HomeMy WebLinkAbout20063043.tiff BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' SIGN POSTING
CERTIFICATE
THE LAST DAY TO POST THE SIGN IS November 5, 2006. THE SIGN SHALL BE POSTED
ADJACENT TO AND VISIBLE FROM A PUBLICALLY MAINTAINED ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY.
IN THE EVENT THE PROPERTY BEING CONSIDERED FOR A SPECIAL REVIEW IS NOT
ADJACENT TO A PUBLICALLY MAINTAINED ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, THE DEPARTMENT
OF PLANNING SERVICES SHALL POST ONE SIGN IN THE MOST PROMINENT PLACE ON
THE PROPERTY AND POST A SECOND SIGN AT THE POINT AT WHICH THE DRIVEWAY
(ACCESS DRIVE) INTERSECTS A PUBLICALLY MAINTAINED ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY.
I, Chris Gathman , HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER PENALTIES OF PERJURY THAT THE SIGN
WAS POSTED ON THE PROPERTY AT LEAST TEN DAYS BEFORE THE BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS HEARING FOR AMUSR-1508 IN THE AGRICULTURAL ZONE DISTRICT.
(/ Lks:,s cam.l
Name of Person Posting Sign
Signature of Person Posting Sign
STATE OF COLORADO
) ss.
COUNTY OF WELD
The foregoing instrument was subscribed and sworn to me this r—itday of �c`Nxnhe( , 2006.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
r,
bublic ,•
I BETHANY '•
SALZMAN
Ni Fn
My Commission Expires: 10-(C1.-C1 9` -
F
EXHIBIT
c
4A(ASP.+15O8
o C o- 3oy3
NOV-14-2006 TUE 12 48 PM ANADARKO FAX NO. 303 296 9523 P. 02
KerrNtGee
Kerr,MCGoo Oil&Gas OnShore LP
1900 Brooawny,Suite 3700,Donver,Colorado 00202
393-2CM-3600•Fax 303-206-3601
TO: Chris Cabman, Planner
Weld County Department of.Planning Services
918 10" Street
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: Amended Use by Special Review AMUSR-1508
Longmont Broadcasting
Mr. Gathman
This letter is to inform you that Ken-McGee has reached agreement with the applicant,
Longmont Broadcasting,LLC, for oil &gas operations surface use issues arising from the above
captioned application. Our agreement is that the applicants cause the final plat to show the
protected drill sites for existing wells and for the future ability to "twin"those wells under the
current guidelines set forth by the Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission. We have
provided a drawing and overlay showing the requested sites; the drawing is attached to this letter
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Terry D. Enright
Landman Specialist
Enclos d At 'whiner'
iu
NOV-14-2006 TUE 12:49 PM ANADARKO FAX NO. 303 296 9523 P. 04
� � lb �d`/ I I
F .piJ IVI It 9
It
•at1 . suaLvem CC q a ter,G� i4fi;t
111111
lc
IVS�q� I:I
e $ pew it
,. I 1:,4i ₹ eci
,�h• b�
\ BBB c1/4._•::\21
`t
1p `g r Yg \ yF �' - �.�
Tp ..d \\ ', i �,^
OQ to a ..a�. .47.„„. av /a/
W0. !t
a 9dd? W P
,a C� 1111u lil tt ,'1 0.` b 5Eg� #
Z � 5: • ¢ I y bra thy °'d
Q .. . . r '\� / 0 �kfy 2 _3 � ,�;.
0
U :-•'�� '/ ce .*-4—..\.! f� n 4a $� `--�
ui • N
y • 1•'• .� aJ.�jl -661 I� ` \ -••,,,..14\ `saa--'� ' iiii a
/ i(
rt ,
yA W \ \ �L1_b4yY N 0
9 4L1
N n I \\ "�a .J J% ,9�� n g
ma I U ry nl \ \ Fyd�a4d i I. >>
il W I in
IW n \ i9 �� S W '
DIV
o
(� I al QU yS�`,yy( ,erroQ�iIaLi�i� F d¢ Y ¢ S; 1 2RA co
N ���• [ Indic
"�iCWyti�sGE1_ \ LyJOrriII Cj r°J' I �� �\ y NO�aO n glry
a ^\ i N �I� i 'IIH 7i"T'^ a-- & —a---3n tie r8.
ig -iyhtigiq 2;
\ 14i1
y; BEII m �3gg D��S6Sx Q2 Li
YR'2f6 >
j ya
0M,0o.00.0as 00'00.1 :`:.3J 1 & l!
RB'df 12
130MYd •00 OMs 3llal 3.00.00.00N
0['Lf9L �- d
a 3.0e-oo.00N �_
(l vas) Li. QVpa AINf10Q dl3M '
( *i MEMORANDUM
O: Board of County Commissioners
Mlle T
COLORADO DATE: November 15, 2006
FROM: Chris Gathman —Planner II e. 54 .
SUBJECT: Proposed revisions/Amendments to AMUSR-1508 resolution
1) Item 2.C (criteria of approval): Replace with the following language:
c. Section 23-2-220.A.3 —The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with
the existing surrounding land uses. There are 5 single-family residences
approximately 1,170 feet north at the closest point and northeast from the
proposed tower site. Water tanks for the Town of Frederick along with a single
family residence are located to the west across County Road 17. An existing
tower site is located to the south (USR-776). Agricultural land is located to the
east. An existing Excel Energy powerline is located approximately 1,000-feet
north of the communication tower site at its closest point. Aletter from Excel
Energy dated October 11, 2006 stated no conflict with the proposed tower
provided it does not fall into Excel/Public Service Company's overhead
lines. The letter also stated that the owner would be expected to pay for all
damages to the transmission line in the event of collapse. A separate
referral sheet from Excel Energy was also received stating no conflict with
their interests.
A letter dated March 30, 2005, from ERI Installations, Inc. stated that in the
unlikely event of a collapse, the towers would fold and the fall zone would likely
extend no farther than 25-50% of the tower. However, the letter also states any
distance beyond this would be quite unusual and the outer limits of the unusual
collapse condition would extend to 70% of the height of the tower (1,021 feet).
Ernest Jones of ERI provided an updated letter dated October 12, 2006
stating that in the unlikely event of a collapse, the majority of the steel in
the tower mast would fall within a radius of 450-feet around the tower base,
with some light scatted debris extending to an area of up to 700 feet from
the tower base. Any significant debris beyond this would be quite unusual
and unexpected. The existing residences and powerlines are located outside of
this area. The western tower has been built and a portion of the eastem tower
potential debris zone would fall within the existing property to the east (currently
vacant) and the existing property to the northeast (currently has a residence).
There is an attached development standard indicating that an easement
agreement covering the potential zone of collapse (70% fall radius) shall be
signed and recorded prior to the release of building permits.
OBIT
a
2) Insert as item #3 under condition 1.B (The plat shall be amended to delineate the
following):
"Protected drill sites for existing wells and the future ability to twin those wells per
the Colorado Oil and Gas Commission shall be indicated on the plat perthe letter
and attached map received November 14, 2006 from Terry D. Enright of Kerr-
McGee."
3) Insert as item 1.C and renumber subsequent conditions of approval: "The applicant
shall provide written verification from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that
the proposed increase in tower height proposed under this amended USR has been
approved."
Longmont Broadcasting, LLC
Weld County Board of County
Commissioners Hearing
November 15, 2006
Amended Use by Special Review
#AMUSR-1508
Frederick Tower Project
All Rights Reserved
^T ea.hIS
,5`, ,wComwnr
Historic Timeline •WCOPS Staff reply concluding amendment to be
major change received 4/21/2006
USR-1508 Application &Approval
• Staff referred matter to BOA with application
•Subject property acquired 7/16/2003 deadline of 4/21/2006. Deadline met by applicant.
BOA determined that Amended USR would be
•Planned for broadcast towers. most appropriate.
•USR application submitted 3/6/2005 •Only proposed amendment is to tower height
•Passed WC Planning Commission on Consent (increase of less than 300'—1,180'to 1,459)
Agenda 5/17/2005 •Primary impact is to airspace controlled by
•Approved by WC Commissioners Sl3/2005 Federal Aviation Administration who must approve
height amendment.
•Construction of West tower has been completed •USR process is comprehensive and in-depth;
to 1,159'height utilizing local contractors much research and many referrals plus the added
•Request to staff for height amendment 4/20/2006 requirements of WC tower code&federal agencies
•Of 91 items addressed in the original application, •Proposed height amendment results from:
only 10 items apply to height amendment —FAA willingness to consider approval of taller towers
when and where appropriate
•Critical elements for height amendment are FAA -Small increase in height can exponentially extend
approval and addressing tower fall and debris radii broadcast area and signal strength to target population
•Radii only important in the event of catastrophic -Additional tenants could be accommodated to meet
failure resulting in tower coming down. Very rare. the WC requirement for shared use of the tower(s).
•Additional mineral owner scrutiny due to change -2 new projects in close proximity to tower site could
in well spacing allowances by COGCC potentially affect broadcast operations at the lower levels
of the tower due to the height of proposed facilities.
•Other items not affected and not changed from •Power Generation'peaking'd ant properly to the
original approved USR southeast of tower site(annexation to anned for Town of Frederick)
•Water tower(tank)construction at site adjacent to towers on
the southwest.
Z f V
argykligNi
f y:
Potential Interference from Water Tanks Viewed from Tower
Nearby Proposed Projects
ry It t ( Q I/
I + Xis — LL•i: # 1..
s� ,
4.__L _ _- a
WCR 16 ti
L
Weer Taro "' }_ l '7 I
Construction t.
WC U i OWerPn I
.- ._ Power Plant
IS t _SS. -a
M4YV 52 I )( `
it»»iii
i - n
Potential 5gnal Block from Water Tanks Tower Viewed from Power Plant Construction Site
FF} . Yt . r
,
v(€
i .
a
t
'._ s rte.. '�M4 a' t t
fc+
Tower Viewed from Power Plant Construction Site
Original Purpose
• Construction of 2 broadcast towers
• Towers to be approx. 1,459 feet in height
s (original permitted height: 1,180')
d ' -
=r • Located on a parcel of approx. 93 acres
•
• Located at WCR 15 and WCR 16 near
-
Town of Frederick
• Adjacent to a similar existing tower
provides"clustering" or"tower farm"
configuration
2
Reasons Location
, � __
• Existing adjacent tower(Clear Channel tower � 'r � r?
to south)is inadequate for current needs
• Federal regulations require conversion to L
Digital N in 2006-2009 _ '
• Location is best for front range broadcast wcd++
1
area
• No other similar facilities exist to fill the need - MWY _ ,
Site
VCR 16• w. 'r,, _:.Par Ai. Conformity
r
T' • Proposed uses conform with Weld County
-40 Code regarding Comprehensive Plan and
Zoning District(confirmed by WCDPS)
N
y Existing Tower d j 7
C
Longmont SreWe•tlNg USR Application
Mop of Surrounding Property woe
- Sods, Overlay Districts
`n I' :€ �4= — e
+ M t-:-� Soils Map Geohazard Overlay
,� '7 .f 3 1� III 1 . "
J�ennem I rove e 0, .
annexed po Went " VVV
L I l t( . 4 ,t
3
Water & Sewer Construction
• 2 towers of 1,459 feet each(original height 1,180)
• Water supplied by existing Central Weld • West tower first stage is constructed to approx.
County Water District tap 1,159 ft.and became operational for first tenant
• Sewage disposal by permitted installed July 1,2006 to meet FCC deadline&client(NBC)
9 P contract deadline. More users to be added.
septic system • West tower support building completed to
required standards, including color conformity.
• East tower planning stages only. No construction
or building permit at this time. Determination to
build at some time in future will be based upon
need and market demand.
TOWER BASE UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Construction
• West tower is the highest dollar building \F"..(4, (
permit issued from the So.Weld Offices
• Applicant has engaged as many local _ it
contractors as possible for this project ice'
(Thissen Construction, Alpha Surveying,
numerous other subcontractors)
• Project will generate significant property tax "'
dollars for Weld County, particularly as aff,
additional users populate the tower(s).
TOWER ANCHOR TOWER ANCHOR CABLE TIES
N.
hill‘ .
• r5 .;4 x' yam, 3A
lit
I'ilk
B:..
4
Gitldg Steel Tower Section Support Equipment Building
3 .1
s art. w st-ia'
w!
�_
— g
{
Support Equipment Building Support Equipment Building&Security Fencing
1 at ..aa �. "-
L e
t 1 ...
C Ifillt,..st-.
v.. �;�v,Etdy ct £` t§r, 4 10-E
Tower Guy&Anchor Tower Base
I 3?7\11
4<� t
��>Y4r'dt
i g,„--,.
w 4airu
5
Tower View from Base Tower Rising .
� < t- /
\
» \
. \\ w
\ » ^ \ \'3
/ \ /
' & » s
.� � »> a .
y w ° <«a m2
hi
Oyer o . «: .
}
• F Facility will operate 24 - 7 - m5 . 4 «�
. �lmAmd 1:
)\�:
. a4Emplyeev bprwek .y -4
• Rye R Climbing 2abm« pr j § ; ,
year § »«
)�.y(
\\
§«g< <.
1-, : \
.
{
.
\� i\ d
\?/
0A , _ -\ /
�.
/
r
>
� \ « � \ ( / �{
. \ \/ \
7, >§
u
y \ \ \\ »
6
Recorded Plat-Detail Recorded Plat-Zoom
r a '• 7 {-,
__,,L..,..__,....
\ N .L7 -- , ,- :,,,,x
i ; l' , ,:-...„.„..: .117. 14.“.
Site Attributes Landscape / Appearance
• Location ideal for targeted broadcast area • Current surface and existing runoff
• Access assured by recorded agreement patterns will not change
• Fire protection provided by Ft. Lupton Fire •
• Tower cannot be"disguised"
• Septic system for sewage disposal • Only facilities are low profile buildings, guy
(permitted &constructed) anchors, &towers
• Water supply from Central Weld County •
• Chain Link fence for necessary security
Water District(tap installed) • Chain link use for"see-through"character
• Adjacent to existing facility • Constant visual for safety, security
Re-vegetation of Site Need
• No other similar towers in the Front Range
broadcast area serve this need
• Broadcast area encompasses Front Range
.`` growing population area
New Growth • Federal requirement for DTV by 2009
� or • Will provide for co-location and shared use
`
to consolidate users
' • Added height increases broadcast
effectiveness to target population
• Additional users accommodated by
additional tower height
7
m eaT _ C lxrMH � Visual Impact
• Smallest practical visual impact
••<•"•• -1A59 feet per tower(very narrow profile)
" W B L L) —Harder to see in distance due to narrow profile.
"" ' Height increase indiscernible at close distance.
—Special finish&redirected safety lighting
Mope; reduces visual impact
. M, ° ^•" i -Guy wires give little visual impact
—Low profile buildings
�hn A
A
—Chain link"see-through"fencing
v a w < • A ., c c' -Similar to other facilities of modern life
• Light poles,Power lines,Water tanks&towers,
Grain elevators,Cell phone towers
Visual Perception of Height-Existing towers mewed from WCR 14
Both towers are
5F the same height
." rte- ' �
(43 .a ;v;$y
than the
e"' x' far lower
4 �A , �'�iv'kcnivel ' '. ' �, a S
Visual impact is '
reduced by use of
special finish and
redirected safety
lighting.
U
Note the visual
difference between / 1
the existing,adjacent
tower on the right and •
the new(West)tower jr -
under construction onthe left.
8
!fin 1J
?: r
Federal Agencies Structural Integrity
• Federal Communications Commission
(FCC)has issued an approved • Modern guyed tower is a professionally
construction permit
—Approval includes safe level of allowable non- engineered design to provide highest
ionizing radiation from broadcasts industry level of structural integrity
• Federal Aviation Administration(FAA) • Base and guys are designed to
issued original approval and would have withstand wind load, ice loading
to approve height increase • Worst case tower fall design provides
-FM Approval determines and indicates no for folding collapse in unlikely event of
interference with aircraft catastrophic failure
—Height increase contingent upon FAA
approval
Structural IntegrityTIPICIL D mu
• Tower fall and debris field radii are determined VOID
by licensed experienced tower engineers(to
industry standards). Information obtained from
ERI, Inc.,Ernest R.Jones,PE.
• Maximum tower fall radius is approx.50%of
tower height. Tower structure folds on itself.
• Maximum potential debris field radius is approx.
70%of tower height. Debris is bolts,fasteners,
etc.
9
From a letter dated 10-12-06 from Ernest Jones,of ERI,Inc.
.- Mr.Jones is a professional engineer specializing in broadcast
/ \ tower design&construction.
\
/ .•.o. \
/ \ summan:
I 11 Basal vim my pro!cbnal eapenise in the field of;over engineering a:nnµ with a
I thepen'et past hisses failure it is my p,.fmional opinion thro
( I • ITi_tower structure would he eepewal to fall En a fig-eau:mem with the
\ / malonly of steel in the town mast tailing in an area within a radius of 4,0 tat
\ / wound the tower base,with some.w.mere h&c(dehr's extending to an area el
up to 7(C feet from the toner base row wgndiemt dries other than small and
\ y relent mt.kip parts and mttes.bcaunl this dtxtvwe newld be quite unutual and
\ / is not crt tar
N. /
w.
Updated West Tower Fall&Debris Radii
From a letter dated 10-12-06 from Ernest Jones,of ERI,Inc. --- -- .
Mr.Jones is a professional engineer specializing in broadcast - —
tower design&construction. , •
- .- 4•
7 1 -am
ParisPais de:litedi«nat_iad,_erane and maintained towers.m%Inch theintron of /
each ofdtce owns can he tented through grope retie.and cualuatlr;o.hate:nl
reh
andle,it agates, Ilapa Ih. l yatwl a nd h tLi hl for
__
estrernelt high
Lahr ' t en et clew to lM install.:in the'. e a tM111 21,,ear,and n. -_ -
of them hate experienced strusturallailme mi.is mmiu tatll,at lessv.urniot tel •
Mr walatul to design jest tahncatier.as l hate stated Awe I haugot to -am
keenera tower designed tntodas'x murn&tang vitro eywselto.wtigioha • i -Jr
prelntahle rind and we storm leadings. tme
• .ew m-
.s
N I l;
„,
Security Mineral Issues
• All mineral interests have been contacted per statutory
• Facilities located requirement(new notices for AMUSR)
well off county ;_ -j • Have negotiated&recorded surface agreement with KP
road Kauffman. No change from previous application.
• Facilities _I • Facility footprint adjusted to accommodate KN Energy
Security fenced _ •
underground lines
with chain link • Late referral from Kerr-McGee. Agreement to show
• Fence or other r`'� t ,,Tt their facility locations&setbacks on the final plat. To be
security devices - I..'„,..:-.-,.?,.A..d `04P formalized prior to BOCC hearing
to discourage
9 ,.;i•.. • i ft ited will accommodate oil&ga and can peacefully
&
Climbing co-exist with existing oil&gas facilities,pipelines.8
• All buildings operation
fenced,locked, • No effect on surface agreement due to height increase
secured
10
KamMCOn Location*&Linn To M Shown on 1M Final Plat
J--- - — WC Public Works Referral Issues
al Reference to"proposed"accesses. Final
, I / " •
recorded plat shows actual accesses(both
r., 5 : were existing and affirmed by recorded
crossing agreements with PSCo./Excel)NO
CHANGE.
l se
• Reference to verification with local
emergency responder—already have
approval from Ft. Lupton Fire Marshall—
_- NO CHANGE.
11 n • Reference to historic runoff—NO
�` CHANGE.
: 1
Recorded Plat Shows Access E-mail from Ft. Lupton Fire Marshall
rwnnIIIruu .._ .._
r,r,
_i .. ...........,.`.....'• wELc COUNTY R( ...._.....,_.......
--4- - - _ ..
a «a.,b dt' ,fir
4 ? . . '"�
Adjacent Property Issues • West tower has no issues with fall or debris
radii as approved(PSCo referral).
• Must address catastrophic failure(very rare) • West tower increases in radii do not impact
• Tower fall and debris field radii are determined by other dissimilar facilities.
licensed experienced tower engineers(to industry Proposed east tower debris field radius
standards) P
• Maximum tower fall radius is approx.50%of tower extends over"Wilson property to east.
height. Tower structure folds on itself. • Original approval required agreement with Ms.
• Maximum potential debris field radius is approx.70% Wilson on east tower before building permit
of tower height. Debris is bolts,fasteners,etc. issued.
• Tower owners maintain adequate liability insurance. • Option with Ms.Wilson made at that time—not
• Referral from Xcel/PSCo indicates no conflict,but currently renewed until decision is made
confirms issue of liability. Similar facilities.
• No reply from adjacent tower owners—compatible
regarding construction of east tower
due to similar facilities.
11
• Applicant purchased property from Ms.Wilson in • Applicant has maintained ongoing discussions with Ms.
2003 for$610,200 with clearly stated plans for Wilson in this regard and is willing to continue
construction of 2 broadcast towers. consideration of reasonable terms.
• Use is compatible with existing and proposed surrounding
• RE completed by LMBC prior to purchase using property uses(existing towers,natural gas processing
existing ditch as natural boundary. RE created plant,large dairy,power lines,proposed power station,
the small parcel(Lot A)at the NE corner of the rural water district tank farm.)
property at Wilson's request for the opportunity to
build a home. • Applicant acknowledges that they must reach formal
agreement with Ms.Wilson in this regard before issuance
of EAST tower building permit. Proposed interim written
• Applicant acknowledges fall and debris radii of agreement reaffirms LMBC requirement for formal
proposed EAST tower extends over a portion of agreement and to notify Ms.Wilson of any updated
Wilson property. engineering studies that would impact safety issues.
Conditions of Approval from WC Board of z„___,,‘ j^.., -
Commissioners for AMUSR-1N508 _
Item 30. Prior to construction of the eastern tower,
'-- ,,
an easement shall be granted and recorded
covering the potential zone of collapse a outlined `. /
in the letter,dated March 30,2005,from Ernest
R.Jones of ERI Installation, Inc.(included in the .,
USR-1508 application materials). The potential '.,.//.,*
zone of collapse shall reflect the increase m ... . .
height of the broadcast tower from 1,180 feet(as
•
approved under USR-1508)to 1,480 feet(as . •�
approved under AMUSR-1508). Evidence of such ' ' I ••
shall be submitted prior to release of building
permits. -
Municipal Issues Summary
• Original USR was very comprehensive
• Reply from Town of Frederick only • Applicants have been pro-active and cooperative
—Zoning—WC zoning is appropriate • Applicants willing to work with appropriate
conditions
—Future use—intended to be broadcasting
• Height increase maintains and expands tower
—No requirement for annexation effectiveness for all users with minimal impact
—Preserves virtual open space • Height increase accommodates additional users
—No IGA • Issues to be considered are minimal in context of
—Applicant has assisted Town of Frederick all requirements&issues previously addressed
officials to address lighting issues on • Full application&hearings provide for extensive
adjacent Clear Channel tower staff review,referrals,SPO's,&public input
• Applicant requests approval as submitted
12
Hello