HomeMy WebLinkAbout20062073 HEARING CERTIFICATION
DOCKET NO. 2006-45 AND 2006-46
RE: SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT#1562
FOR A MAJOR FACILITY OF A PUBLIC UTILITY(A 72-MILE 230 KV TRANSMISSION
LINE AND ONE NEW SWITCHING STATION) IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE
DISTRICT - CEDAR CREEK WIND ENERGY, LLC /GREEN LIGHT ENERGY, INC.
AND
SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT#1563
FOR A MAJOR FACILITY OF A PUBLIC UTILITY (UP TO 300 INDIVIDUAL THREE-
BLADED WIND TURBINE GENERATORS) IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE
DISTRICT- CEDAR CREEK WIND ENERGY, LLC / GREEN LIGHT ENERGY, INC.
A public hearing was conducted on August 2, 2006, at 10:00 a.m., with the following present:
Commissioner M. J. Geile, Chair
Commissioner David E. Long, Pro-Tem
Commissioner William H. Jerke - EXCUSED
Commissioner Robert D. Masden
Commissioner Glenn Vaad
Also present:
Acting Clerk to the Board, Esther Gesick
County Attorney, Bruce Barker
Planning Department representative, Chris Gathman
Health Department representative, Char Davis
Public Works representative, Donald Carroll
The following business was transacted:
I hereby certify that pursuant to notices dated June 29,2006,and duly published July5,2006,in the
Fort Lupton Press, a public hearing was conducted to consider the request of Cedar Creek Wind
Energy,LLC,and Green Light Energy, Inc.,fora Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special
Review(USR)Permit#1562 for a Major Facility of a Public Utility(a 72-mile 230 kV transmission
line and one new switching station)in the A(Agricultural)Zone District, as well as a Site Specific
Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit#1563 for a Major Facility of a Public Utility
(up to 300 individual three-bladed wind turbine generators) in the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
Bruce Barker, County Attorney, made this a matter of record, and advised the applicants'
representative,David Stoner,that he has the option of continuing this matter to a date when the full
Board will be present. However,if he decides to proceed today,it will require three affirmative votes,
or in the case of a tie vote, Commissioner Jerke will listen to the record and make the determining
vote. Mr. Stoner indicated he would like to proceed today. In response to Chair Geile, Mr. Barker
stated the applications for each of the cases are in compliance with the 1041 Regulations of the
Weld County Code.
2006-2073
PL1845
PL1846
OP ', PL /�LtJ 0 -OiO
HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK WIND ENERGY, LLC, AND GREEN LIGHT
ENERGY, INC. (USR#1562 AND #1563)
PAGE 2
Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services,presented a brief summary of the proposals and
entered the favorable recommendation of the Planning Commission for each of the cases into the
record as written. He stated the applicants are proposing 300 wind turbines, along with the
associated substation and power transmission lines. He stated the main western entrance to the
site is from Weld County Road 122, located generally northwest of the Pawnee Buttes. He further
stated the Town of Grover is approximately five miles west of the site. Mr. Gathman stated the
proposal consists of 31,670 acres; however, only 118 acres will have permanent structures. He
stated the wind turbines will be required to locate a minimum of 1,000 feet from adjacent homes,
400 feet from existing roads and USR boundaries,and they cannot interfere with existing oil and gas
facilities. He further stated the applicant has met with the Colorado Division of Wildlife(CDOW),
which in a letter dated July 12, 2006, recommends 10 of the 39 wind turbines adjacent to the
escarpment be setback at least 220 yards from the rim edge. He stated there are no significant
impacts with the remaining 29 turbines adjacent to the escarpment,and the applicant has agreed
to the setback proposal. He further stated the CDOW has requested that setbacks from the
Sharp-tailed Grouse nesting area would be less than one-half mile for three of the turbine sites. He
stated the reduced setback distances would be agreed to in exchange for the applicants funding or
conducting research on the impacts of turbines on grouse behavior to guide future development.
He stated the applicants have also agreed to engage in habitat enhancement projects and
supplemental Sharp-tailed Grouse transplants. Mr. Gathman stated the transmission line is
proposed along a one-half-mile section line easement. He stated the Town of Grover supports the
proposal, and the Planning Commission added a Condition of Approval dealing with a Road
Maintenance Agreement to address impacts from construction and heavy equipment. He further
stated the turbines will range in height from 327 to 391.5 feet at the tip of the blade, they will be
spaced 700 to 800 feet apart, and the rows of turbines will be set back one-third to one-half mile
from roads. Mr. Gathman stated the applicants are proposing an office/maintenance facility for
employees, one substation near Weld County Road 105, south of Weld County Road 122, a
temporary concrete batch plant and gravel mining operation (which will be requested under a
separate application) to support the upkeep of local gravel roads, the transmission line, and a
switching station near the Town of Keenesburg. He stated the Town of Keenesburg is opposed to
the alternative route along Interstate 76,which conflicts with its Comprehensive Plan. He explained
the applicant is requesting a permit fora 72-mile easement corridor for the transmission line,which
will use"H"frame structures,with a maximum ground clearance of 14 feet,and the line will end at
the proposed switching station. He stated the transmission line will be within close proximity to
several residences;however,it will still be in compliance with national electrical regulations,and the
property owners will be compensated for the loss of any crops. Mr. Gathman stated both
applications are 1041-regulated applications, since they are a matter of State-wide concern. He
stated the project will address part of the increasing electrical demand in Colorado,as well as help
Public Service Company of Colorado fulfill the renewable energy requirements of Amendment#37,
which was approved in a General Election in 2004. He stated 17 referral agencies reviewed the
wind turbine proposal, and eight provided comments; while 15 referral agencies reviewed the
transmission line and switching station proposals,and eight provided comments which have been
addressed in the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards. Mr. Gathman stated staff
received numerous telephone inquiries and correspondence regarding the alignment of the wind
turbines and transmission line structures, property devaluation, loss of view corridors, impacts to
agricultural lands, and conflicts with wildlife. He referred to a Memorandum, marked Exhibit O,
2006-2073
PL1845
PL1846
HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK WIND ENERGY, LLC, AND GREEN LIGHT
ENERGY, INC. (USR#1562 AND #1563)
PAGE 3
regarding changes to the Draft Resolution for USR #1562, and requested the last sentence of
Condition of Approval #3K be modified to read, "Also, the applicant shall attempt to address the
concerns of the Colorado Division of Wildlife specific to wildlife, relative to the towers and
transmission alignment." Mr. Gathman also requested Conditions of Approval#4.A and #4.B be
deleted. Commissioner Long suggested retaining the last sentence of Condition #4.B, since
building plans may be of use to the Pawnee Fire Protection District. Lastly,Mr.Gathman requested
Development Standards#28 through#33 be deleted,and that Condition of Approval#3.N be added
to state,"The applicant shall attempt to address the concerns of the Bijou Irrigation District specific
to transmission line alignment and identifying the inlet canal on all recorded plat maps."
In response to Chair Geile,Mr.Gathman stated 118 acres of the overall site will be partof the turbine
facility, and each structure will generate up to one(1) megawatt(MW)of power. He stated Xcel
Energy will own the switching station, and the transmission line will be owned by Babcock and
Brown,which is operated by Cedar Creek Wind Energy,LLC. He further stated there is an existing
115 kilovolt (kV) transmission line near the Town of Keenesburg, which will be rebuilt to
accommodate the proposed 230 kV line. Responding to Commissioner Vaad, Mr.Gathman stated
the "escarpment" is the drop off area along the ridge..
Char Davis, Department of Public Health and Environment,stated there will be a septic system and
potable water for the employees at the maintenance building, and staff is requesting a Dust
Abatement Plan and a Waste Management Plan.
Donald Carroll, Department of Public Works,stated he met with the applicants'representatives to
discuss a potential batching plant and gravel operation for use on local roads. He stated the batch
plant would be located at the substation site. He further stated right-of-way permits will be required
for large equipment using the County rights-of-way,and the applicants intend to use a section line
access through a Nonexclusive License Agreement. Mr.Carroll stated the operation will be required
to submit a Stormwater Drainage Management Plan,On-Site/Off-Site Improvements Agreements,
and a Long-Term Road Maintenance Agreement to address hauling in equipment, dust control,
maintenance,and transporting oversize vehicles. In response to Commissioner Long, Mr.Carroll
stated signage was not included in the discussions;however,it can be added to the Improvements
Agreement to ensure workers going to the site do not get lost or enter an area where there is not
enough room to turn around. Responding to Commissioner Masden, Mr.Carroll stated the County
does have a few gravel pits in the area; however, the applicant has indicated it may bring some
material in from Pine Bluffs. In response to Chair Geile, Mr. Barker stated the subject permit is for
the transmission line corridor; however, the specific placement of the poles still needs to be
coordinated with the property owners. Mr.Gathman stated the switching station is site specific,and
the applicants are in the process of a Recorded Exemption for the site. He stated the wind turbines
will be location specific;however,the applicants are still working to micro-site the turbine locations.
He further stated the applicant has submitted drawings for the lines that connect the turbines and
lead to the transmission line and switching station. Mr.Gathman displayed photos of the area,and
stated the CDOW has reviewed the escarpment area with the applicant and expressed concern
with the location of ten turbine sites. He stated there are also existing wind gauges and Department
of Defense facilities in the area.
2006-2073
PL1845
PL1846
HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK WIND ENERGY, LLC, AND GREEN LIGHT
ENERGY, INC. (USR #1562 AND#1563)
PAGE 4
Mr.Stoner represented the applicant and displayed a PowerPoint presentation,marked Exhibit P,
in the USR#1562 file. He explained he works for Green Light Energy, Inc.,which is the co-applicant
with Cedar Creek Wind Energy, LLC, which is owned by Babcock and Brown. He stated the
applicants initially submitted three applications for the following:300 wind turbines,the transmission
line, and a switching station near the Town of Keenesburg, along with a small portion of
transmission line that is owned by Xcel that will be rebuilt. He stated the wind farm will have 300
three-bladed turbines for a total capacity of up to 330 megawatts. He stated this permit will not
designate the specific wind turbine locations,just the overall boundary,and prior to obtaining building
permits, the applicants must submit plans for the specific turbine locations. Responding to Chair
Geile, Mr. Barker stated this is the final consideration; the matter will not come back before the
Board. Mr.Stoner stated there will be combination of overhead and underground electrical collection
lines, and he indicated their general locations. He stated the substation will be located on Weld
County Road 105,one-half mile south of Weld County Road 122,which will include a permanent
operations and maintenance building, office, shops, etcetera. Mr. Stoner stated the overall site
consists of 31,670 acres; however, only 118 acres will be directly impacted by the actual footprint
of a wind turbine,buildings,or service roads. He stated the 300 turbine sites will generate up to 330
megawatts,which allows some flexibility in the selection of equipment. He displayed a diagram of
various types of wind turbines, and stated the applicants intend to use GE 1.5 MW and Mitsubishi
1.0 MW towers. Mr.Stoner stated the red dots on his PowerPoint presentation indicate the general
locations of the tower sites, and the yellow dots are the anticipated sites of the larger towers. He
stated the applicants are still working with the CDOW on shifting some of the locations,and the final
plat will show the specific locations prior to obtaining building permits. He stated the turbines will
be arranged in rows, they will be separated by a distance of 700 to 800 feet, and the rows will be
from one-third to one mile apart. He further stated the underground collection system will collect
generated power and transfer it to the substation,where it will go through step-up transformers. In
response to Chair Geile, Mr. Stoner stated the substation will house two 165 MV transformers.
Mr. Stoner stated the generated power will be delivered along the transmission line to the Public
Service Company of Colorado,according to the terms of a long-term agreement which was signed
in December2005. Responding to Chair Geile and Commissioner Masden, Mr. Stoner stated the
specifics of the agreement is confidential;however,he did note the term is longer than 15 years,and
it will be a direct line that interconnects with the Public Service Company of Colorado. He stated
the applicants began looking at five potential routes, at which time they considered land use,
geologic issues,culture, locations of residences,and demographics, and the analysis resulted in
the requested corridor. He stated 60 percent of the transmission line is currently under option with
the landowners,and he anticipates the remaining right-of-way will be acquired very soon. He further
stated there are some alternate routes in various places along the line which will be used to address
concerns of the CDOW, or in the event agreements with property owners on the primary route
cannot be obtained. In response to Chair Geile, Mr. Stoner stated the corridor is generally one
section wide,and the applicants are still seeking approval of both the primary and alternate routes
near the switching station. He stated they are aware of the concerns expressed by the Town of
Keenesburg,and the alternate alignment would only be approved subject to documentation that the
concerns of Keenesburg have been addressed. He displayed diagrams of the two-pole H-Frame
and 3-pole angle structures, and stated the transmission line will be owned, constructed, and
operated by Cedar Creek Wind Energy, LLC. He stated if the rebuilt route is selected,that portion
2006-2073
PL1845
PL1846
HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK WIND ENERGY, LLC, AND GREEN LIGHT
ENERGY, INC. (USR#1562 AND #1563)
PAGE 5
of the line and the switching station will be owned and operated by the Public Service Company of
Colorado. He further stated the Transmission line and switching station were submitted as two
separate applications(USR#1562A and USR#15626),which need to be approved as two separate
permits,since there are ownership differences. Responding to Commissioner Masden, Mr.Stoner
stated the 35-acre parcel will house a new switching station,located along the 1-76 Frontage Road.
He explained power from the wind facility will come from the director rebuilt route,will interconnect
to one of the Rocky Mountain Energy Facility lines,which are just south of the switching station,and
one of the circuits will be diverted into the switching station, located at the intersection of Weld
County Roads 16 and 55. Mr. Stoner stated the applicants do have the land under option for the
facility,and the planned construction schedule is subject to approval and continued work with the
Departments of Planning Services and Building Inspection. He stated once all the requirements are
met,the applicants intend to start construction in October2006,and energize the line in June 2007.
He stated the first phase of operations will commence in July2007,and the turbines are scheduled
for delivery in the Fall of 2007, with the entire proposal to be fully operational by the end of 2007.
Mr.Stoner stated the applicants are making a$4 million investment,which will benefit Weld County
with jobs and subsequent economic stimulus,as well as the land owners who will receive royalties
based on the amount of energy generated. He stated the project was implemented in response to
Amendment 37, which was passed by vote in the State of Colorado, and it is part of Xcel's effort
to provide long-term renewable energy as required. Mr. Stone submitted a letter,dated August 2,
2006,to Troy Florian, Colorado Division of Wildlife, marked Exhibit CC in the USR#1563 file. He
clarified the need to have the transmission line and switching station approved as two separate
permits,and stated the applicants agree with the changes proposed by staff in the memorandum,
marked Exhibit O in the USR#1562 file. He stated the applicants are also agreeable to keeping the
last sentence of Condition of Approval #4.6 as requested by Commissioner Long; however, he
noted the requests of the Pawnee Fire Protection District are already addressed under a separate
Condition of Approval. Responding to Chair Geile, Mr. Stoner stated he and the applicant have
reviewed and concur with Conditions of Approval and Development Standards proposed and
modified. Mr.Gathman stated Condition of Approval#3.C of USR#1562 can be modified to include
the submittal of the plot plan to the Pawnee Fire District. Mr. Stoner stated any reference to wood
poles should be changed to steel H-Frame poles, and he clarified paragraphs #24, #24, and
Conditions of Approval#3.A.4 refer to a Quit Claim Deed for the switching station parcel,which will
actually be transferred via a Warranty or Special Warranty Deed. Chair Geile expressed concern
with not transferring the ownership of the transmission line to the utility provider,primarily with the
serious service responsibilities in the event the line is damaged. Mr. Stoner stated the applicant
gets paid based on the delivery of power at the switching station,therefore,there is a large incentive
to keep the line maintained in order to get paid for the power that is generated. He stated the
applicants did discuss the potential for transfer of ownership of the line;however,Xcel Energy has
indicated it is only interested in obtaining the power at the switching station, since the area to the
north is not served by the Public Service Company of Colorado. Chair Geile also expressed
concern in the event the applicants are unable to renegotiate the long-term agreement in the future.
Mr.Stoner stated the applicants would be in agreement with adding a Condition of Approval requiring
the removal of the transmission line if the agreement is not renegotiated in the future. Responding
further to Chair Geile, Mr.Stoner stated the applicants selected the H-frame structures,since there
is adequate right-of-way,and he added the section owned by Xcel will be rebuilt and replaced with
2006-2073
PL1845
PL1846
HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK WIND ENERGY, LLC, AND GREEN LIGHT
ENERGY, INC. (USR #1562 AND #1563)
PAGE 6
the same single-pole structures that currently exist. (Changed to Tape#2006-29.) He further stated
the applicant will be obligated to pay taxes,since the site is a state-assessed property. In response
to Commissioner Masden, Mr. Stoner stated the transmission line is designed to accommodate
additional capacity on the structures; however, it is not designed for additional conductors. He
stated the Xcel line is currently designed fora single circuit,therefore,the poles will be replaced and
redesigned for additional capacity within the same corridor, on a pole-for-pole basis.
Rob Palmer,Milliken resident and wildlife photographer,stated he has been working at the Pawnee
Buttes for the past 30 years. He stated the CDOW has addressed the placement of turbines near
the escarpment in an effort to protect the nesting raptors. Mr. Palmer stated the construction
activities may be very disruptive and negatively impact the nesting population, and he proposed
construction be prohibited during the months of February through June.
Julie Boyle,Gill resident,stated she concurs with Mr. Palmer's comments. She further stated she
supports the installation of a renewable energy system; however, she wants it done responsibly.
Ms. Boyle expressed concern with interrupting the nesting sites,and stated the applicants should
be required to comply with the CDOW recommendations. Commissioner Long referred to the
August 2, 2006, letter from the applicant to the CDOW, and reviewed the agreed upon distances
for the record. Ms. Boyle stated there are ten turbines near the escarpment that are still under
review, and contrary to staff's recommendation, she requested the applicants be "required to
comply,"not just"attempt." Mr.Gathman stated the applicants and the CDOW have met and have
agreed upon the setbacks. Ms. Boyle reiterated the setbacks should be required, not just
attempted. Commissioner Long stated an absolute requirement can result in a third-party veto
power,therefore,the Board encourages the applicant to work with the recommendations, and he
feels the applicant has provided adequate evidence of a cooperative effort between the parties.
Chair Geile recessed the meeting until 1:30 p.m. Upon reconvening,Troy Florin,Colorado Division
of Wildlife, District Manager for the area north of Weld County Road 74,stated over the last several
months he has met with the applicant on numerous occasions. He stated they plan to continue
working with the applicant because wind energy is a clean and environmentally friendly power
source;however,it can potentially have negative impacts on raptors,song birds,bats,etcetera. He
stated it is the CDOW's goal to work with the applicants to design a successful wind energy facility,
which will reduce the impacts to area wildlife such as the Burrowing owls, Sharp-horned Owl,
Sharp-tailed Grouse, unique plant life, and the escarpment which is a one-of-a-kind geological
feature in the region. He stated the escarpment is ideal for approximately 60 nesting sites for raptor
species. Mr. Florian stated there are 14 turbines which should be no closer than 200 meters from
the rim edge to provide protection for the raptors, song birds, and bats. He explained the blades
have a 300-foot diameter and can rotate at speeds of 200 miles per hour,therefore,each site needs
to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. He stated the Division does not agree with the 50-meter
setback from the rim edge regardless of nest locations,as expressed in the letter, marked Exhibit
CC in the USR#1563 file. However, he does agree that two of the turbines will be outside of the
200-meter range. In response to Chair Geile, Mr. Florin indicated the locations of the 14 turbines
of concern, and stated minimal relocations will result in significant benefits of the project, while
accommodating wildlife habitats. He stated the Division agrees with the remaining setback
distances, and he requested the opportunity to comment on, and review, the turbine locations as
2006-2073
PL1845
PL1846
HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK WIND ENERGY, LLC, AND GREEN LIGHT
ENERGY, INC. (USR#1562 AND #1563)
PAGE 7
they are micro-sited. He further stated some of the nests are currently inactive; however, the
raptors often rotate their nest sites. He stated the Sharp-tailed Grouse have been identified and
need approximately 1.2 miles from the ledge site. He stated negotiations with the applicants have
resulted in a one-half mile setback from the ledge site and the understanding that they will participate
in a long-term study, which will serve as a resource for future wind energy developments. Mr.
Florian stated the applicant will also participate in habitat improvement and accommodate
courting/nesting activities. He stated the CDOW recommends ground breaking outside of the
nesting season;alternately,the applicants can blade the ground to prevent nesting in construction
areas. He further stated the applicants should consider seasonal shutdowns as necessary to
minimize impacts during peak migrations. Mr. Florian stated the area contains critical habitat
features, including the cliff escarpments and Crow Creek north of State Highway 14, and the
agreements with the applicants should also address access for the CDOW staff to monitor impacts
to the wildlife. He recommended the facility be required to abide bya Weed Management Plan,with
hunting to be retained at the landowners'discretion. He further stated the migratory species are
protected by federal and state law,and proper placement of the wind turbines will mitigate many of
the potential impacts. Responding to Chair Geile,Mr. Florin stated the primary concerns are the 50-
meter minimum setback from the escarpment edge and ground breaking outside of nesting periods.
Don Nebb, President of Bijou Irrigation District, stated the transmission line will cross the intake
canal, and he expressed concern with a 14-foot maximum working height. He explained some
areas can only be accessed from one side of the canal, which requires long-reach equipment to
complete maintenance operations.
Charles Sturrock, Grover resident, stated his ranch is divided by Weld County Road 122, and he
owns two miles north and south of the road. He stated the escarpment cliffs are part of his ranch,
and he submitted a packet,marked Exhibit DD in the USR#1563 file. Mr.Sturrock stated there will
be ten turbines and a portion of the transmission line crossing his property,and he noted few of the
turbines are within 50 meters of the drop off. He stated many of the terms of the agreement with
Xcel are confidential,and he was initially opposed to the proposal; however, he later chose to sign
an agreement to avoid going through the hassle of losing his land through eminent domain. He
stated the first term of the Xcel agreement is for 20 years, and he will receive$50,000 a year,with
royalties between $1,000.00 to $1,500.00; however, he feels the proposal will result in a loss of
property value. Mr. Sturrock stated turbine sites 42, 43, 44, 38, 37, 36 and 35 are within 54 yards
of the drop off; however,there are many others that are more than a mile from the escarpment. He
requested all the turbines be moved back to his property line along Weld County Road 103 so he
can continue ranching. He stated his land is unique and he wants to continue implementing a
grazing plan through his permit with the U.S. Forest Service. Mr. Sturrock stated he does have an
agreement with the Air Force to notify them when his cattle are moved into the missile silo area,to
avoid air inspections that impact his cattle. However, he expressed concern with allowing more
gates to his property for turbine access, which if left open create a lot of work when his cattle get
loose. Mr. Sturrock submitted a study, marked Exhibit DD in the USR#1563 file, regarding the
effects of wind turbines on bird abundance. He suggested the applicant be required to relocate the
turbines along his property line,or that they evaluate the statistical report before placing the turbine
towers.
2006-2073
PL1845
PL1846
HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK WIND ENERGY, LLC, AND GREEN LIGHT
ENERGY, INC. (USR#1562 AND #1563)
PAGE 8
Bob White, owner along the transmission corridor, stated he lives in Range 62 West, and he
questioned the correctness of the legal description.
Burton Cross submitted a letter on behalf of various Crow Creek residents, marked Exhibit N in the
USR#1562 file. He stated the CDOW testimony indicates a one-half mile setback from the Crow
Creek is important,and he requested the ability to negotiate the location of the corridor as it crosses
his property. He stated Cedar Creek Wind Energy, LLC, will own the transmission line, and he
questioned whether it is a public utility registered in the State of Colorado. If not,he questioned how
the line will be maintained in the future,and whether the applicant has the right of eminent domain.
Mr. Cross stated he is not opposed to the project; however, he is concerned with the details since
the Crow Creek area has critical habitat.
Ken Strom,Director of the Bird Association for Audubon Colorado and Weld County resident,stated
the Audubon supports wind energy;however,the key issue is how the energy is developed and how
the facilities are constructed. He stated he has been working with the National Wind Association,
and they agree it is a good resource if done correctly. Mr.Strom stated Weld County is the steward
of critically important habitats. He stated the short grass prairie is rapidly dwindling,and there is a
continental committee of scientists which has designated the Pawnee National Grasslands as a
habitat of worldwide significance. He further stated he works with ranchers that have sustained their
ranch operations by diversifying to welcome wildlife/bird enthusiasts. Mr. Strom stated wildlife
tourism in Weld County makes as large a contribution as that of hunting,fishing,and skiing in other
areas of Colorado. He stated the Board must guide the requested development to ensure it does
not go contrary to established laws and regulations. He further stated, if approved,the applicants
should be required to conduct an environmental survey and make the results available to the public.
Mr.Strom stated although there are verbal agreements between the applicants and the CDOW,he
would prefer a written agreement. In response to Chair Geile, Mr. Strom stated the surveys and
studies are required prior to construction to provide information for those who are considering the
matter and potential impacts.
Steve Jones stated he spent 25 years studying the North American Prairie,and he is the author of
six books on the subject. He stated 50 meters from the edge of the cliff is not sufficient, since the
blades will extend beyond the edge. He explained raptors use thermals to rise into the air from the
cliff edge, and it is often difficult to determine which nests are historic or inactive, since the birds
often rotate and come back to a nest years later. Mr. Jones stated dead raptors will make
newspaper headlines and give wind energy a bad name,therefore,he suggested starting the project
with caution to see how the birds react, and then possibly move the turbine towers closer to the
ridge.
Sharon Hahn,area resident since 1916,stated there is an unlimited supply of wind in the area. She
stated the resource is free,wind farms do not require water for cooling,it continues despite drought
conditions, and it will provide an economic boost for drought stricken farms. She further stated it
does not pollute, and it decreases revenue on fossil fuels and the dependency on foreign fuels.
Ms. Hahn stated continued housing development in Colorado will result in an energy shortage;
however,the proposal will bring employment during and following construction of the facilities,and
2006-2073
PL1845
PL1846
HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK WIND ENERGY, LLC, AND GREEN LIGHT
ENERGY, INC. (USR#1562 AND #1563)
PAGE 9
local schools will benefit from the taxes. She stated the applicants have been a good neighbor and
kept her updated throughout the process.
Matthew Ososky, Town of Grover Mayor, stated the Town is in support of the proposal, which
appears to be a compatible project for the area. He stated the area has limited resources, other
than agriculture,which receives very little surface water, and the infrastructure will not take away
from the community. Mr. Ososky stated the great space of northern Weld County is unique, and
the escarpment extends south from Pine Bluffs for 20 miles, and there are approximately 1,000
acres of escarpment territory. He stated wildlife tourism in the area is minimal and cannot be
compared to other tourist industries in the State, and even if all the wildlife was removed, the
economics would not be impacted. He stated the raptors are swift and intelligent,and they are able
to adjust to the placement of the turbines. In response to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Ososky
reiterated there are 1,000 square miles of escarpment-like habitat in the area.
Polly Reetz stated she is an active member of the Denver Audubon Society, which has a long
history of activity and interest in the Pawnee National Grasslands. She stated the Society has
conducted week-long seminars for the past 17 years, bringing 35 to 45 people to visit the Pawnee
National Grasslands and review the ecology and biology of the area. Ms. Reetz read a portion of
"Feather Quest," by Peter Dunn for the record. She stated many people come from around the
County and the world for bird watching and study,and she wants to ensure the wind energy facility
is done carefully and correctly. She stated she fully supports the recommendations of the CDOW,
with the addition that ferruginous hawks are very sensitive to human presence and should be given
the same setback as applied to the golden eagles and prairie falcons. Ms. Reetz stated she
supports the protection of the Chalk Bluffs area,and she feels monitoring is important. She further
stated the sweeping views of northern Colorado are also a valuable resource which should be
protected.
Diana Sturrock, Grover resident, referenced the third to last page of Exhibit DD, which was
submitted by her husband, Charles Sturrock. She stated it is important to be good stewards of the
land and protect the birds. She stated she supports wind power;however,she asked that the birds
not be eliminated as a result. There being no further comments, Chair Geile closed public
testimony.
Mr. Stoner stated the applicants will work with Mr. Nebb of the Bijou Irrigation District to
accommodate the necessary height of the transmission line for canal maintenance purposes. In
response to the comments made by Mr.Sturrock,Mr.Stoner stated the CDOW is comfortable with
the locations proposed on the Sturrock property;however,they have heard their concerns and will
continue to work with them. Regarding the statements made by Mr. Cross on behalf of the Crow
Creek area, Mr. Stoner stated the applicants are working on acquiring the necessary easements
east of Crow Creek; Cedar Creek is not a public utility, but is regulated as an exempt wholesale
generator;and Cedar Creek does have the power of eminent domain, but there is a strong desire
not to have to exercise that right as exhibited in the attempt to choose alternate or additional
alignments. Responding to Chair Geile, Mr.Stoner stated the right of eminent domain is pursuant
to State statute, and similar case law, since the applicants are engaging in the activities of
constructing a power line. In response to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Stoner stated the decision
2006-2073
PL1845
PL1846
HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK WIND ENERGY, LLC, AND GREEN LIGHT
ENERGY, INC. (USR#1562 AND #1563)
PAGE 10
before the board is for a specific corridor,with the flexibility to finalize negotiations with the property
owners for the specific tower locations,and the final alignment will be shown to staff on the final plat.
He stated once the corridor is approved,the applicants'intent is to construct a single transmission
line, not add more within the corridor in the future. He further stated the wind resource is better in
the northwest portion of the site, close to the escarpment,and the applicants are working to find a
balance to get the maximum efficiency,while being sensitive to the wildlife needs. He stated the
percentage of energy loss would have to be evaluated on a site-specific basis. Responding to
Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Barker stated eminent domain requires the company to make an offer at
fair market value,including loss or damages. If the amount is not accepted,then the property owner
can bring a legal process, by which Commissioners are hired by the Court to decide whether
condemnation is allowed. Commissioner Vaad commented the condemnation is determined by the
Court and an effort is made to get the fair market value. Responding to Commissioner Masden,Mr.
Stoner stated in prior developments Cedar Creek Wind Energy, LLC,has worked as cooperatively
as possible with affected agencies. Commissioner Masden commented it appears the applicant
is working pro-actively to mitigate many of the issues of concern. Mr.Stoner stated the letter to the
CDOW evidences the applicants'flexibility in moving turbines and agreeing to various setbacks,and
they will continue to comply with the setbacks as the site design is finalized. Responding to
Commissioner Long, Mr.Stoner stated Mr.White has entered into an option for an alignment,and
some of his confusion may have stemmed from receiving notice of an option for an alternate
alignment. In response to Chair Geile, Mr. Stoner stated the corridor allows flexibility for locating
within the easement, and then the remaining area of the corridor goes away. Mr. Stoner clarified
they are purchasing an easement, not purchasing the land fee-simple, so property owners can
continue to use the land as they see fit. He further stated they are largely in agreement with the
CDOW and their ability to address the concerns. He further stated the wildlife studies can be made
public; however, they do not want to publish the specific maps of nests, as a protection measure.
Chair Geile recessed the hearing for five minutes. Upon reconvening Rhett Good, Western
EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (West, Inc.), displayed a PowerPoint presentation, marked
Exhibit FF. He stated they began working with the CDOW, on behalf of the applicants, and have
relocated various turbines at the CDOW's request. He further stated they reviewed the various
surveys that have been conducted on the various species, identified nests that did not have birds,
and formulated setbacks. Mr. Good stated West, Inc., has consulted for other wind facilities,and
this is the first to recognize setbacks for inactive nests. He stated studies at similar sites showed
only one fatality in two years,with 99 percent of the turbines being located more than 100 meters
from a rim edge. He reviewed the commitments of Cedar Creek Wind Energy, LLC, and showed
a display of other factors that can result in bird fatalities. He displayed the design of the proposed
towers, which will be tubular towers, which will not attract birds, unlike crossbar towers that also
spin much faster. In response to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Good stated the birds use the updrafts
of air running into the cliff when flying from their nests. He stated as the air reaches the top of the
cliff it begins to flow horizontal again and move the turbines. He explained updrafts are different from
thermals. Thermals are created when warm area rises from the rocks and flows in an upward,
circular motion that birds float on. Responding to Chair Geile,Mr.Good stated the 50-meter setback
appears to be adequate. Responding to Commissioner Long, Mr.Stoner stated the applicants will
work with the CDOW to review monitoring protocol post construction. In response to Chair Geile,
Mr.Stoner stated the turbines have a 20-year design life,there are contracts for the turbine supply
2006-2073
PL1845
PL1846
HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK WIND ENERGY, LLC, AND GREEN LIGHT
ENERGY, INC. (USR#1562 AND #1563)
PAGE 11
to meet the construction schedule, and if the venture is successful, the future expansion will be
subject to market demand and future review by Weld County.
Mr. Gathman proposed adding Condition of Approval#3.S to USR#1563 to state, "The applicant
shall install appropriate signage on the designated haul route and site locations. The applicant shall
also provide a plan showing sign locations to the Department of Public Works." He also suggested
modifying Condition of Approval#3.C of USR#1562 to add"The applicant shall submit plot plans
to the applicable Fire Protection Districts for their review and comment." He clarified the turbines
and maintenance facility will require building permits. Commissioner Long indicated his primary
concern is that the plans be forwarded to the Pawnee Fire Protection District, so it is familiar with
the layout of the buildings at the substation. Commissioner Vaad suggested adding a second
sentence to Condition of Approval #3.K for USR #1563 to state, "As constructed plans for the
building will be submitted to the Pawnee Fire Protection District." Mr.Gathman stated the applicant
discussed the preferred and alternate routes in the vicinity of Keenesburg, which will require
rebuilding the Xcel line,or in the alternative,proceed along the 1-76 Frontage Road,with approval
from the Town of Keenesburg. Chair Geile commented that option is understood and should not
be required as a Condition of Approval. Mr. Gathman also proposed inserting a new Development
Standard#34 to USR#1562 to state, "In the event the use of the transmission lines is ceased on
a permanent basis, the applicant shall be responsible for the removal of transmission lines and
reestablishment of the site to its original state." Mr. Barker stated the Board may want to consider
substituting the word"applicant"with"owner/operator"in the event the facility changes ownership.
Chair Geile withdrew his proposal to add Development Standard#34 due to potential complexities.
Commissioner Long commented there has been a lot of due diligence on the part of the applicant
to mitigate many of the concerns in relation to the demands of Amendment 37. He stated the
project will benefit multiple property owners by creating an income from the land, generate
approximately 20 jobs,and benefit the Town of Grover and Pawnee School District economically.
He stated the subject site does not contain the only escarpment area,and the turbines will exist on
a small percentage of a vast habitat area. He further stated he is hesitant to restrict the setback
beyond 50 meters,and he suggested the applicants and CDOW also review the potential of moving
the turbines linearly,not just back from the edge. Based on those comments,Commissioner Long
stated he supports the proposals.
Commissioner Masden concurred and stated the applicants have done a lot of due diligence
working with the CDOW. He stated although the applicants are still researching some of the
corridor alignments, a majority of the property easements have been resolved, and the selected
placement will be the least intrusive. He stated the project will be in compliance with Amendment
37, and Xcel and the Public Service Company of Colorado are doing their part in working with the
applicant to meet the demands. He further stated he is always hesitant to grant third-party veto
power,therefore, he is pleased that the applicants are working with the appropriate agencies. He
stated agriculture is a unique business, and this proposal will allow many farms and ranches to
diversify and support the existing agricultural lifestyles.
2006-2073
PL1845
PL1846
HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK WIND ENERGY, LLC, AND GREEN LIGHT
ENERGY, INC. (USR#1562 AND #1563)
PAGE 12
Chair Geile stated he is impressed with the applicants'work with a public utility,conducting public
meetings,and bringing in professional consultants. He stated 118 acres will be impacted,and the
applicant and the CDOW have done a lot of work in coming to an agreement on turbine structure
placement and determining a preferred corridor. He stated he is not concerned with either route as
it pertains to the Town of Keenesburg; he feels that issue will be resolved, and the overall project
will bring a $4 million investment to Weld County. He further stated the project will have a huge
impact on the tax base in the area and benefit the local school districts. Chair Geile stated he
appreciates the public testimony regarding avian concerns;however,he feels those concerns have,
or will be dealt with, in cooperation with the CDOW. He feels there will be many other similar
projects, and this proposal establishes a good base line for future applications. Based on those
comments, Chair Geile stated he supports the application.
Commissioner Long moved to approve the request of Cedar Creek Wind Energy,LLC,and Green
Light Energy, Inc.,for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit#1562
for a Major Facility of a Public Utility(a 72-mile 230 kV transmission line and one new switching
station)in the A(Agricultural)Zone District,based on the recommendations of the Planning staff and
the Planning Commission,with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards as entered
into the record. His motion included replacing all references to"wood H frame poles"to"metal H
frame poles,"amending paragraphs#2.j and#2.r and Condition of Approval#3.A.4 to replace"Quit
Claim Deed" with "Warranty or Special Warranty Deed," amending Condition #3.C to add a
sentence which states, "The applicant shall submit plot plans to the applicable Fire Protection
Districts for their review and comment," modifying the last sentence of Condition #3.K to state,
"Also, the applicant shall attempt to address the concerns of the Colorado Division of Wildlife
specific to wildlife, relative to the towers and transmission alignment," deleting Conditions of
Approval #4.A and #4.8 and Development Standards #28 through #33, and renumbering or
relettering accordingly. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Vaad, and it carried
unanimously.
Commissioner Long moved to approve the request of Cedar Creek Wind Energy, LLC,and Green
Light Energy, Inc.,for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit#1563
for Major Facility of a Public Utility(up to 300 individual three-bladed wind turbine generators)in the
A(Agricultural)Zone District,based on the recommendations of the Planning staff and the Planning
Commission, with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards as entered into the
record. His motion included modifying Condition of Approval#3.Kto add a sentence which states,
"As constructed plans for the building will be submitted to the Pawnee Fire Protection District,"and
adding Condition of Approval#3.S to state,"The applicant shall install appropriate signage on the
designated haul route and site locations. The applicant shall also provide a plan showing sign
locations to the Department of Public Works." The motion was seconded by Commissioner
Masden,and it carried unanimously. There being no further discussion,the hearing was completed
at 4:00 p.m.
2006-2073
PL1845
PL1846
HEARING CERTIFICATION - CEDAR CREEK WIND ENERGY, LLC, AND GREEN LIGHT
ENERGY, INC. (USR#1562 AND #1563)
PAGE 13
This Certification was approved on the 7th day of August 2006.
APPROVED:
ccari OARD OF UNTY COMMISSIONERS
ELD CO Y, COLORADO
ATTEST:
. J. ile, Chair
Weld County Clerk to the Bdatid`11,f
i^u . on 4 c David E. Long, Pro-Tem
BY:
Dep Clerk the Board EXCUSED
W' 'am HH.�Jerke
TAPE #2006-28 ,�(;x �1\,��Robert D. Mtiaen
DOCKET#2006-45 EXCUSED DATE OF APPROVAL
Glenn Vaad
2006-2073
PL1845
PL1846
EXHIBIT INVENTORY CONTROL SHEET
Case USR#1563 -CEDAR CREEK WIND ENERGY, LLC AND GREEN LIGHT ENERGY,
INC.
Exhibit Submitted By Exhibit Description
A. Planning Staff Inventory of Items Submitted
B. Planning Commission Resolution of Recommendation
C. Planning Commission Summary of Hearing (Minutes 07/18/2006)
D. Clerk to the Board Notice of Hearing
E. Applicant Various Maps
F. Applicant Corrected Map
G. Lowe, Fell, and Skogg Letter re: The TH Ranch, LLC
H. Nancy Stocker Letter of Concern, dated 07/28/2006
Applicant Turbine Vicinity Map, submitted 07/19/2006
J. Greeley/Weld County Airport Referral, dated 07/20/2006
K. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Letter of Concern, dated 07/24/2006
L. Patrick Murphy E-mail of Concern, dated 07/29/2006
M. Ruth Cushman E-mail of Concern, dated 07/29/2006
N. Linda Powers E-mail of Concern, dated 07/29/2006
O. Marilyn Binkley E-mail of Concern, dated 07/29/2006
P. Raymond Davis E-mail of Concern, dated 07/30/2006
Q. Dick Filby E-mail of Concern, dated 07/30/2006
R. Pauline Reetz/American Audobon
Society E-mail of Concern, dated 07/30/2006
S. Robert Arnold E-mail of Concern, dated 07/30/2006
T. Lori Fujimoto E-mail of Concern, dated 07/31/2006
U. JoAnn Hackos E-mail of Concern, dated 07/31/2006
V. Judith Niemann E-mail of Concern, dated 07/31/2006
W. Charles Bell E-mail of Concern, dated 07/31/2006
X. Urling and Hugh Kingery E-mail of Concern, dated 07/31/2006
Y. Carol Nichols E-mail of Concern, dated 07/31/2006
Z. Ken Strom/Director of Bird
Conservation and Public Policy
-Audubon Colorado E-mail of Concern, dated 08/01/2006
AA. Gordon Grenfell/Colo. Hawking Club E-mail of Concern, dated 08/02/2006
BB. Jerry Raskin E-mail of Concern, dated 08/02/2006
CC. Applicant Letter to Troy Florian, Colorado Division of
Wildlife, dated 08/02/2006
DD. Charles Sturrock Packet of Pictures and Letters
EE. Charles Sturrock Report#4 from Center for Evidence-Based
Conservation re: Effects of wind turbines on
bird abundance, dated 07/29/2006
FF. Rhett Good PowerPoint Presentation
GG.
HH.
I I.
JJ.
KK.
LL.
MM.
NN.
OO.
PP.
QQ.
RR.
SS.
EXHIBIT INVENTORY CONTROL SHEET
Case USR#1562-CEDAR CREEK WIND ENERGY, LLC,AND GREEN LIGHT ENERGY, INC.
Exhibit Submitted By Exhibit Description
A. Planning Staff Inventory of Items Submitted
B. Planning Commission Resolution of Recommendation
C. Planning Commission Summary of Hearing (Minutes 07/18/2006)
D. Clerk to the Board Notice of Hearing
E. Larry Croissant E-mail of Concern, dated 07/18/2006
F. Applicant Transmission Line Vicinity Map, dated
07/19/2006
G. Applicant Vicinity Maps
H. Moore Law Firm, PC Letter re: Incorrect notification, dated
07/24/2006
Lowe, Fell and Skogg Letter representing The TH Ranch, LLC,
dated 07/27/2006
J. Weld County Airport Referrals without Comments, dated
05/23/2006
K. Robin Swope Letter of Opposition, dated 07/21/2006
L. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Letter of Opposition, dated 07/24/2006
M. Susan Krcmarik Letter of Opposition, dated 07/31/2006
N. Landowners in Crow Creek vicinity Letter and Exhibits re: Alternative Routes,
dated 07/31/2006
O. Planning Staff Memorandum re: Changes to the Conditions
of Approval and Development Standards,
dated 08/01/2006
P. Applicant Copy of PowerPoint presentation, dated
08/02/2006
Q.
R.
1a.._
ciz \! 4.v O h
y ✓� .p
re C.'� pJ Jn ��k
W \ d /'
z G q- �w .v_
W '� eCYI
�, 1 4� Z; '1._
z rJ O .v e ^ y �° �
w _, rJ \ N. .o ,2 '4C4
U N L C� v- y. ----: C
t0re o �0 rt I. � ? or `Y .3 (.4\
�'�
W N W N J �L ,k C.P Cam' C,- X N Q,
U 0 z U (--y-�r. � r O q 'tea
a m a2
3 a
W O w a rn w t Si, ^` 1 v •x n
a 0 e re z ^ i X13 „1 1n ' � `� � r 3 \�
U) W
E a di
H c
z ro 15
O CO >,
CO c
c ✓ i J
� <t) - J
. 1 `
Q #OA .c T: Z 4 f .. ni.
y m N ': 'mil v) _I c
Z
W W Lu CI o tii
_ o ti 1- Y . .
ILIO a z 4) ‘'`,L4 s \I
G
I J I/
z N - C� (,,i P
Ii 7 �v4 rvl
z ,,-)\-O N � t �
w °` v $ 7 3 N .so [T
sY
S2 NNk� _ ra N r� :Z1
J t•� ` ( ' ` � 7 'Fr) a
w
re • � � I) r
c ca 4 4 p " \ '_J `'
G G A U 4 4 ki z km
�S a
U J N ,� j' L Q _`,��J4Q ` y k
N (7 �9 a y
a d fD Th. - t , Q 6 ti I 1 ----.
i L `1 r �'
Ill ni
I-- o W E 3 nest,' o �� 3Q4n
Q G V v G z° re (;) G H Y5 A to t <3 1� N o O
Q \ �
i
w E V A gc.
O >1 -
fA o Y ` + _ 7 CJV
QL}
O a � N � L • Q y
O z O d�, `a 2 b-- o
LL a m � k - s. �nn
J
0 i- uj O .---C) C' .._..,.., D V p 1 N, .,;, .-, a 4 zj ou
Ew co w O c):_,\,r- rr, \___L > _+.. ,_._ ,.,_, g
I O 0.
N
d
J
4 V�\�
'
N
Li l� J R
z O v
c "Cr
� � -SC IA
w a 0 ou
Z —
w
0 61Q
s � � ;
z ° b� ..7-. c-4 -
0 n� uQ
w
o o ice . -2\,) CI •-
lIJ —J
• _ ,
en
2 ksi
N w 0, v oil _ S45
?' Qi J`
z a 3 °' 0) - 9. c� , �*4 `�s
J r
a m 2 )(— 3 r -S '1-- -
F 0} w a m r !� U ` JVa
Q O w o c. n , 1. �
a G a c G Z A� W .� d /K A;
N A S ` X N C1 V1 r m c
fl) r a u
fq w E - � •
e e .9
F CJ co '2 1 o 0 3
Z
yl. Cn
.^-..^.,
O 4 3₹
fn o >` 1: 4b y g w ::-.-
3 O it N ` -44� � \0 o IS �. [ II
U.
Q .15
It N V a V ? ~ a
4 7 m
Q •3 _1! f l !1 -5 N r V CA i CI 2ygY
Q * ` `� ` S1YLr .7 f+�$ 3
a F N o O �� •
w 88b
w W w o < (��S .` g C 3I P °°
z Y w c \ ` r- C,'
r o a (� vl8 EU
Hello