permits will be obtained prior to
commencement of construction activities if necessary.
There will be no construction activities within Weld County right-of-way; therefore, a right -of way permit is
not required.
An access information sheet was provided in the original submittal. The access information sheet has
been revised and is provided in this re -submittal package.
Public Works Specific Comment
Grading Permit: This application did not contain a Grading Permit application along with a grading plan
(with 2' contours), erosion control plan (with temporary and structural BMP's) and evidence of a CDPHE
storm water discharge permit, this information will be required prior to construction. Per information
submitted this site contains erosive soils.
Response
No grading will be performed for construction of the transmission line. A CDPS General Permit for
Stormwater Discharges for construction activities associated with the Henry Lake Substation and
transmission line has been applied for through the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment. Because the Henry Lake Substation and associated transmission line are considered a
"common plan of development" based on the CDPHE General Permit, Tri-State will be obtaining one
stormwater permit for both the substation expansion and the transmission line. Drawings of the erosion
control method to be used along the transmission line are included in Appendix B of the 1041 Application.
Public Works Specific Comment
Storm Water Drainage: A Drainage Report was not required; however the applicant shall provide a
grading plan and erosion control plan and obtain a grading permit prior to construction.
Response
Grading will not be performed for construction of the transmission line. Best management practices and
erosion control measures are provided in Appendix B.
Public Works Specific Comment
Geotechnical Soils Report: A geotechnical soils report is not required for Public Works; a soils map
indentifying erodible soils was submitted and it appears most of this site contains erosive soils.
Comment noted. No response is required.
•
•
July 16, 2009 • •
Ms. Jacqueline Hatch-Drouillard
Weld County Department of Planning Services
Page 5 of 5
•
•
•
Health Department Comments
The Health Department has reviewed the 7 -Day Completeness Review and has no additional comments
at this time.
Comment noted. No response is required.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you would like to discuss any issues related to the above
responses or to the attached application re -submittal package materials.
Sincerely,
Mark Murray
Tri State Generation and Transmission, Inc.
Sr. Permitting and Land Rights Specialist
Office: 303-254-3211
Mobile: 303-916-4923
•
IIIeRecorded in County, CO Doc Id: 3630226
06/15/2009 04:50 P Receipt#: 7417576
Page: 1 of 4 Total Fee: $21.00
Steve Moreno, Clerk and Recorder
TRI-STATE GENERATION AND TRANSMISSION ASSOCIATION, INC,
TRANSMISSION LINE EASEMENT
Dustin Clark and Paine Clarl4-Grantom, In consideration of Ten Dollars ($10) and other good and valuable consideration to
Grantors in hand paid, by TRI-STATE GENERATION AND TRANSMISSION ASSOCIATION, INC., a Colorado Corporation,
1100 West 110'k Avenue. Westminster, Colorado 50233, Grantee, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, hereby grants.
bargains. sells, conveys, and confirms unto Grantee, Its successors and assigns, a perpetual nonexclusive easement for the
transmission, distribution, or both, of electricity and for the transmission of communication signals for the use of Grantee and its
members only, on, over, under, and across the following described premiers (hereinafter the "Easement Parcel") located in attached
EXHIBIT °A".
Together with the right and authority to Grantee. its succeneorsrlicensees, lessees, contractors, or assigns, and its and their agents and
employees to enter at all times upon mid Easement Parcel to survey. construct, repair, remove, replace. reconsimet, patrol. Inspect.
improve, enlarge, upgrade, aerate, and maininin electric transmission and distribution lines and communication facilities, both
overhead and underground, including towers, poles, and other supports of whatever materials; together with braces, guys, anchors,
cross -arms, cables, conduits, wires, conductors, manholes, transformers, and other fixtures, devices, and appurtenances used or useful
in connection therewith, the right and authority to alter, improve and utilize the Easement Parcel for access, Ingress and egress for
construction, raconsmotion. inspection, repair, removal, replacement, patrol and improvement of the transmission and distribution
lines, communication facilities, and other fixtures and equipment Installed thereon by Grantee at such times and with such equipment
as Grantee determines la necessary, and full right and authority to cut. remove, trim, or otherwise control trees, brush, and other
growth on or overhanging the Easement Parcel and which may interfere with Grantee's use of this eanement,
Grantee, at its sole cost and expense. shall maintain and repair the power lines; supporting poles and any related improvements
permitted by this easement in good order and condition.
Grantors may utilize the Easement Parcel for such purposes as Grantee determines. in its sole discretion, do not interfere with
Grantee's rights and privileges granted hereby and do not cause or contribute to danger or risk to persons or property given Grantee's
uses of the Easement Parcel.
Except as specifically authorized herein, no buildings, structures. or wells shall he placed or permitted to remain on. under. or over the
Easement Parcel, Improvements, including without limitation, landscaping, may be erected, placed, or permitted to remain on, under,
or over the Easement Parcel, including changes in grade. that in Grantee's sole judgment will not interfere with the facilities
=strewed by Grantee un the Easement Parcel, or in Grantee's solo judgment will not interfere with the exercise of any of the rights
herein granted, Grantors agree that no improvements shall be made by Grantors without Grantors first obtaining Grantee's written
consent to detailed plans and specifications for such improvements and grade changes, Grantors may not utilize the Easement Parcel
for the storage Of flammable or explosive materials or hay or htraw stacks or for the construction, installation or operation of above
ground mechanical Irrigation facilities. Grantee shall exeFeike the: rights herein granted to it with due care. end all damage to the
Easement Parcel occurring hereunder resulting from the failure to exercise due care shall be paid for or repaired at the expense of
Grantee. In the event Grantee damages improvements, including landspaping. located on the Easement Parcel by the use of its rights
grunted by this easement, Grantee shall promptly, subject to seasonal conditionp, restore such improvements as near as practicable to
the condition existing before the damage. Should Grantors utilize Brae •Easement Parcel in a manner that Grantee determines is in
violation of the limitations Imposed hereby, Grantee may obtain a mandatory injunction to restrain such use.
The provisions of this easement shall be binding upon and shall inure aide, benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, personal
representatives, successors, and assigns of the panes hereto,
By signing below, Grantee agrees, for itself, its successors and assigns, to be bound by the provisions hereof.
Signed and delivered this la day of , 20 09. •
GRANTORS:
Parent 15
eRecorded in Weld County, CO Doc Id: 3630226
06/15/2009 04:50 P Receipt#: 7417576
Page: 2 of 4 Total Fee: $21.00
Steve Moreno, Clerk and Recorder
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:.
STATE OF COLORADO
COUNTY OF Wtlol
) as
)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this today of .3-wsa. 200q by Dustin Clark
Witness my hand and official seal
My Commission Expires:
a'wi\' I11300L
STATE OF COLORADO
COUNTY OF Wad
. ' Nbtory Public
) as
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 6 day of C'u ue, 20 01 by Paine Clark
Witness my hand and official seal
.Rius..it 0. 7yt,/s„ L
My Commission Expires: Notary Public
�c;arseo
0 •,°
`a oTARy
1.4400
Prime]115
(Seal)
•
•
•
•
eRecorded in •d County, CO Doc Id: 3630226
06/15/2009 04:50 P Receipts: 7417576
Page: 3 of 4 Total Fee: $21.00
Steve Moreno, Clerk and Recorder
EXHIBIT A
EASENIENT"'SURVEY PLAT
NE % SE 1A SEC 27
T1N, R66W, 6TH P,M,
COUNTY OF WELD, STATE OF COLORADO
Property Description
Easement 1
A strip of land 150.00 feet wide, lying 75.00 feet on each side of the following described
centerline, being a portion. of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 27,
Township 1 North, Range 66 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, in the County of Weld, Stale
al Colorado. Sold centerline being more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at the Southeast Corner of said Section 27 (n 2" aluminum cap in range box);
WHENCE the East Quarter Corner of said Section 27 (a 3 I/4" aluminum on number 6
rebut) bears NO0'17'49'W o distance of 2,618.81 feet (Basis of Bearing — Assumed);
THENCE N13'30'28'W a distance of 1,343.03 feet to o point on the southerly Tine of sold
Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 27, being the POINT QF BEGINNING;
THENCE NO2'30'41"7/ a distance of 1,311.55 feet to a point an the northerly line of said
Northeast Quarter el the Southeast Quarter of Section 27, being the POINT OF TERMINATION.
Sidelines are lengthened or shortened to Intersect the sold southerly line of the Northeast
Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 27, and the said northerly line of said Northeast
Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 27,
Containing 196,732 square feet, (4.515 Acres), more or less.
Exhibit attached and by this reference made a port hereof.
•
Prepared by:
Dote:5•H•o9
Jomes A. Daley P1.5 37044
For and on behalf of JACOBS Engineering
707 17th Street U2300
Denver Colorado, 00202
(303) 820-5240
+attas ewer AO wmw
amn ,nmo:r w
aaew enomw,
aam, *I Iaa.•nn-w Iwlcs/d
pBrsloe yk�li iU k
,m ,M sLm. w�sm mew
e.,Jt. e5k r „"per
TRI-STATE
demo -S. ,...
CLARK EASEMENT 1
SECTION 27, TIN, R66W, 6TH P.M.
MAW'0 I�HENRYLAKE—PARCELI sea "al
OF 2
•
•
eRecorded in Weld County, CO Doc Id: 3630226
06/15/2009 04:50 P Receipt#: 7417576
Page: 4 of 4 Total Fee: $21.00
Steve Moreno, Clerk and Recorder
EXHIBIT A
EASEMENT SURVEY PLAT
NE % SE % SEC 27
T1 N, R66W, 6TH P.M.
COUNTY OF WELD; STATE OF COLORADO
NE 1/4 SEC 27, TIN, R66W, 6TH P.M.
POINT OF TERMINATI
NE 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4
SEC 27, TIN, R664, 6TH P.M.
EASEMENT PARCEL I
146,732 SQ. FT (4.516 AC.) ±
POINT OF BEGINNING
•
SE 1/4 OF THE SE•I/d_:
•
SEC 27, TIN, R66W. GUI P.M.
4
tki
n I)e .vo
I IRe • MC
JAMS IPMCI ea. nSiii4Q
CUM' P/9AcI III
MOON /COMP/Ell
IMMl IN IMO4-T141IMO! r • asP
JACOB
1111 Inn 9=1 11 N Zia. earn CO MOO
I�p y�yl Mu, dYIY�IYpV�gy,P���.I�11 1,
"a fr n o161Yilit": Mt011�1
HENRY LAKE SUBSTATION
E 1/4 COI SEC 27
RIO .2 I/4' MOM CAP ON
Ta MAR
+m
Nm
p N
/BASIS OF BEARING
W
N
POINT
FCOFCOMMENCEMENT
CCR 27
FRO 2' ALUM CAP IN
RANCE DU
This exhibit dons not repreannl a
monumcnled aunty and is intended only
In depict Iho alloched property descrlphon.
TRI-STATE
CgOWMina IrW.N[YP
AIN<aYN.IM.
CLARK - EASEMENT 1
SECTION 27, TIN, RS6W, 6TH P.M.
•
•
•
•
eRecorded in •d County, CO Doc Id: 3628225
06/08/2009 03:01 P Receipt#: 7416358
Page: 1 of 4 Total Fee: $21.00
Steve Moreno, Clerk and Recorder
TRI-STATE GENERATION AND TRANSMISSION ASSOCIATION, INC.
' TRANSMISSION LINE EASEMENT
Norma Jean Rltchev, Grantor, In consideration of Ten Goners ($10) and other good and valuable consideration to Gmnlbr in hand
paid, by TRI-STATE GENERATION AND TRANSMISSION ASSOCIATION. INC.. a Colorado Corporation, 1100 West 1160'
Avenue, Westminster, Colorado 80233, Grantee, the ree6ipt ihhcn:ofhi hereby acknowledged. hereby grants, bargains, mulls. convoys.
and =dims unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, a perpetual nonexclusive casement for the transmission. distribution. or both, of
electricity and for the transmission of communication signals for the use of Grantee and its members only, an, over, under, and across
the following described premises (hereinafter the "Easement Parcel") located 'n attached EXHIBIT "A"
Together with the right and authority to Grantee. Its successors. Iicensee.s, lessees. contractors, or assigns• and its and their agents and
employees to enter m all times upon said Easement Parcel to survey. construct, repair, remove, replace, reconstruct, patrol. inspect.
improve. enlarge. upgrade. uprose, and maintain electric transmission and distribution lines and -communication facilities. bolls
overhead and underground, including towers, poles. and other supports of whatever materials; together with braces, guys, anchors.
erawarms, cables, conduits, wires, conductors, manholes, transformers. and other fixtures, devices, and appurtenances used or useful
in connection therewith- the rigid and authority to alter, improve and utilize the Easement Parcel for across, ingress and egress for
construction, re-constnclion, inspection, repair, removal, replacement. patrol and Improvement of the transmission and distribution
lines, communication facilities, and other fixtures and equipment installed thereon by Grantee at such times and with such equipment
as Grantee determines is necessary, and MI right and authority so cat, remove, Trim, or otherwise control trees. brush, and other
growth on or overhanging the Easement Parcel and which may interfere with Grantee's use of Ods easement,
Grantee, at its sole cost and expense, shall maintain and repair the power lines, supporting poles and any related improvements
permitted by this easement in good order and condition.
Grantor nay utilize the Easement Parcel for such purposesas Grantee demmrinea, in Its sole discretion,. do not interfere with Grantee's
rights and privileges granted hereby and do not cause or contribute to danger or risk to persons or property given Grantee's uses of the
Easement Parcel.
Except as specifically authorized herein, no buildings, structures, or wolfs shall be placed or permitted to remain on, under, or over the
Easement Parcel. Improvements, including without limitation, landscaping, may be erected, placed. or permitted to remain on, under,
or over the Easement Parcel, including changes in grade, that in Grantee's sole judgment will not Interfere with the Ibcilities
constructed by Grantee on the Easement Parcel, or in Grantee's sole judgment will not interfere with the exercise of any of the rights
herein granted. Grantor agrees that no improvements shall be made by Grantor without Grantor first obtaining Grantee's written
consent to detailed pins and specifications for such improvements and grade changes. Grantor may not utilize the Easement Parcel
for the storage of flammable or explosive materials or hay or straw stacks or for the construction, installation or operation of above
ground mechanical irrigation facilities. Grantee shall a*erclae,the rights herein granted to It wills due core, and all damage to the
Easement Parcel occurring hereunder resulting from die failure to exercise due core shall be paid for or repaired at the expense of
Grantee. In the event Grantee damages improvements, iaci&ding landscaping, located do the Easement Pineal hy the use of its rights
granted by this easement, Grantee shall promptly, subject to seasonal conditions, restore such improvements as near as practicable to
the condition existing before the damage. Should Creator utilize the Easement Parcel in a manner that. Grantee determines is in
violation of the limitations imposed hereby, Grantee may obtain a mandatory injunction to restrain such use.
The provisions of this easement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, personal
representatives, successors, and assigns ()Mho parties hereto.
By sighing below. Grantee Jagrees. for itself, its successors and assigns, to he bound by the provisions hereof.
Signed and delivered this/O day of J _ 0
GRANTOR:
By: !' c
orma Jean itehey
•
• •
•
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I(eNMck
STATE COUNTYPfBE6jt e f, )
/r'(1)�CJL��pI� ) ss
COUNTY OF ) 2,
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
Witness my hand and official seal
My,G »lion Espirets
olary Public
20 by Norma Jean Ritchey
(Seal)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
EXHIBIT A
EASEMENT SURVEY PLAT
NE Y4 SEC 27
T1N, R66W, 6Th P,M,
COOP OF WELD, STATE OF COLORADO
Properly Oescripuon
Easement 2
A strip of fond 150.00 feet wide, lying 75.00 feel on each side of the following described
centerline, being a portion of the Northeast Quarter of Section 27, Township I North, Range
66 Weal of the 6th Principal Meridian, In the County of Weld, Stole of Colorado. Sold
centerline being more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at the Southeast Corner of said Section 27 (a 2" aluminum cap in range box);
WHENCE the East Quarter Comer of sold Section 27 (a 3 1/4" aluminum on number 6
mbar) beard NO0'17'49'W a distance of 2,618,81 feet (Basis of Bearing - Assumed);
THENCE NUB'04'ZB"N o distance of 2,642,37 fent to o point on the southerly line al said
Northeast Quarter of Section 27, being the POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE NO2'30'41'W a distance of l,332.22 feet to the POINT OF TERMINATION.
Sidelines ore lengthened or shortened to intersect the said southerly line of the Northeast
Quarter of Section 27.
Containing 199,833 square feet, (4.588 Acres), more or less.
Exhibit attached and by this reference mode a pod hereof.
met
N -O9,.
Prepared by: 1 ra ��'105
Dales A.
Doi t,"I M1
James A. Daley PfS 37044'
For and on behalf of JACOBS Engineering
707 1711, Street )2300
Denver Colorado, 80202
(303) 82.0-5240
Mn1-n-w W5Eue
JACOBS
tel ,le Spaoi.t. MO a CO DMZ
T7A'DN' r8 . `wSmMtPno^ rtnt9
TRI-STATE
s.u,...,wMurpm,w,
RITCHEY - EASEMENT 2
SECTION 27, TIN, R66W, 6TH P.M.
0 WHw RYLAKE-PAncEL2 am 41 OF 2
• •
EXHIBIT A
EASEMENT SURVEY FLAT
NE % SEC 27
TIN, R66W, 6TH P.M.
COUNTY OF WELD, STATE OF COLORADO
E I/4 COR SEC 77
FRO 3 I/4 M.UU CAP CN
f6 ROAR
POINT OF TERMINATIONI
NE 1/4 SEC 27, 11N, R66V1, 6114 P.M.
EASEMENT PARCEL 2
199,833 SQ. FT (4.588 AC.) t
5'.
150.0
z
POINT OF 0E08NNINC
NE 5/4 OF THE SC 1/4
ii
SEC 27, TIN, R66W, 6TH P.P.M.
N , °. L� A OOF9�
it it 37044 a
e
1 Ye! JWn
66-
r, m
b�
N
,._—BASIS OF RE RING
PONE OF COIaMENUEAIEN1
SE CDR SEC 77
fN01' AWII CAP IN
RANGE COY
Ihls e.hibd dooc not rAyTAAYn1 U
monamenled bun* one is intended only
lo depict the OIt chett plopolty C066riptio1.
TRI - STATE
a re ouAtr;id Tr Yumau
„eouW w.
RITCHEY - EASEMENT 2
SECTION p27, TIN, R66W, 6714
Af10
'�(1 �P7iHENRruKE-PARCEL2 ;y 1'n2 OF 2
•
•
1.4
•
BRIGHTON CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION
HENRY LAKE SUBSTATION EXPANSION
CONDITIONAL USE
RESOLUTION NO.: 09-125
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Brighton, Colorado, Approving With
Conditions As Set Forth Herein, a Conditional Use for an Expansion of an Electrical
Power Substation and the Addition of Transmission Lines and Associated Towers,
known as Henry Lake Substation, and Generally Described as a Parcel of Land
Located in the Southeast 1/4 of the Southeast ''A Section 27, Township 1 South,
Range 66 West of the 60' Principal Meridian, City of Brighton, County of Weld,
State of Colorado.
•
•
WHEREAS, the Applicant and Owner, Tri-State Generation and Transmission
Association Inc., request approval of a certain Conditional Use for the expanded
operation of an existing electrical power substation and additional transmission lines at
230 -kV and associated towers; and
WHEREAS, a notice of public hearing sign was posted on the Substation
Property and owners of property within 300 feet of the subject Property were notified of
the Public Hearing not less then fifteen (15) days prior to such hearing, pursuant to the
City of Brighton Municipal Code, and Land Use and Development Code; and
WHEREAS, a notice was published in the Brighton Blade on Wednesday, June
17, 2009 not less than fifteen (15) clays prior to such hearing, pursuant to the City of
Brighton's Land Use and Development Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that pursuant to the City of Brighton's Land
Use and Development Code, a Conditional Use is an additional use of land that may be
allowed with restrictions deemed necessary upon approval of the City Council, and that
approval thereof is subject to the City's Conditional Use procedures and criteria; and
WHEREAS, the Conditional Use, with the conditions attached hereto, meets all
of the City of Brighton's Land Use and Development Code, applicable to a Conditional
Use submittal; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that sufficient justification
exists to approve the requested Conditional Use, so long as certain specific conditions are
placed on said approval, as more specifically provided herein.
•
•
•
Henry Lake Substation Expansion
Conditional Use
NOW THEREFORE, Be It Resolved by the City of Brighton City Council as
follows:
The Conditional Use request of Tri State Generation and Transmission
Association, Inc. for the expanded operation of the existing Henry Lake electrical power
Substation and additional transmission lines at 230 -kV and associated towers to be
located at the northwest corner of Weld County Road 4 (WCR 4) and the extension of
Weld County Road 33, is hereby approving, subject to the following conditions:
1. All improvements and development of the Substation Facility Site shall be
constructed in strict compliance with the Site Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit
"A" and incorporated herein by this reference.
2. Any additional transmission lines, or towers, or an increase in voltage in any
transmission line, or expansion of the Substation Facility beyond what is
depicted in the Site Plan, shall require a subsequent Conditional Use review
by the City Council.
3. The transmission line tower structures north of the Henry Lake Substation
shall not exceed 110 feet in height, and carry no more than 230 -kV.
4. Landscaping around the Henry Lake Substation shall be established,
maintained, and replaced in accordance with the approved Landscaping Plan,
attached hereto as Exhibit B, and incorporated herein by this reference;
irrigation shall be continued, in perpetuity, at the sole cost and expense of the
Owner, as necessary to maintain the health of all landscaping vegetation on
the Site.
5. The use of gravel on the two access roads shall be allowed to continue until
such time as WCR 4 adjacent to the Property is widened and improved to at
least an 80 foot collector, or the issuance of a building permit for residential
development within one -quarter (1/4) mile of the Substation Facility,
whichever occurs first, at which time the Owner, at it sole cost and expense,
shall replace the gravel with a hard surface approved by the City. Likewise,
the two access points onto WCR 4 from the Substation Facility shall be
allowed to continue until such time as WCR 4 adjacent to the Property is
widened and improved to at least an 80 foot wide collector, or the issuance of
a building permit for residential development within one -quarter (1/4) of the
Substation Facility, whichever occurs first, at which time the City may, at its
sole discretion, direct that one of the access roads to WCR 4 be abandoned
and closed.
6. The fencing of the expansion area shall match that of the existing fence on the
Site.
7. Any and all signs on the Site shall be approved by the City of Brighton prior
to installation, and shall conform to applicable provisions of the Sign Code in
effect at the time of application.
Page 2 of 5
Henry Lake Substation Expansion
Conditional Use
8. All additional exterior lighting specified in the Site Plan shall match the
existing lighting of the Substation Facility, and shall be installed so as to be
minimally disruptive to adjoining landowners and land uses, as approved by
the City prior to installation.
9. Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association shall provide information
pertaining to the possible health effects resulting from the electric and
magnetic fields associated with electric facilities to property owners and
residents adjacent to the Henry Lake Substation and transmission lines upon
request.
10. The remaining portion of the 38.479 -acre Property not utilized for the
Substation and transmission lines shall be restricted to uses consistent with the
zoning in place at the time development is proposed.
RESOLVED, this 7th day of July, 2009.
CITY OF BRIGHTON, COLORADO
CITY COUNCIL
•
ATTEST:
Ga
ez, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Margart R. Brubaker, Esq.
City Attorney
e E. Pawlowski, Mayor
Page 3 of 5
•
Henry Lake Substation Expansion
Conditional Use
EXHIBIT A
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
zifsr1^:x: L-Thi t .
t.A.,/dB ,....er,».r JA
Nom osem, ml Atl"31
QVL•Itll®
11
{
•
Page 4 of 5
•
•
•
•
Page 5of5
Henry Lake Substation Expansion
Conditional Use
EXHIBIT B
LANDSCAPE PLAN
-- —
e;Iel 11 1 .
Efel f
LIIE! ' it I I j a
' I c I4't I
II !IIa CIIIii II' `5
A gY 1.d ;, t i I I a g
I {m I' {K �ITI I I `fi I I. c S ii
t' r { i W I� I
t4 ' ea9 g a•' I I I tllet j`� [ P p�I 13 a'sPtl Lf,.iEe1 i''0 I I I•
t!'�II#!!ti
iE' !'C�;igin
stE°' it:l t iI� It; ii �! It i II pfi !'��� I .t�
I ; 4,. i I I t t t lti t ti!I: I ie
' t, d
I11II'II►IIt r sal` El! 1�1 iI! ! i! I'! ij Iil}i�('AO `g
j !tit
�'% %Jill F E! tt l::! I+{e it'f il! �S
! ! gas ilia `ii !IP, !is fl �� ., aI'1 ��it iEEI f
{IiiZ! t I
I
t!'
Hello