HomeMy WebLinkAbout20092820.tiffBEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Moved by Mark Lawley, that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning
Commission. Be it resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the application for:
CASE NUMBER: USR-1708
APPLICANT: Lone Star LLC
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for Oil and
Gas Support Facility (Class II - Oilfield Waste Disposal Facility) in the A
(Agricultural) Zone District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the N2 N2 NW4 of Section 18, T3N, R64W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to CR 34 and East of and adjacent to CR 49.
be recommended favorably to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons:
The submitted materials are in compliance with the application requirements of Section 23-2-260 of
the Weld County Code.
2. It is the opinion of the Planning Commission that the applicant has shown compliance with Section
23-2-220 of the Weld County Code as follows:
A. Section 23-2-220.A.1 -- The proposed use is consistent with Chapter 22 and any other
applicable code provisions or ordinance in effect.
Section 22-4-140.A EP.Goal 2. states: "Mineral resource exploration and production waste
facilities should be planned, located, designed and operated to encourage compatibility with
surrounding land uses in terms of items such as general use, scale, height, traffic, dust, noise
and visual pollution."
Section 22-4-140 EP.Policy 2.1. states "In reviewing the operational and reclamation
plans for solid and brine waste disposal facilities, the County should impose such
conditions as necessary to minimize or eliminate the potential adverse impact of the
operation on surrounding properties and wildlife resources."
The applicant is required to make improvements to County Road 34 and County Road 49
to address traffic safety and dust impacts generated by the facility. In addition, the
applicant is required to submit a Lighting Plan and a Screening Plan to address
compatibility and mitigate impacts on surrounding properties.
B. Section 23-2-220.A.2 -- The proposed use is consistent with the intent of the A
(Agricultural) Zone District. Section 23-3-40.A.2 of the Weld County Code provides for Oil
and Gas Support and Service as a Use by Special Review in the A (Agricultural) Zone
District.
C. Section 23-2-220.A.3 -- The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with the
existing surrounding land uses. The facility is located immediately west of the Horton
Feedlot (USR-1152 for up to 5,000 head approved in 1999). The nearest residence is
located approximately 825 feet to the west of the site (north of County Road 34). There
are approximately 7 residences along County Road 49 located approximately 2,300 feet
to 3,300 feet from the site. Oil and gas improvements (tanks batteries) are located
immediately to the north of the proposed facility. Vacant land (with oil and gas
improvements) are located immediately to the north and south of this site. The applicant
is proposing to place the facility in a location that is lower in elevation than the adjacent
battery tanks located immediately to the north. Attached Conditions of Approval and
Development Standards (screening plan, lighting plan...) will help to ensure that the
proposed use is compatible with the surrounding area.
2009-2820
Resolution USR-1708
Lone Star LLC
Page 2
D. Section 23-2-220.A.4 -- The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with future
development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zoning and with the
future development as projected by Chapter 22 of the Weld County Code and any other
applicable code provisions or ordinances in effect, or the adopted Master Plans of
affected municipalities. The existing site does not lie within the three mile referral area of
any municipality.
E. Section 23-2-220.A.5 -- The application complies with Section 23-5 of the Weld County
Code. The existing site is not within a recognized overlay district, including the Geologic
Hazard, Flood Hazard or Airport Overlay District. Effective January 1, 2003, Building
Permits issued on the proposed lots will be required to adhere to the fee structure of the
County Road Impact Program. (Ordinance 2002-11). Effective August 1, 2005, Building
Permits issued on the proposed lots will be required to adhere to the fee structure of the
Capital Expansion Impact Fee and the stormwater/drainage impact fee. (Ordinance 2005-
8 Section 5-8-40)
F. Section 23-2-220.A.6 -- The applicant has demonstrated a diligent effort to conserve
prime agricultural land in the locational decision for the proposed use. The proposed site
is designated as "other" per the 1979 Soil Conservation Service Important Farmlands of
Weld County Map.
G. Section 23-2-220.A.7 -- The Design Standards (Section 23-2-240, Weld County Code),
Operation Standards (Section 23-2-250, Weld County Code), Conditions of Approval and
Development Standards ensure that there are adequate provisions for the protection of
health, safety, and welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood and County.
This recommendation is based, in part, upon a review of the application materials submitted by the
applicant, other relevant information regarding the request, and responses from referral entities.
The Planning Commission recommendation for approval is conditional upon the following:
1. Prior to recording the plat:
A. The plat shall be prepared per Section 23-2-260.D of the Weld County Code.
(Department of Planning Services)
B. All sheets of the plat shall be labeled USR-1708. (Department of Planning Services)
C. The plat shall be amended to delineate the following:
1) The attached Development Standards. (Department of Planning Services)
2) The approved Screening Plan. (Department of Planning Services)
3) County Road 34 is designated on the Weld County Road Classification Plan as a
local paved road, which requires 60 -feet of right-of-way at full build -out. The
applicant shall verify the existing right-of-way and the documents creating the
right-of-way. Existing and/or future right-of-way shall be identified. (Department of
Public Works)
4) WCR 49 is classified by the County is a Strategic Roadway, which requires a 140 -
foot right-of-way at full build out. There is presently a 60 -foot right-of-way. This
road is maintained by Weld County. An additional 40 feet from the centerline of
County Road 49 shall be delineated on the plat as future County Road 49 right-of-
way. The applicant shall verify the existing right-of-way and the documents
creating the right-of-way. Existing and/or future right-of-way shall be identified.
(Department of Public Works)
Resolution USR-1708
Lone Star LLC
Page 3
5) The landscaping (seeding) plan. (Department of Planning Services)
6) The approved Lighting Plan. (Department of Planning Services)
7) Add a note stating "Weld County shall not be responsible for the maintenance of
drainage related structures." (Department of Public Works)
D. All required Air Emissions Permits must be filed with the Air Pollution Control Division,
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. Evidence of such shall be
submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. (Department of
Public Health and Environment)
E. A Ground Water Monitoring Plan shall be submitted to the Weld County Health
Department of Public Health and Environment for review and approval. Evidence of such
shall be submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning Services.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
F. A Storm Water Discharge Permit for construction activities shall be submitted to the
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment for review and approval.
Evidence of such shall be submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning
Services. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
G. The applicant shall address the requirements (concerns) of the Weld County Department
of Public Works, as stated in their referral response dated August 13, 2009. Evidence of
such shall be submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning Services.
These requirements and concerns include but are not limited to:
• Providing the construction drawings acceptable to the County for the requested
road improvements which include:
o Paving WCR 34 between WCR 51 and WCR 53
o A westbound left turn deceleration lane on WCR 34
o A southbound left turn deceleration lane on WCR 49 onto WCR 34
o A right turn acceleration lane on WCR 49
o A right turn deceleration lane on WCR 49
o Paving the internal roadway and parking lot and widening of the site
access to 60 foot radiuses.
• Providing an updated traffic study
• Providing a final drainage report and final site grading plan
Providing an offsite geotechnical report acceptable to the County that includes
pavement designs for offsite paving improvements. (Department of Public
Works)
H. Evidence that the existing well has been converted from residential to commercial use for
this facility shall be provided to the Department of Planning Services. (Department of
Planning Services)
The applicant shall enter into an Improvements Agreement (On -site and Offsite)
According to Policy Regarding Collateral for Improvements (Lone Star Saltwater Disposal
Facility USR-1708). Collateral will be posted for both the on -site and offsite work to be
completed. The agreement and form of collateral shall be submitted for and reviewed by
the Departments of Planning Services and Public Works and accepted by the Board of
County Commissioners prior to recording the Use by Special Review plat. Or the applicant
may submit evidence that all work has been completed and approved by the Departments
of Public Works and Planning Services. (Departments of Public Works and Planning
Services)
Resolution USR-1708
Lone Star LLC
Page 4
J. The applicant shall submit a Screening Plan to the Department of Planning Services for
review and approval. (Department of Planning Services)
K. A lighting plan, including cut sheets of the intended lights, shall be provided to the
Department of Planning Services for review and approval. The lighting plan shall adhere
to the lighting requirements for off-street parking spaces per Section 23-4-30.E of the
Weld County Code and shall adhere to the lighting requirements in accordance with
Section 23-3-360.F and 23-2-250.D of the Weld County Code. Further, the approved
lighting plan shall be indicated on the plat. (Department of Planning Services)
L. The applicant shall submit an agreement between the surface developer and the mineral
owners and/or lessees or provide evidence that an adequate attempt has been made to
mitigate their concerns. (Department of Planning Services)
2. The applicant shall submit three (3) paper copies of the plat for preliminary approval to the Weld
County Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
3. The Special Review activity shall not occur nor shall any building or electrical permits be issued on
the property until the Special Review plat is ready to be recorded in the office of the Weld County
Clerk and Recorder. (Department of Planning Services)
4. Upon completion of 1. above the applicant shall submit a Mylar plat along with all other
documentation required as Conditions of Approval. The Mylar plat shall be recorded in the office
of the Weld County Clerk and Recorder by Department of Planning Services' Staff. The plat shall
be prepared in accordance with the requirements of Section 23-2-260.D of the Weld County
Code. The Mylar plat and additional requirements shall be submitted within sixty (60) days from
the date of the Board of County Commissioners resolution. The applicant shall be responsible for
paying the recording fee. (Department of Planning Services)
5. The Department of Planning Services respectively requests the surveyor provide a digital copy of
this Use by Special Review. Acceptable CAD formats are .dwg, .dxf, and .dgn (Microstation);
acceptable GIS formats are ArcView shapefiles, ArcInfo Coverages and Arclnfo Export files
format type is .e00. The preferred format for Images is .tif (Group 4). (Group 6 is not acceptable).
This digital file may be sent to dhuerter4co.weld.co.us (Department of Planning Services)
6. Prior to the Release of Building Permits:
A. A building permit shall be obtained prior to the construction of any new building, tanks or
support facilities. (Department of Building Inspection)
B. A building permit application must be completed and two complete sets of plans including
engineered foundation plans bearing the wet stamp of a Colorado registered architect or
engineer must be submitted for review. A geotechnical engineering report performed by a
registered State of Colorado engineer shall be required. (Department of Building
Inspection)
C. Buildings shall conform to the requirements of the various codes adopted at the time of
permit application. Currently the following codes have been adopted by the County and
are being enforced: The 2006 International Building, Residential, Plumbing, Mechanical,
Fuel Gas and Energy Conservation Codes, the 2008 National Electrical Code.
(Department of Building Inspection)
D. A plan review shall be approved and a permit must be issued prior to the start of
construction. (Department of Building Inspection)
E. A letter is required from the Platte Valley Fire Protection District as to whether a fire
permit will be required. (Department of Building Inspection)
Resolution USR-1708
Lone Star LLC
Page 5
F. A concrete secondary containment structure (floor and walls) surrounding each tank or
battery of tanks shall be constructed. The volume retained by the structure shall be 150%
greater than the volume of the largest tank inside the structure. A registered professional
engineer shall design the structure. The structure shall prevent any release from the tank
system from reaching land or waters outside of the containment area. The operator shall
provide evidence from the engineer to the Weld County Department of Public Health and
Environment and Planning Services that the structure has been constructed to meet this
criterion. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
G. A detailed design of the "concrete unloading pad" shall be submitted to the Weld County
Department of Public Health & Environment for review and approval. The design shall
demonstrate how all spilled wastes, stormwater and wash down water will be contained
within the receiving area and concrete sump. The design shall also include the method in
which seams will be sealed to prevent leakage through the pad. A leak detection system
shall be designed and installed beneath the "concrete unloading pad". The "concrete
unloading pad" shall be constructed and operated in accordance with the approved
design. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
H. A copy of the drilling log shall be submitted to the Weld County Department of Public
Health and Environment. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
An individual sewage disposal system (I.S.D.S.) permit is required for sewage flow from
the proposed operations building. The system must be designed by a Colorado
Registered Professional Engineer and in accordance with Weld County I.S.D.S.
regulations. The design must be submitted to the Weld County Department of Public
Health and Environment for review and approval prior to installation. (Department of
Public Health and Environment)
J. Solids and sediment will accumulate in the storage tanks. The facility shall submit a
detailed plan that describes the method those solids will be removed, including all on -site
handling procedures and disposal. Any amendments to the approved plan shall be
submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment for
approval. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Health
and Environment. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
K. A detailed closure plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Health and
Environment and the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. The closure plan
shall include a description of the manner in which the well will be plugged and abandoned,
as well as specific details regarding reclamation of the property. No structures or
equipment associated with the facility shall remain on the property following closure.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
L. The facility shall post financial assurance with the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation
Commission (COGCC). The financial assurance shall be adequate to cover a third -party
closure of the facility, including the plugging and abandonment of the well, in accordance
with industry standards, and the removal of all structure (including concrete) on the
facility. The site shall be returned to its original grade. In the event the COGCC does not
have the authority to require financial assurance for the entire cost required for third -party
closure, the facility shall post the remainder of the financial assurance with Weld County.
The facility shall submit evidence to the Weld County Departments of Public Health and
Environment and Planning Services that the appropriate financial assurance has been
obtained. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
7. Prior to Final Approval of Building Permits:
A. The applicant shall submit evidence to the Weld County Department of Public Health and
Environment, Weld County Planning Services and the Colorado Oil and Gas
•
•
•
Resolution USR-1708
Lone Star LLC
Page 6
Conservation Commission (COGCC) that the facility was constructed in accordance with
application materials. (Department of Public Health & Environment)
8. Prior to Operation
A. The applicants shall notify drivers of large trucks through the placement of a sign on the
facility property that the use of jake brakes upon entering or existing the facility is
prohibited. (Department of Public Works)
B. A stop sign will be required to be installed at the access before traffic will enter onto
County Road 34. (Department of Public Works)
Motion seconded by Bill Hall.
VOTE:
For Passaae
Robert Grand
Bill Hall
Tom Holton
Alexander Zauder
Roy Spitzer
Mark Lawley
Nick Berryman
Jason Maxey
Against Passage Absent
Erich Ehrlich
The Chair declared the resolution passed and ordered that a certified copy be forwarded with the file of this
case to the Board of County Commissioners for further proceedings.
CERTIFICATION OF COPY
I, Kristine Ranslem, Recording Secretary for the Weld County Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the
above and foregoing resolution is a true copy of the resolution of the Planning Commission of Weld County,
Colorado, adopted on October 6, 2009.
Dated the 6'h of October, 2009.
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
•
•
•
SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Lone Star LLC
USR-1708
1. The Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for an Oil and Gas Support
Facility (Class II Oilfield Waste Disposal Facility) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District and subject to
the Development Standards stated hereon. (Department of Planning Services)
2. Approval of this plan may create a vested property right pursuant to Section 23-8-10 of the Weld
County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
3. The facility shall be constructed and operated to ensure that contamination of soil and
groundwater does not occur. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
4. A manager, knowledgeable in operating an injection well, shall be on site when the facility is
receiving waste. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
5. Any individual sewage disposal system (I.S.D.S.) on the property shall be permitted, installed,
maintained and operated in compliance with all provisions of the Weld County Code, pertaining to
I.S.D.S. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
6. Adequate drinking water, hand washing, and toilet facilities shall be provided. (Department of
Public Health and Environment)
7. No disposal of waste other than Class II, as defined by the Environmental Protection Agency, is
permitted. Any changes from the approved Class II use would require an amendment to this
Special Review permit. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
8. Any wastes generated on the facility shall be disposed in accordance with the Colorado solid
Waste Act, Section 30-20-100.5, C.R.S., or other appropriate rule, regulation, or law. (Department
of Public Health and Environment)
9. The maximum permissible noise level shall not exceed the industrial limit of 70 dB (A), as
measured according to Section 25-12-103, CRS. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
10. Fugitive dust and fugitive particulate emissions shall be controlled on this site. (Department of
Public Health and Environment)
11. All chemicals stored on -site must be stored secure, on an impervious surface, and in accordance
with manufacturer's recommendations. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
12. The facility shall comply with Colorado Air Quality Control Commission Regulations and any air
permits issued by the Colorado Department of Health and Environment Air Pollution Control
Division. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
13. All liquid wastes received at the facility shall be unloaded on the unloading pad. The concrete
unloading pad shall be cleaned at a frequency that prevents oils and other wastes from building
up on the pad. At a minimum, the pad shall be pressure washed daily to remove any waste build-
up. During winter months, the facility shall maintain the unloading pad free of ice. (Department of
Public Health and Environment)
14. Any analysis of waste shall be forwarded to the Weld County Health Department, Environmental
Health Services Division. The Division reserves the right to require additional, more extensive
monitoring at a later date. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
•
•
•
Resolution USR-1708
Lone Star LLC
Page 8
15. All liquid and solid wastes (as defined in the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act, 30-20-
100.5, C.R.S., as amended) shall be stored and removed for final disposal in a manner that
protects against surface and groundwater contamination. (Department of Public Health and
Environment)
16. Any petroleum -contaminated soils on the facility shall be removed, treated or disposed in
accordance with all applicable rules and regulations. (Department of Public Health and
Environment)
17. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with all of the foregoing
Development Standards. Noncompliance with any of the foregoing Development Standards may
be reason for revocation of the Permit by the Board of County Commissioners. (Department of
Public Health and Environment)
18. The facility shall comply with the approved groundwater monitoring plan. (Department of Public
Health and Environment)
19. All storm water, which has come into contact with waste materials on the site, shall be confined on
the site. In the event that storm water is not adequately controlled on the site, upon written
notification from the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment or the Colorado
Department of Public Health and Environment, a comprehensive site -wide storm water plan shall
be developed and implemented. The plan must be approved, in writing prior to implementation by
the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment and the Colorado Department of
Public Health and Environment. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
20. The operation shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of the State and Federal
agencies and the Weld County Code. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
21. No parking or staging of commercial vehicles shall be allowed on County roads. (Department of
Public Works)
22. The maximum number of employees employed at the site shall be six (6). (Department of
Planning Services)
23. Buildings shall conform to the requirements of the various codes adopted at the time of permit
application. Currently the following has been adopted by Weld County: 2006 International Building
Code; 2006 International Residential Code; 2006 International Mechanical Code; 2006
International Plumbing Code; 2006 International Fuel Gas and Energy Code; and the 2008
National Electrical Code and Chapter 29 of the Weld County Code.
(Department of Building Inspection)
24. Hauling hours shall be limited to 7:00AM until 7:00PM daily. (Department of Planning Services)
25. The Landscaping on site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved Screening Plan.
(Department of Planning Services)
26. 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 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. (Department of Planning Services)
•
•
•
Resolution USR-1708
Lone Star LLC
Page 9
27. Effective January 1, 2003, Building Permits issued on the lot will be required to adhere to the fee
structure of the County wide Road Impact Fee Program. (Department of Planning Services)
28. Effective August 1, 2005, Building Permits issued on the proposed lots will be required to adhere
to the fee structure of the Capital Expansion Impact Fee and the stormwater/drainage impact fee.
(Ordinance 2005-8 Section 5-8-40)
29. Should noxious weeds exist on the property, or become established as a result of the proposed
development, the applicant/landowner shall be responsible for controlling the noxious weeds,
pursuant to Section 15-1-40 of the Weld County Code.
30. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Design Standards of
Section 23-2-240, Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
31. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Operation Standards
of Section 23-2-250, Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
32. Personnel from Weld County Government shall be granted access onto the property at any
reasonable time in order to ensure the activities carried out on the property comply with the
Development Standards stated herein and all applicable Weld County regulations. (Department
of Planning Services)
33. The Special Review area shall be limited to the plans shown hereon and governed by the
foregoing standards and all applicable Weld County regulations. Substantial changes from the
plans or Development Standards as shown or stated shall require the approval of an amendment
of the Permit by the Weld County Board of County Commissioners before such changes from the
plans or Development Standards are permitted. Any other changes shall be filed in the office of
the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
34. Weld County shall not be responsible for the maintenance of drainage related structures.
(Department of Public Works)
35. The applicant shall obtain necessary right of way and access permits from the Public Works
Department prior to the start of construction activities within the Weld County Right of Way.
Contact Amy Burry, Utilities Coordinator, at 970-304-6496 x 3764. (Department of Public Works)
I
Commissioner Ehlrich reminded the applicant of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan as indicated in
testimony today and referenced Sections 22-5-90.A, 22-5-90.B and 22-5-90.D recognizing oil and gas
development in the County as an integral part of the County economy and has a substantial direct and indirect
impact on current and future land use. Also, the County recognizes the substantial economic contribution of
oil and gas production in Northern Colorado.
(Erich Ehrlich left the meeting)
(Bruce Barker entered the meeting)
The Chair read the next case into record.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1708
APPLICANT: Lone Star LLC
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for Oil and
Gas Support Facility (Class II - Oilfield Waste Disposal Facility) in the A
(Agricultural) Zone District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the N2 N2 NW4 of Section 18, T3N, R64W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to CR 34 and East of and adjacent to CR 49.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, commented that the injection well facility will encompass approximately 6
acres of the 37.3 acre property it is located on and will be located at the eastern end of the site adjacent to
existing oil and gas tank batteries.
The facility is located immediately west of the Horton Feedlot (USR-1152 for up to 5,000 head of cattle
approved in 1999). The nearest residence is located approximately 825 feet to the west of the site on the north
of County Road 34. There are approximately seven residences along County Road 49 located approximately
2,300 feet to 3,300 feet from the site. Oil and gas improvements (tanks batteries) are located immediately to
the north of the proposed facility. Vacant land, with oil and gas improvements, are located immediately to the
north and south of this site. The applicant is proposing to place the facility in a location that is lower in
elevation than the adjacent battery tanks located immediately to the north. Attached Conditions of Approval
and Development Standards (screening plan, lighting plan) will help to ensure that the proposed use is
compatible with the surrounding area.
Ten referrals were sent out. Four (4) Referrals were received and either indicated no concerns or are
addressed through development standards and conditions of approval. No referral response was received
from Weld County Sheriff's Department, Platte Valley Fire Protection District, Colorado Division of Wildlife,
Colorado Oil and Gas Commission, and Weld County Ambulance Services.
Fifteen (15) letters and e -mails from surrounding property owners have been received. A summary of
concerns mentioned in this correspondence were:
• Traffic concerns (increasing traffic at an already busy, dangerous intersection, traffic noise, traffic
safety, hauling hours).
• Adverse impacts from the injection well operation (noise, dust, lighting, potential for contamination
of water wells in the area, potential for disruption for cell phone service during operations)
• Applicant is from out of state and has never operated an injection well facility.
• Incompatible with the surrounding agricultural area. This area already has a lot of impacts (with
Horton Feedlot) — this facility will only add to these impacts.
• Height and location of tanks disrupt the visual environment.
• There are already several injection well facilities in the vicinity of this site.
Some proposed mitigation proposed in surrounding property owner letters consisted of:
• Limit hauling to daytime hours (7 to 7)
EXHIBIT
C
•
•
•
• Place a berm around the facility.
• Screen site with trees and shrubbery (one variation would be to have the applicant provide well
started trees to neighbors within site of the operation so that the neighboring property owners
could grow the trees on their property — to provide screening.
• Dim lights of the facility during nighttime hours
• Place tanks on a less visually prominent location of the property.
• Prohibit use of jake brakes.
• Place a "bird cage" over the injection site (while injection is occurring) to reduce noise.
Due to the concerns expressed by the neighboring property owners. The Department of Planning Services
recommended that the applicant hold a community meeting with the neighboring property owners (or at a
minimum meet with neighboring property owners individually) in regards to this case.
The Department of Planning Services is recommending the following Conditions of Approval/Development
Standards to address or mitigate concerns:
• A screening plan will need to be submitted and approved by the Department of Planning Services
prior to recording the plat.
• Consistent with other injection well facilities recently approved in the county — A development
standard requiring: "Hauling hours shall be limited to 7:00AM until 7:00PM daily." Has been added.
• The applicant will also be required to submit a lighting plan to be reviewed and approved by the
Department of Planning Services. The lighting plan will need to meet the following requirements of the
Weld County Code:
"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
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."
It should also be noted that the site plan indicates that the facility will be located at the eastern end of the
property (furthest away from the majority of the residential properties in the area). The applicant is also
proposing to place the tanks in an area to the south of the proposed office building for the facility that will have
a ground level approximately 10 feet lower than the existing oil tank and pump site immediately to the north of
the proposed injection well site.
• The' Department of Public Works has also proposed road improvements/mitigation to address
safety/road impacts associated with this proposed operation.
The Department of Planning Services feels that the development standards and conditions of approval will
adequately mitigate any impacts associated with this use and recommends approval.
Commissioner Maxey asked how the houses on the feed lot property play into this. Mr. Gathman indicated
that the houses are to the east and would be closer to the site.
Don Carroll, Public Works, commented that County Road 34 is a paved local road. County Road 34 is paved
out to the intersection of County Road 51 and was done about 10 to 12 years ago with the feedlot. Traffic
counts from County Road 49 to 51 are 275 ADT and the next mile from County Road 51 to 53 is 150 ADT. He
indicated that that stretch of road is a magnesium chloride road which took care of the dust problem and gave
it more stabilization. Staff doesn't feel that particular section of road will hold up to this proposed type of use.
Mr. Carroll said that there is a lot of oil and gas activity in the area. County Road 49 is a strategic roadway and
13
•
•
•
carries about 4000 vehicles per day. The average speed is 70 miles per hour and it is posted 65 mph. Truck
counts on County Road 49 is 35% trucks. Staff is asking for an Improvements Agreement for upgrades to
accommodate the facility between County Roads 51 and 53. They are asking for that mile to be paved for
heavy truck use which will be going to this facility. They are asking for improvements to the intersection of
County Road 49 and 34 in the way of accel/decel lanes. He added that the applicant is proposing 120 round
trips per day.
Through the Improvements Agreement there is a maintenance clause which states that any damage caused
to the road would be the applicant's responsibility.
Janet Carter, Public Works, showed an illustrated slide for the location of all the oil and gas wells near the site.
This site is a disposal site in which they are fracking wells and there will be trucks coming in to dispose of
water. Ms. Carter indicated that a few of these sites are permitted but not actually performing yet.
Staff is expecting quite a bit of traffic for this site. The applicant is proposing that the majority of traffic would
be coming from Gutterson Ranch to the east. Staff has asked the applicant to pave the portion that is not
paved to Gutterson Ranch which is from their site to the east. Staff also requested that the applicant install
accel/decel lanes on County Road 49 at County Road 34. She added that this is consistent with a lot of
projects in the past. Because the applicant is proposing that the majority of traffic is coming from east staff
asked that they put in a deceleration lane into the facility.
Commissioner Berryman asked how much of the traffic is coming from County Road 49 rather than from the
east. Ms. Carter said that currently in the applicant's traffic study they are not proposing much traffic from
County Road 49. She added that they have been making some adjustments to their traffic study. Ms. Carter
said that when they received the traffic study the applicant was proposing 120 trips per day and the majority of
the traffic would be coming from the east at Gutterson Ranch.
Commissioner Grand asked if there is any program that the Sheriffs Department can encourage adherence to
the speed limit. Ms. Carter said that they are working with the Traffic Division of the Sheriffs Department to
patrol that area as well as working with the school district to move the school bus stop signs on County Road
49 to alternate routes such as the side county roads.
Troy Swain, Environmental Health, commented that they recommended approval with some suggested
conditions which have been incorporated into the staff report.
Jim Lee, Lone Star LLC, Andrews, Texas, commented that they are requesting approval for fabrication of a
salt water disposal facility. Since acquiring the property he has done extensive cleanup of the site. The site
was previously a cow/calf operation and had a tremendous amount of waste on it.
Mr. Lee stated that they used the grade of the site to place these tanks. These tanks are very large diameter
and low profile to accommodate unobtrusiveness. The injection pumps will be housed and insulated to
minimize noise. With this design they have utilized the grading of the site and dropped the tanks seven (7)
feet lower to try and limit visibility. The applicant is proposing to pave the entire entrance facility to eliminate
dust.
Mr. Lee said that the system will be a completely closed system. There will be emissions but they will be
controlled and monitored.
A lighting plan will be submitted to the Planning Department. Mr. Lee noted that this site is adjacent to an
existing oil and gas battery on the north and south side of County Road 34.
Dan Hull, Lamp, Rynearson and Associates, 808 8`" St, Greeley, CO. Mr. Hall said that the applicant is using
low profile tanks and will be doing some grading to mitigate the impact. He added that they are doing
everything they can to minimize visual impact.
The construction, approval, permitting of the well is all controlled by the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation
Commission (COGCC). The well is approximately 10,000 feet deep. The producing formation is above the
14
•
•
•
injection formation so the oil production formation is at about 7,000 to 8,000 feet. The aquifer which most of
the wells pump out of is approximately 400 feet in elevation. According to the COGCC requirements, the
applicant has to provide a level of protection for the groundwater.
Mr. Hull stated that there will be secondary containment around the tank farm as well as for the off-loading
area. There will also be well monitoring installed around the facility to determine if there has been any
contamination to the surrounding area.
Mr. Hull commented that they do not agree with portions of condition of approval 1.G., specifically paving
WCR 34 between WCR 51 and WCR 53, a westbound left turn deceleration land on WCR 34, a southbound
left turn deceleration lane on SCR 49 onto WCR 34, a right turn acceleration lane on WCR 49, and a right turn
deceleration lane on WCR 49. He requested that those conditions he listed be removed from the staff report.
Mr. Hull said that Mr. Lee had a pre -application meeting with Weld County in 2008. Public Works did provide
comments at that time requiring that an accel/decel lane be installed on County Road 49. He indicated that
they expected that requirement but feel it is important to have a traffic study to make sure it is warranted. On
August 13, 2008, after application submittal, they received comments from Public Works and to their surprise
the improvements have increased dramatically. What started as an accel/decel lane has increased to what he
listed earlier. The project cannot move forward with the magnitude of these improvements.
The accel/decel lane would be approximately $100,000 worth of improvements on the lower end. Upon further
research he found that it could cost up to $690,000 worth of improvements. The improvements to add a left
turn lane to the facility would be approximately $100,000 worth of improvements. Paving one mile of county
road would be approximately $500,000 worth of improvements. With all of these improvements the total
comes to $1.3 million in improvements. This facility is not viable at this amount of improvements.
Mr. Hull added that after receiving these comments they met with Public Works staff and had felt that they
were moving in a positive direction but with no resolution. An updated traffic study was submitted to Public
Works as well as a letter stating their concerns.
Mr. Hull indicated that whether or not this facility is built the same amount of traffic will be there. The facility is
not creating the traffic; the applicant is only trying to capture the traffic that is already there.
Mathew Kruse, Lamp, Rynearson Associates, stated that from a traffic engineering standpoint this is a unique
site at there are numerous wells in this county and they have no idea on the exact route that they are going to
take every day. Therefore they used their best engineering judgment and good faith effort to estimate a trip
distribution that they are comfortable with. Originally the first submittal was that 40 percent was coming from
the west and 60 percent coming from the east. They have since revised that to show that 2/3 of the traffic is
coming from the east and 1/3 is coming from the west.
Mr. Kruse clarified that the 120 trips per day previously stated is incorrect. The permit limits the amount of
truck traffic on a daily basis to 60 round trips so that is 60 entering and 60 exiting for a total of 120 trips but
that is not a 120 round trips.
Commissioner Grand noted some tragic traffic accidents on County Road 49. He added that there are some
sensitivity issues in this area and the county is way behind where it should be on its roads from a safety issue
for the residents of the county. Mr. Kruse said that they do not want to discount safety. He added that they
have switched the location of the access drive for safety issues and safety is a big concern of theirs as well.
Hours of operation are from 7 am to 7 pm. The trucks need to go to the well facilities, load up and come back,
therefore they will miss the am peak hour and when they return they will miss the pm peak hour.
Commissioner Grand asked Mr. Lee if he is feeling burdened with solving a problem that is not solely his. Mr.
Lee agreed with those comments.
The Chair called a recess at 4:49 p.m.
15
•
•
•
The Chair called the meeting back to order at 4:59 p.m.
Commissioner Maxey appreciated the work on the traffic studies and clarified if these figures are just best
guesses. Mr. Kruse said that they know the amount of trucks coming to the site on a daily basis which is 60
trips in and out. Based on the location of Gutterson Ranch, this is the best engineering judgment of predicting
where the trips are going to come from.
Mr. Maxey calculated that it is about 250 feet east of the crest of the hill on County Road 34. He asked if the
applicant still believes that there shouldn't be a left turn lane into the facility based on a site distance
standpoint. Mr. Kruse said that they have a diagram that they can provide which shows the existing profile of
County Road 34 and where the location of the access is and how far back you can see in each direction. He
added that it satisfies the standards for site distance.
Commissioner Berryman asked to hear more about what is being proposed for the landscape/screening plan.
Mr. Hull commented that right now the plan doesn't show any trees or screening. He said that they are doing
the low profile tanks and grading in a manner that would reduce the visual impact. As far as trees, they have
not shown them yet but it is something that they would work with planning staff on what would be required.
Commissioner Holton clarified if the applicant had originally planned on installing the accel/decel lanes on
County Road 49. Mr. Hull said that they didn't plan on it, but that it was the original comment. The applicant's
response to that was to do a traffic study to see if it is warranted. He added that the original traffic study did
not support it.
Ms. Carter said that when there is a pre -application meeting, it is at a very preliminary stage. They have not
visited the site and don't know very much of what is going on in the area. Therefore they don't know a lot of
the requirements that will take place on the development at that point. Until they actually receive the submittal
materials like the traffic study, drainage report, and site plan they don't know what they will actually have to
require to make sure that that site is up to county code and standards.
It was mentioned that it would be $100,000 for the accel/decel lanes. Ms. Carter stated that they have no way
to confirm a price for something like that and they would never throw out a money value for what an
improvement would cost.
Ms. Carter said that the actual traffic data that was presented today, she has not had a chance to review.
They met with the applicant a month ago and the applicant had proposed to refigure some of their traffic count
data at her request. She did not receive an updated traffic study until the September 29th and has not had
adequate time to review it. Commissioner Holton clarified if all of these requirements are based on the recent
traffic study. Ms. Carter said that they are based off of the preliminary traffic study which they submitted but
not the recent study. Ms. Carter added that there is one thing that would not change, warranted or not, is the
accel/decel lanes on County Road 49 due to the safety issues.
Ms. Carter pointed out that the am peak hour on County Road 34 is actually at 9:30 am and 2:15 pm for the
pm peak hour. She added that it could be due to scheduling at the feed lots or various traffic within Gutterson
Ranch.
Commissioner Holton commented that it appears that we are taking it at the worst case scenario. He added
that there should be a trigger which states that after so many trips then it becomes paved. Ms. Carter said
that we get to a certain point with development in general that it becomes a point where it is needed and now
it's become a safety hazard because we didn't foresee it in advance. We reach a trigger and we didn't see the
trigger far enough in advance to ask for that improvement. Mr. Holton understood but felt that the burden was
put on one applicant.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Ray Nelson, 15950 CR 47.5, LaSalle CO, stated that he submitted a letter on September 28, 2009. He
appreciated that the tanks were moved down off of the highest portion of the property; however he is still
curious as the last drawing he saw had 36 feet tall tanks.
16
•
•
•
There was a community meeting a week ago and lighting was an equal concern to traffic. He asked what
shielded lights are and how it can be mitigated.
Mr. Nelson asked that the hours of operation be set in concrete.
He recommended that rather than putting trees on the site that trees be given to the local landowners. He
thought that if they are given to those that want to hide this from their view they will make sure those trees live.
Mr. Nelson is curious who monitors the wells and any groundwater spills.
He expressed appreciation for all of the traffic studies and diagrams. He commented that one more truck on
that road is dangerous. We need to have accel/decel lanes. Trucks that size tear up a gravel road in no time
and he believes it needs to be paved.
Jim Johnson, 16015 CR 49, LaSalle CO, agreed with Mr. Nelson. The traffic is his biggest concern. He has
had people take his gate out three (3) times due to the sun coming down and blinding the traffic. With regard
to the accel/decel lanes, he asked how much land he is going to lose. Mr. Johnson said that when that
intersection is changed he will need to find a different way out.
Kathryn Bank, 16201 CR 49, concurred with all the traffic issues. She asked what happens if the permit limits
are exceeded for the 60 round trips per day and how it is enforced.
Lonnie Ford, 16299 CR 49, stated that he has lived out there for 25 years and seen a lot of change to County
Road 49. He appreciated the work that has been done to try and make things better such as dropping the
tank height to possibly move the tank batteries further back. He shares the concerns of his neighbors. He
said that there is no guarantee that this facility will get the traffic from the Gutterson Ranch and will therefore
need business from other locations. He said that there may be more traffic from the west than what is
anticipated.
Linda Ratzlaff, 24249 CR 34, stated that she appreciated that the applicant wants to be a good neighbor;
however his home is in Texas. She commented that most of the traffic will come from Gutterson Ranch;
however he admitted to her that he is a business man and that he would not turn down companies coming
from the other direction. She is worried about the traffic as well.
Ms. Ratzlaff asked if there would be any water testing and if so how often. If there are trees purchased they
will not be big enough in her lifetime. She would like to see bigger, more established trees to cover the site.
Charlene Fridge, 15417 CR 49, commented that they can see the tanks from the feedlot and they get a lot of
dust from the feedlot. She is concerned with the dust they may be getting from the trucks. She is very
concerned about the traffic and added that the deceleration lanes are a must. She agreed with all the
previous comments made from her neighbors.
The Chair closed the public portion of the meeting.
Mr. Lee said that the proposed tanks are 16 feet tall and will be 7 feet below the unloading station. The tallest
tank on facility will be 10 foot lower than those tanks on the hill. This style of tank has not been seen in Weld
County.
Mr. Hull clarified the hours of operation. Truck off-loading will be from 7 am to 7 pm but the facility will operate
24/7. During off-loading times they will pump into the ground. Noise should be under the requirement.
The applicant is willing to work with the neighbors with landscaping. Mr. Lee said that he is willing to supply
trees to the neighbors but does not want to be responsible for them in the future years if they would die.
The applicants stated that the lights will be downcast to the site and they will submit a lighting plan to staff.
17
Mr. Lee said that the State will monitor the number of trucks every month when he sends in a report to them.
•
•
•
Mr. Kruse said that if in the future a right turn north bound deceleration lane and left turn deceleration lane on
County Road 49 is installed it may not solve all the problems. It could create different problems. If you think
about a truck getting into that lane and if there is a vehicle that is basically going the same speed just behind
them it is in the shadow or the blind spot of that vehicle. Therefore if a car turns out thinking that truck is going
to turn there is a possibility to have other accidents.
Commissioner Spitzer asked how often the COGCC checks the integrity of the well. Mr. Lee believed the well
is checked annually.
Mr. Spitzer asked how "jake brakes" will be handled in this operation. Mr. Lee said that that they can make a
requirement for the truck drivers to not use those.
Commissioner Lawley commented that in the past we have always done proportionate share of paving and
asked why it hasn't been introduced into this case. Ms. Carter said that they will look into something along
those lines if that is the Planning Commission's direction. She added that since the applicant's numbers have
changed from 120 to 60 trips per day they could look at wrapping the road instead of conventional paving.
She said that staff makes the recommendations off of the data that they receive. She added that they have
not had the chance to review the latest study so that is something that they can look into if that is the direction.
Mr. Lawley felt that these cases need to be addressed the way it has been done in the past. To be consistent
in the past, staff has always indicated proportionate share. Ms. Carter said she believes there may be some
flexibility with County Road 34 prior to the County Commissioner hearing upon review of the latest traffic study.
The Chair asked for any changes to the conditions of approval or development standards. Mr. Gathman
suggested adding Condition 7.A. "Prior to Operation" stating 'The applicants shall notify drivers of large trucks
through the placement of a sign on the facility property that the use of jake brakes upon entering or existing
the facility is prohibited."
In addition, Mr. Gathman recommended adding Condition 7.B. which reads "A stop sign will be required to be
installed at the access before traffic will enter onto County Road 34."
Roy Spitzer moved to add Condition of Approval 7.A and 7.6 as recommended by staff, seconded by Mark
Lawley. Motion carried.
Mr. Gathman stated that Development Standard 36 is a duplicate of Development Standard 17 and suggested
to remove number 36.
Roy Spitzer moved to delete Development Standard 36, seconded by Robert Grand. Motion carried.
The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the amended Development Standards and Conditions
of Approval and if they are in agreement with those. Mr. Lee replied that they are in agreement but would like
to have further review of Condition 1.G and address that with the County Commissioners.
Mark Lawley moved that Case USR-1708 be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the
amended Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's
recommendation of approval, seconded by Bill Hall.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Nick
Berryman, yes with comment; Erich Ehrlich, absent; Robert Grand, yes with comment; Bill Hall, yes with
comment; Alexander Zauder, yes with comment; Jason Maxey, yes with comment; Roy Spitzer, yes with
comment; Mark Lawley, yes with comment; Tom Holton, yes with comment. Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Berryman commented that it is imperative that the County Commissioners review the testimony
today and attempt to deal with the issues of public safety as well as the improvements from a feasibility
standpoint. He believes that it is unreasonable to have the applicant bear the full burden of the proposed
improvements and there needs to be some effort to work with them.
18
•
•
•
Commissioner Grand commented that a close review of the paving and improvement requirements of the road
needs to be done in light of the new figures. In addition, he asked for consideration by the County
Commissioners of reducing the speed to 55 mph on County Road 49. He feels it is unfair to burden all of the
improvements on one customer and is concerned that it doesn't fix anything if the speed limit is not lowered.
Commissioner Hall commented that it seems the turn lanes are a reasonable request. He also feels that
paving of the extra mile is an unreasonable request. Individuals cannot support this; however it is common for
housing developments and other businesses to be required to do the turn lanes.
Commissioner Spitzer commented that he thinks it is reasonable that new industries share the incremental
costs of the improvements; however he is not sure that we can expect to burden them with the entire costs of
the improvements. Public safety is really our own responsibility and feels that the turn lanes are probably
warranted.
Commissioner Maxey agreed with Mr. Hall's comments regarding the unreasonable request of paving the mile
road between County Road 51 and 53. He added that he agrees with the turn lanes and feels that it is a
matter of public safety as well as development of property.
Commissioner Zauder agreed with Mr. Grand's comments.
Commissioner Lawley agreed with all of the Commissioner's comments.
Commissioner Holton commented that he would like the County Commissioner's to take a good look at
Condition 1.G. He would like to recommend reducing the speed limit on County Road 49.
The Chair reminded the public that the County Commissioners will hear this case on October 28, 2009 at 10
a.m.
The Chair read the next case into record.
CASE NUMBER:
PLANNER:
REQUEST:
Code Ordinance 2009-8
Brad Mueller
In the Matter of Repealing and Reenacting, with Amendments, Chapters
22 Comprehensive Plan, 23 Zoning, 24 Subdivision, 26 Mixed Use
Development, and 27 Planned Unit Development, of the Weld County
Code, specifically the addition of language concerning the permitted use
of a Medical Marijuana Dispensary (Amend Section 23-1-90 Definitions;
and Add Section 23-3-230.D.10)
Brad Mueller, Planning Services, commented that some code changes were brought before the Planning
Commission earlier this year. He added that those changes were approved by this Board and then brought
before the County Commissioners for the first and second readings and have been approved. More recently a
couple of issues have come up that the County Commissioners felt needed immediate attention and therefore
staff has come back with an addendum to that set of code changes. The County Commissioners have
continued the third hearing to October 12, 2009.
The two topics we are discussing today are medical marijuana dispensaries and correctional facilities.
Medical marijuana was approved by the Colorado voters in 2000. Since that time about 9,000 patients have
registered in Colorado for medical marijuana use. The dispensaries not regulated; it is rather left to the local
jurisdictions. More recently there has been an increase in activity due to a decree earlier in the year which
lead to relaxation of federal enforcement of marijuana consumption and use. The registration of patients
within Colorado is projected to be about 15,000 by the end of the year and currently 400 in Weld County.
In light of this, staff and the County Commissioners are recommending that a new use be both defined and put
into the appropriate portions of the Weld County Code. Staff is recommending that the medical marijuana
dispensaries be listed as a use by special review in the C-3 zone district. There are currently 75 parcels in the
19
Hello