The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20022179.tiff Weld County Planning Dept. 3UL 0 2 2001 Mr. Chris Gathman, Planner Weld County Department of Planning Services RECEIVED 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Wean RE: USR-1343 Owens Brothers Concrete Company/Special Use Permit 14U Dear Mr. Gathman: As a member of the Platte& Prairie Chapter of the National Audubon Society, I am deeply concerned about the proposed mining operation referenced above. This mining operation is directly across the road from the 19-acre Sage Hill Farm Wetland, located at 8234 WCR 28, and poses a serious threat to the continued well-being of the wetland and all the species of animals and plants which live there. Our local Audubon chapter"adopted"the Sage Hill Farm Wetland several years ago, and many of our members have volunteered numerous hours of work towards improving the already high quality habitat to be found on this site. The traffic, noise, lights, dust and other disturbances associated with the gravel operation will negatively impact the ideal habitat currently found in this wetland. Also,the proposed mining operation may lower the water table and thereby destroy the wetland. Therefore, I ask that you consider implementing the following changes to the proposed mining operation: (1) Move the aggregate processing plant to the northwest corner of the Nix/Owens property, placing it near the already existing Varra plant and as far away from the Sage Hill Farm Wetland as possible. (2) Route the gravel hauling traffic onto State Highway 66 or onto WCR 19, both of which are paved roads which already carry commercial truck traffic. Don't allow gravel truck access onto WCR 28, which runs along the north border of the wetland. (3) Require a substantial dirt berm along the entire length of the boundary where the gravel operation borders the wetland, to protect against noise and disturbance. (4) Keep night lighting at the gravel pit well away from the wetland and limit mining and processing activities to daylight hours only (not 24-hour operation as requested). (5) Disallow the Concrete Batch Plant proposed under this Special Use Permit, as insufficient information has been provided in the application to determine the environmental impact(location of plant, number of mixing trucks, etc.)of such a plant. (6) Require evidence of adequate protection to the high water table which is the source of the Sage frill Farm Wetland. Thank ou for your attention to the above points. C e� t,1 S Sincerely /� 7,g/ �I ou My Ad ress: I/lr•Je'i7l/� • va bpt go4/23zi 2002-2179 Weld County Planning Dept. Mr. Chris Gathman, Planner ,:UL 0 2 2001 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Avenue RECEIVED Greeley, CO 80631 RE: USR-1343 Owens Brothers Concrete Company/Special Use Permit Dear Mr. Gathman: As a member of the Platte& Prairie Chapter of the National Audubon Society, I am deeply concerned about the proposed mining operation referenced above. This mining operation is directly across the road from the 19-acre Sage Hill Farm Wetland, located at 8234 WCR 28, and poses a serious threat to the continued well-being of the wetland and all the species of animals and plants which live there. Our local Audubon chapter"adopted"the Sage Hill Farm Wetland several years ago, and many of our members have volunteered numerous hours of work towards improving the already high quality habitat to be found on this site. The traffic, noise, lights, dust and other disturbances associated with the gravel operation will negatively impact the ideal habitat currently found in this wetland. Also, the proposed mining operation may lower the water table and thereby destroy the wetland. Therefore, I ask that you consider implementing the following changes to the proposed mining operation: (1) Move the aggregate processing plant to the northwest corner of the Nix/Owens property, placing it near the already existing Varra plant and as far away from the Sage Hill Farm Wetland as possible. (2) Route the gravel hauling traffic onto State Highway 66 or onto WCR 19, both of which are paved roads which already carry commercial truck traffic. Don't allow gravel truck access onto WCR 28,which runs along the north border of the wetland. (3) Require a substantial dirt berm along the entire length of the boundary where the gravel operation borders the wetland, to protect against noise and disturbance. (4) Keep night lighting at the gravel pit well away from the wetland and limit mining and processing activities to daylight hours only (not 24-hour operation as requested). (5) Disallow the Concrete Batch Plant proposed under this Special Use Permit, as insufficient information has been provided in the application to determine the environmental impact(location of plant, number of mixing trucks, etc.) of such a plant. (6) Require evidence of adequate protection to the high water table which is the source of the Sage Hill Farm Wetland. Thank you for your attention to the above points. Sincerely, � ifs? 4P. -d . • , S031 My Address: EXHIBIT Weld County planning Dept. Mr. Chris Ga n, Planner ,;,JL 0 J 2001 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RECEIVED RE: USR-1343 Owens Brothers Concrete Company/Special Use Permit Dear Mr. Gathman: As a member of the Platte& Prairie Chapter of the National Audubon Society, I am deeply concerned about the proposed mining operation referenced above. This mining operation is directly across the road from the 19-acre Sage Hill Farm Wetland, located at 8234 WCR 28, and poses a serious threat to the continued well-being of the wetland and all the species of animals and plants which live there. Our local Audubon chapter"adopted"the Sage Hill Farm Wetland several years ago, and many of our members have volunteered numerous hours of work towards improving the already high quality habitat to be found on this site. The traffic, noise, lights, dust and other disturbances associated with the gravel operation will negatively impact the ideal habitat currently found in this wetland. Also,the proposed mining operation may lower the water table and thereby destroy the wetland. Therefore, I ask that you consider implementing the following changes to the proposed mining operation: (1) Move the aggregate processing plant to the northwest corner of the Nix/Owens property, placing it near the already existing Varra plant and as far away from the Sage Hill Farm Wetland as possible (2) Route the gravel hauling traffic onto State Highway 66 or onto WCR 19, both of which are paved roads which already carry commercial truck traffic. Don't allow gravel truck access onto WCR 28,which runs along the north border of the wetland. (3) Require a substantial dirt berm along the entire length of the boundary where the gravel operation borders the wetland, to protect against noise and disturbance. (4) Keep night lighting at the gravel pit well away from the wetland and limit mining and processing activities to daylight hours only (not 24-hour operation as requested). (5) Disallow the Concrete Batch Plant proposed under this Special Use Permit, as insufficient information has been provided in the application to determine the environmental impact (location of plant, number of mixing trucks, etc.) of such a plant. (6) Require evidence of adequate protection to the high water table which is the source of the Sage Hill Farm Wetland. Thank you for your attention to the above points. Sincerely, ei 0 ail/04u `° My Address. s Mks' l> � v�Y a"� 2 � 8a b 3�1 EXHIBIT a rt , liem) `" Audi ? ' , .a m �V,4°.a w a#p _i_s_yc t, 3 m a tl E'iro It. Q p 2 ° 8.c uS T.C c,d o y '.“1 =';;;_60 ti e�cvmC�f -@W�°'x,�ro,�,7.re ob m a'n.7 and Till b o w w w t n 4 y c:c w 9 �d yr, .. r--0 w© an =us %a -. � try o a .0 a'Cnk Ta F,..-5. d -4 m .9 g , ti y °n :# 0 fi s•p `' a,,""i,a s5` 9— y 1 di 4 A= g . w aittIE i Y db x , , ` e w�; F.f°N' 0 6 bo3 P. C y� tl G �'.A f0 Usif~a''.� Lq. C o na -i , ,.�)Z YS Q ma B " Gg tr. .i �n ,,, `-''s'4; t 0.w g'.5. 9 N � o E' S. 9 N Q d m w m O �A � 9 ro y 9L iP 6 -6.18 ,7;2148yswx .ag8= � 4 j n o- L Po B a 1, ,.,1,' s r3y� d C r. i.,‘,„I 'tl - 9 ¢1 .2,r-a 1 irtH[6�,,.0..-.',.;') .�9F �h Ra4.+w 1 a ,� cid o tl 3 + am 2, % awl'O141 ww ti sc. os.9 m Ste. 't " wr r ku � o v �} 9 c w ,yf tlt� 4a* tsgg, ,o � a i bi Z 1;1�y C �'Y [� '.Yo '49'd. tld tl`D �L�. y c ,�i � c �� 68 =p .- -c tl E�� ro acv C ? lc- r: 2-d T., 8 8 g ...,...2.-E ,,, 2 w d 5 c L',..;`,‘` w ro � 3 �uw J A `3f `v ,0 V .C qiii h9 8 va �°w o'w ,S o 4'U r r,( c. ll. y 0-01-8%6117 -6.yp°w' d, -skiM VCS ro srE 0 git. wLA b'1Ya3 Ili 64 "OrmmTh 4,,E ;dirk iA :Itiv who m°'� at .; E Iiiiii '1$ c°+ 3 y- c tlrap�5&i'kvmfy Ea'�^�1 fe-oo o w 9oa wy'ed rii as u . w '� i� t� Weld County Planning®@� Mr. Chris Gathman Planner JUL 0 3 ZOO\ Weld County. Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 1/,th Avenue RECEIVED Greeley, CO 80631 RE: USR-1343 Owens Brothers Concrete Company/Special Use Permit Dear Mr. Gathman: As a member of the Platte& Prairie Chapter of the National Audubon Society, I am deeply concerned about the proposed mining operation referenced above. This mining operation is directly across the road from the 19-acre Sage Hill Farm Wetland, located at 8234 WCR 28, and poses a serious threat to the continued well-being of the wetland and all the species of animals and plants which live there. Our local Audubon chapter"adopted"the Sage Hill Farm Wetland several years ago, and many of our members have volunteered numerous hours of work towards improving the already high quality habitat to be found on this site. The traffic, noise, lights, dust and other disturbances associated with the gravel operation will negatively impact the ideal habitat currently found in this wetland. Also,the proposed mining operation may lower the water table and thereby destroy the wetland. Therefore, I ask that you consider implementing the following changes to the proposed mining operation: (1) Move the aggregate processing plant to the northwest corner of the Nix/Owens property, placing it near the already existing Varra plant and as far away from the Sage Hill Farm Wetland as possible. (2) Route the gravel hauling traffic onto State Highway 66 or onto WCR 19, both of which are paved roads which already carry commercial truck traffic. Don't allow gravel truck access onto WCR 28, which runs along the north border of the wetland. (3) Require a substantial dirt berm along the entire length of the boundary where the gravel operation borders the wetland, to protect against noise and disturbance. (4) Keep night lighting at the gravel pit well away from the wetland and limit mining and processing activities to daylight hours only (not 24-hour operation as requested). (5) Disallow the Concrete Batch Plant proposed under this Special Use Permit, as insufficient information has been provided in the application to determine the environmental impact (location of plant, number of mixing trucks, etc.) of such a plant. (6) Require evidence of adequate protection to the high water table which is the source of the Sage Hill Farm Wetland. Thank you for your attention to the above points. S'ncerely, • A e tc-Lnt/1y eCfi0-c V<. l .2 I".ft, ✓lam .( 4 Address: EXHIBIT / d 3 4-5 wck 39 (ice . wcr z- )--) 14 CA -I Weld county planning Dept. Mr. Chris Gathman, Planner „U -6 L 0 NCI\ Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Avenue RECEIVED Greeley, CO CO 80631 RE: USR-1343 Owens Brothers Concrete Company/Special Use Permit Dear Mr. Gathman: As a member of the Platte& Prairie Chapter of the National Audubon Society, I am deeply concerned about the proposed mining operation referenced above. This mining operation is directly across the road from the 19-acre Sage Hill Farm Wetland, located at 8234 WCR 28, and poses a serious threat to the continued well-being of the wetland and all the species of animals and plants which live there. Our local Audubon chapter"adopted"the Sage Hill Farm Wetland several years ago, and many of our members have volunteered numerous hours of work towards improving the already high quality habitat to be found on this site. The traffic, noise, lights, dust and other disturbances associated with the gravel operation will negatively impact the ideal habitat currently found in this wetland. Also,the proposed mining operation may lower the water table and thereby destroy the wetland. Therefore, I ask that you consider implementing the following changes to the proposed mining operation: (1) Move the aggregate processing plant to the northwest corner of the Nix/Owens property, placing it near the already existing Van-a plant and as far away from the Sage Hill Farm Wetland as possible. (2) Route the gravel hauling traffic onto State Highway 66 or onto WCR 19, both of which are paved roads which already carry commercial truck traffic. Don't allow gravel truck access onto WCR 28, which runs along the north border of the wetland. (3) Require a substantial dirt berm along the entire length of the boundary where the gravel operation borders the wetland, to protect against noise and disturbance. (4) Keep night lighting at the gravel pit well away from the wetland and limit mining and processing activities to daylight hours only (not 24-hour operation as requested). (5) Disallow the Concrete Batch Plant proposed under this Special Use Permit, as insufficient information has been provided in the application to determine the environmental impact(location of plant, number of mixing trucks, etc.)of such a plant. (6) Require evidence of adequate protection to the high water table which is the source of the Sage Hill Farm Wetland. Thank you for your attention to the above points. Sincerely, EXHIBIT My Address: ^J�„�� ,;?7o c E, /C �� G31 Weld County Planning Dept. Mr. Chris Gathman, Planner �l 0 2601 Weld County Department of Planning Services RECEIVED C D 1555 N. 17`h Avenue R E 5 Greeley, CO 80631 RE: USR-1343 Owens Brothers Concrete Company/Special Use Permit Dear Mr. Gathman: As a member of the Platte& Prairie Chapter of the National Audubon Society, I am deeply concerned about the proposed mining operation referenced above. This mining operation is directly across the road from the 19-acre Sage Hill Farm Wetland, located at 8234 WCR 28, and poses a serious threat to the continued well-being of the wetland and all the species of animals and plants which live there. Our local Audubon chapter"adopted"the Sage Hill Farm Wetland several years ago, and many of our members have volunteered numerous hours of work towards improving the already high quality habitat to be found on this site. The traffic, noise, lights, dust and other disturbances associated with the gravel operation will negatively impact the ideal habitat currently found in this wetland. Also, the proposed mining operation may lower the water table and thereby destroy the wetland. Therefore, I ask that you consider implementing the following changes to the proposed mining operation: (I) Move the aggregate processing plant to the northwest corner of the Nix/Owens property, placing it near the already existing Varra plant and as far away from the Sage Hill Farm Wetland as possible. (2) Route the gravel hauling traffic onto State Highway 66 or onto WCR 19, both of which are paved roads which already carry commercial truck traffic. Don't allow gravel truck access onto WCR 28, which runs along the north border of the wetland. (3) Require a substantial dirt berm along the entire length of the boundary where the gravel operation borders the wetland, to protect against noise and disturbance. (4) Keep night lighting at the gravel pit well away from the wetland and limit mining and processing activities to daylight hours only (not 24-hour operation as requested). (5) Disallow the Concrete Batch Plant proposed under this Special Use Permit, as insufficient information has been provided in the application to determine the environmental impact (location of plant, number of mixing trucks, etc.) of such a plant. (6) Require evidence of adequate protection to the high water table which is the source of the Sage Frill Farm Wetland. Thank you for your attention to the above points. Sin erely, onlBR My Address: Greif-J , 0,0 Sow3' Weld County Planning Dept. Mr. Chris Gathman, Planner C'JL 0 3 Zu01 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17`hAvenue RECEIVED Greeley, CO 80631 RE: USR-1343 Owens Brothers Concrete Company/Special Use Permit Dear Mr. Gathman: As a member of the Platte& Prairie Chapter of the National Audubon Society, I am deeply concerned about the proposed mining operation referenced above. This mining operation is directly across the road from the 19-acre Sage Hill Farm Wetland, located at 8234 WCR 28, and poses a serious threat to the continued well-being of the wetland and all the species of animals and plants which live there. Our local Audubon chapter"adopted"the Sage Hill Farm Wetland several years ago, and many of our members have volunteered numerous hours of work towards improving the already high quality habitat to be found on this site. The traffic, noise, lights, dust and other disturbances associated with the gravel operation will negatively impact the ideal habitat currently found in this wetland. Also, the proposed mining operation may lower the water table and thereby destroy the wetland. Therefore, I ask that you consider implementing the following changes to the proposed mining operation: (1) Move the aggregate processing plant to the northwest corner of the Nix/Owens property, placing it near the already existing Varra plant and as far away from the Sage Hill Farm Wetland as possible. (2) Route the gravel hauling traffic onto State Highway 66 or onto WCR 19, both of which are paved roads which already carry commercial truck traffic. Don't allow gravel truck access onto WCR 28, which runs along the north border of the wetland. (3) Require a substantial dirt berm along the entire length of the boundary where the gravel operation borders the wetland, to protect against noise and disturbance. (4) Keep night lighting at the gravel pit well away from the wetland and limit mining and processing activities to daylight hours only (not 24-hour operation as requested). (5) Disallow the Concrete Batch Plant proposed under this Special Use Permit, as insufficient information has been provided in the application to determine the environmental impact (location of plant, number of mixing trucks, etc.) of such a plant. (6) Require evidence of adequate protection to the high water table which is the source of the Sage Frill Farm Wetland. Thank you for your attention to the above points. Sincerel EXHIBIT My Address: j 52 %rya Gall /dame, 5ree(ez,� CO g ) Weld County Planning Dept. Mr. Chris Gathman Planner JUL 0 3 2.001 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 1'7t1 Avenue RECEIVED Greeley, CO 80631 RE: USR-1343 Owens Brothers Concrete Company/Special Use Permit Dear Mr. Gathman: As a member of the Platte& Prairie Chapter of the National Audubon Society, I am deeply concerned about the proposed mining operation referenced above. This mining operation is directly across the road from the 19-acre Sage Hill Farm Wetland, located at 8234 WCR 28, and poses a serious threat to the continued well-being of the wetland and all the species of animals and plants which live there. Our local Audubon chapter"adopted"the Sage Hill Farm Wetland several years ago, and many of our members have volunteered numerous hours of work towards improving the already high quality habitat to be found on this site. The traffic, noise, lights, dust and other disturbances associated with the gravel operation will negatively impact the ideal habitat currently found in this wetland. Also,the proposed mining operation may lower the water table and thereby destroy the wetland. Therefore, I ask that you consider implementing the following changes to the proposed mining operation: (1) Move the aggregate pro'cesiing plant to the northwest corner of the Nix/Owens property, placing it near the already existing Varra plant and as far away from the Sage Hill Farm Wetland as possible. (2) Route the gravel hauling traffic onto State Highway 66 or onto WCR 19, both of which are paved roads which already carry commercial truck traffic. Don't allow gravel truck access onto WCR 28, which runs along the north border of the wetland. (3) Require a substantial dirt berm along the entire length of the boundary where the gravel operation borders the wetland, to protect against noise and disturbance. (4) Keep night lighting at the gravel pit well away from the wetland and limit mining and processing activities to daylight hours only (not 24-hour operation as requested). (5) Disallow the Concrete Batch Plant proposed under this Special Use Permit, as insufficient information has been provided in the application to determine the environmental impact (location of plant, number of mixing trucks, etc.) of such a plant. (6) Require evidence of adequate protection to the high water table which is the source of the Sage Hill Farm Wetland. Thank you for your attention to the above points. EXHIBITMy Address: 211362 l'1 3 s4-. D vt �----- Weld c °Unty Planning Dept J` v52001 Mr. Chris Gathman, Planner �� Weld County Department of Planning Services EI vE,p 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE: USR-1343 Owens Brothers Concrete Company/Special Use Permit Dear Mr. Gathman: As a member of the Platte& Prairie Chapter of the National Audubon Society, I am deeply concerned about the proposed mining operation referenced above. This mining operation is directly across the road from the 19-acre Sage Hill Farm Wetland, located at 8234 WCR 28, and poses a serious threat to the continued well-being of the wetland and all the species of animals and plants which live there. Our local Audubon chapter"adopted"the Sage Hill Farm Wetland several years ago, and many of our members have volunteered numerous hours of work towards improving the already high quality habitat to be found on this site. The traffic, noise, lights, dust and other disturbances associated with the gravel operation will negatively impact the ideal habitat currently found in this wetland. Also, the proposed mining operation may lower the water table and thereby destroy the wetland. Therefore, I ask that you consider implementing the following changes to the proposed mining operation: (1) Move the aggregate processing plant to the northwest corner of the Nix/Owens property, placing it near the already existing Varra plant and as far away from the Sage Hill Farm Wetland as possible. (2) Route the gravel hauling traffic onto State Highway 66 or onto WCR 19, both of which are paved roads which already carry commercial truck traffic. Don't allow gravel truck access onto WCR 28, which runs along the north border of the wetland. (3) Require a substantial dirt berm along the entire length of the boundary where the gravel operation borders the wetland, to protect against noise and disturbance. (4) Keep night lighting at the gravel pit well away from the wetland and limit mining and processing activities to daylight hours only (not 24-hour operation as requested). (5) Disallow the Concrete Batch Plant proposed under this Special Use Permit, as insufficient information has been provided in the application to determine the environmental impact (location of plant, number of mixing trucks, etc.) of such a plant. (6) Require evidence of adequate protection to the high water table which is the source of the Sage Hill Farm Wetland. Thank you for your attention to the above points. Sincere y, r y ddress:7 2C- ayikAc #ad Weld County Planning Dept. July 2, 2001 JUL 0 5 2001 Weld County Planning Commission RECEIVED Attn: Mr. Chris Gathman, Planner Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE: United Neighborhood Response USR- 1343 Special Use Permit Owens Brothers Concrete Company, Nix Property Sand and Gravel Mine Dear Weld County Planning Commission: This letter is a united neighborhood response expressing our concerns about the Use by Special Review Permit#1343 application submitted by Owens Brothers Concrete Company. We, the undersigned, are residents of the area which will receive the most adverse impact from this proposed mining operation. This neighborhood includes the area immediately surrounding the mine site, along site access roads and along the potential haul routes. Each of us as neighbors would experience significant negative impact from this industrial sand and gravel mine and aggregate processing plant. If the Nix Property Sand and Gravel Mine is granted the right to operate in our agricultural neighborhood, the permit should require that the mining operation not adversely impact the surrounding properties and businesses. This letter reflects all of our concerns identified to date, but our examination and investigation of all issues related to this matter is ongoing. We will present any additional points as soon as possible and within allowable time limits. Our concerns are as follows. 1. WATER ISSUES A. Wells. There are over 35 domestic and irrigation wells in the immediate vicinity of the proposed mining operation. These wells are critical to the existence of the farms and businesses operated by the surrounding neighbors. The Applicant has not demonstrated through engineering studies that no injury will result to these wells and adjudicated water rights. This is contrary to Section 24.1.1 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance which states that the regulation of uses by Special Review is designed to protect and promote the health, safety, convenience, and general welfare of the present and future residents of Weld County. B. Loss of Agricultural Water. The amount of water required for mediated lake surface evaporation is significant. This water would be removed from agricultural EXHIBIT 5s United Neighborhood Response to USR-1343 July 2, 2001 Page 2 application in perpetuity. Such use is in direct conflict with the surrounding agricultural production to which the county has pledged its support. The Weld County Comprehensive Plan states under A. Goal 8 that "[w]ater currently associated with a farm or rural unit of land should be retained for agricultural uses." C. Aquifer. The Applicant has made no provision for recharging the aquifer which lies beneath our farms and which will be dewatered by this mining operation. The dewatering of the aquifer followed by unlimited years of excessive evaporation from the gravel pit open ponds may over time adversely affect our guaranteed Right to Farm. The Applicant has provided no engineering studies showing that no injury will result to this aquifer. D. Water Table. The farms surrounding the proposed mining site have historically had certain very specific seasonal water table levels. Based on long experience of these water tables, we plan our crops and irrigation schedules taking these known water table factors into consideration. A change in these water table levels may require us to plant different crops or irrigate our crops differently. Furthermore, perennial crops such as windbreak trees or pasture grasses depend on consistent seasonal water table levels. Any change in the existing water table level interferes with our guaranteed Right to Farm, plus may actually kill existing perennial crops. This is contrary to the mandates of Section 24.7.1.3 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance, which requires that an applicant show that"uses which would be permitted will be compatible with the existing surrounding land uses." E. Wetland. The Sage Hill Farm Wetland is located at 8234 WCR 28, directly across the road from the southern boundary of the proposed gravel mine. This wetland lies in the hundred-year floodplain and is clearly visible on the exhibit map titled Soils/Wetlands/Floodplain that was included with the application. This approximately 19-acre wetland is less than 100 feet away from the proposed mining operation. The Sage Hill Farm Wetland is the last remnant of a much larger wetland system. It provides habitat to many species of wildlife and has been the recipient of a large grant from the NRCS Wetland Reserve Program. Owens Brothers has not acknowledged the existence of this wetland and has not evaluated the risk to the wetland posed by mining operations. We ask that as a condition for granting any permit for this mining operation,the County require that the Applicant demonstrate, through reliable engineering studies, that no injury will result to the wells,wetlands, aquifer, water table and water rights of surrounding property owners. We ask that no permit be issued until and unless no injury is shown by the Applicant. We also ask that as a condition for granting any permit, the County require that the Applicant mutually agree in writing with each potentially affected party to ensure that the mining operation maintains the existing water table such that the surrounding farms, businesses, wells,wetlands, perennial crops and residences are not injured. United Neighborhood Response to USR-1343 July 2, 2001 Page 3 2. TRAFFIC IMPACTS A. Truck Trips. The application indicates that this gravel operation will add a total of approximately 190 vehicle trips per day to our neighborhood roads, 167 of these trips being heavy gravel hauling trucks. We are concerned about the increased noise, dust, pollution, congestion, road maintenance and safety issues this will create. B. Access. The application indicates the gravel pit access will be on Weld County Road 28. This stretch of WCR 28 is unpaved and is not a through road, as it ends approximately/ mile west of WCR 17. It is currently used primarily by local residents and slow-moving farm vehicles. On page 5 of the Traffic Impact Study provided by the applicant it states: "Over the life of the project, the traffic generated by the Nix Property Gravel Mine will account for approximately 98 percent of the total number of ESALs on WCR 28 from its intersection with WCR 19 to the entrance to the Nix Property Gravel Mine. " We do not see how the applicant can justify the statement found on page 4 of this study stating that "the average daily impacts are minimal" in regard to WCR 28. This dramatic increase in traffic on WCR 28 and at the intersection of WCR 28 and WCR 19 will have a substantial negative impact on our neighborhood. CM Policy 4.3 of the Comprehensive Plan requires "that access roads to and within the site be located in a manner which minimize traffic impacts on surrounding land uses." We ask that as a condition for granting any permit for this mining operation, the County require that WCR 28 not be used for access to this mine. We ask that access into and out of the Nix Property Sand and Gravel Mine be moved to Highway 66. C. Haul Route. The applicant did not designate a haul route in the permit application. Section 44.1.7.4 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance requires that an application include information regarding county roads and bridges to be utilized. Section 44.3.4 mandates that a"profile and typical cross section of haul roads" be submitted with the application. CM Policy 4.4 of the Comprehensive Plan requires that an applicant"demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Board of Commissioners that the street or highway facilities providing access to the mining activity are adequate in functional classification, width, and structural capacity to the requirements of the proposed mining activity." We ask that as a condition for granting any permit for this mining operation, the County require that the haul route be designated. D. Dirt Roads. If the applicant uses unpaved county roads, the county will have to provide additional maintenance to keep the road surfaces graded. This will add to tax United Neighborhood Response to USR-1343 July 2, 2001 Page 4 expense for all county taxpayers. The addition of hundreds of trucks into the local area will degrade the roads and the quality of life for all local residents. We ask that as a condition for granting any permit for this mining operation, the County require that the haul route be limited to paved county roads and state highways E. Traffic Between Mines. Owens Brothers owns another gravel pit site on the northeast corner of the intersection of Weld County Roads 15 and 26, approximately two miles from the proposed Nix Property site. The USR-1343 application does not mention any traffic between these two nearby sites. The roads between these sites are unpaved and used primarily by local residents and farm vehicles. Additional truck traffic between the two sites would significantly degrade the roads and quality of life of the nearby residents. We ask that as a condition for granting any permit for this mining operation, the County require that the number of trucks traveling between these two sites be designated and limited to a minimal amount,fewer than 5 per day. F. Safety. First, visibility at the intersection of WCR 28 and WCR 19 is severely limited. A hill on WCR 19 crests approximately 550 feet south of the midpoint of this intersection. At approximately 700-850 feet south of the intersection midpoint, oncoming northbound traffic on WCR 19 is completely invisible to a vehicle crossing WCR 28 or turning from WCR 28 onto WCR 19. Similarly, northbound traffic on WCR 19 cannot see the intersection with WCR 28 until approximately 700 feet from the intersection. Trees along the west side of WCR 19 further inhibit clear visibility at this intersection. Those of us who drive this route regularly cannot overemphasize what a tricky intersection this is. A second very important safety concern is that the county roads in the vicinity of the gravel pit are school bus routes. The addition of hundreds of trucks on these roads would constitute a safety hazard to our children and to the school bus drivers. This is contrary to the mandates of Section 24.1.1 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance which states that the regulation of uses by Special Review is designed to protect and promote the health, safety, convenience, and general welfare of the present and future residents of Weld County. We ask that as a condition for granting any permit for this mining operation, the County require that these safety issues be addressed by moving the access to Highway 66. G. WCR 26. Throughout the Traffic Impact Study, references to WCR 26 occur. For example, on page 5, it states: "On WCR 26 west of the site access, the total number of ESALs will be about 466,710... " Such references to WCR 26 need to be explained more fully. If WCR 26 is a typographical error for WCR 28, then we do not understand United Neighborhood Response to USR-1343 July 2, 2001 Page 5 the reference to "west of the site access", as other places refer to trucks heading EAST from the proposed site access on WCR 28 to WCR 19. We ask that as a condition for granting any permit for this mining operation, the County require that all references to WCR 26 in the Traffic Impact Study provided by the applicant be clarified. 3. OPERATIONS A. Location of the Aggregate Processing Plant. The aggregate processing plant, administrative offices, machine shop and all other industrial structures and buildings should be located in the northwest corner of the Nix property (in the area currently designated as Phase II). The northwest corner of the Nix property is closest to the existing Varra Gravel Mine aggregate processing plant. Placing the Owens/Nix aggregate processing plant in the same area would keep the industrial sites grouped together and away from the surrounding agricultural and residential areas as much as possible. Policy 4.5 of the Comprehensive Plan requires, "where possible, that batch plants and processing equipment be buffered from adjacent uses." The reasons given in the application for placing the processing plant in the southeast corner of the Nix property are not valid. First, paragraph 5.9 of the application states that this site was"chosen to provide continuous access for oil and gas operations... ". As is evident from the Vicinity Map, all the gas lines interconnect. As is evident from the Reclamation Plan Map, the land above the gas lines will not be mined. From this it becomes clear that gas company employees can drive on roads which run on top of the gas lines and can get to any of the gas wells from any of the other wells, since all gas lines (and consequently all roads) interconnect. Therefore, choosing any one location of the aggregate processing plant over another will not in any way affect the continuous access for oil and gas operations. The second reason given in point 5.9 is "to avoid conflicts with concurrent reclamation activities proposed for this project. " According to the Reclamation Plan Map, eventually all of the mined areas will be reclaimed. Wherever the aggregate processing plant is located in Phase I, eventually it will be in the way of the reclamation activities. The only place the aggregate processing plant would be completely out of the way of concurrent reclamation activities would be to place it in Phase II. The third reason given is: "Locating the plant area next to an existing cut in topography will also help to minimize noise and visual impacts from nearby residences. " However, the WCR 28 location of the plant will be much more visible and noisy to nearby residences, and will impact many more residences, than a location in the northwest corner of the Nix property. Furthermore, a northwest corner location for the plant will still have the advantage of the cut in topography. United Neighborhood Response to USR-1343 July 2, 2001 Page 6 Moreover, point 4.3 of the application states: 'Most of the noise sources will be set back from the property lines by a significant distance. " The aggregate processing plant is arguably the biggest noise source of all, yet this application has placed it right next to the south property line. Likewise, we anticipate that the area surrounding the aggregate processing plant will be the source of the brightest night lighting. We base this assumption on our observation of the Varra Gravel Mine. Moving the aggregate processing plant to the northwest corner of the Nix property will help limit the negative effects of night lighting on neighboring properties. Internal roads already exist on the Nix property which connect the northwest corner of Phase II to both the north property line adjacent to Highway 66 and to WCR 19. These roads provide oil and gas access and can never be mined due to underground utility lines. Therefore, placing the aggregate processing plant in the northwest corner of the Nix property will not increase the number of internal roads. Finally, the Applicant's stated desire to keep more of the Nix farm in agricultural production is not a valid argument against placing the aggregate processing plant in the northwest corner of Phase II. When the Nix farm was sold to a concrete company, this land was essentially condemned for long-term future agricultural production. The emphasis now should be (1)to keep the surrounding farms which have not been sold to gravel interests viable as productive farmland, and (2)to protect the rural character of the surrounding neighborhood as much as possible. This can best be done by locating the aggregate processing plant as far away as possible from neighboring farm properties. We ask that as a condition for granting any permit for this mining operation,the County require that the aggregate processing plant, as well as all other industrial structures and administrative buildings, be located in the northwest corner of the Nix property nearby the Varra processing plant. This keeps industrial activities grouped together and minimizes the impact of this operation on the surrounding farms and residences. B. Hours of Operation. According to Zoning Ordinance 44.4.2, the allowable hours of operation for sand and gravel operations are limited to "the hours of daylight. " In this application, Owens Brothers lists the hours for sand and gravel mining and processing as 6:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. Furthermore, this application states: "An exception to the above hours will be allowed when government contracts are obtained that require extended hours. In this case, 24 hour per day operations will be allowed to meet such contract requirements. " -- The proposed hours of 6:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. exceed the hours of daylight for all seasons of the year. Furthermore, the request for a 24-hour exception would generate United Neighborhood Response to USR-1343 July 2, 2001 Page 7 additional noise, lights and other disturbances during evenings and nights, disrupting the peace and quiet of the neighborhood and the sleep of the neighbors. It would deprive us of a break from the continuous daytime noise of this operation. Moreover, there is no fair way to monitor whether or not Owens Brothers has a government contract which requires 24-hour operation, and whether or not such a contract could only be met by the Nix Sand and Gravel Mine and not by other Owens Brothers sites. In addition, on page 14 of the Use By Special Review (Mining Operation) Application, in point 7.B the applicant has stated that the number of work shifts for the operation is ONE. Twenty-four hour operation or even 6:00 A.M. to 10 P.M. operation is inconsistent with using one shift of workers. We ask that as a condition for granting any permit for this mining operation, the County require that the operation of the Nix Sand and Gravel Mine be limited to daylight hours, as required by Weld County Zoning Ordinance 44.4.2, and that no exceptions to this ordinance be granted. C. Noise, Lights and Other Disturbances. The application lacks specific details regarding noise levels, night lighting and other disturbances. For example, the Noise Report in section 4.3 of this application consists of one short paragraph which states: "The Operator proposes to meet Colorado noise standards at the property lines for industrial properties. " This is a conclusory statement, which provides no real data on the projected decibel level of noise and how that noise will be mitigated. This violates Section 5-2 to 5-3 of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan, and also Section 24.6.1.1 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance which requires that"the operation of the uses shall comply with the noise standards enumerated in 25-12-101 C.R.S. 1973, as amended." The Applicant does not demonstrate how these noise standards will be met. Of special concern to us is the power source to be used for the aggregate processing plant, the dewatering pumps, etc. While electricity is quiet and pollution free, diesel powered engines are noisy and polluting. We are also wondering if the dewatering pumps will be running all through the night, in which case a quiet source of power becomes even more critical. Details are also lacking in regard to night lighting, in that the application states that lighting will be designed "so that the lighting will not adversely affect surrounding property owners. " This statement is not supported by any specifics, such as showing where the proposed lights will be placed. Night lighting is an especially important issue in view of the nearby Sage Hill Farm Wetland. Natural darkness at night is essential for the continued well-being of the wetland wildlife. Section 24.7.1.3 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance requires that special uses be compatible with surrounding land uses, and Section 24.6.1.4.1 prohibits lights which adversely affect neighboring properties. Throughout this application we are assured that matters will be handled in a way that "will prevent nuisance conditions" or other such imprecise statements. Paragraph 5.9, United Neighborhood Response to USR-1343 July 2, 2001 Page 8 for example, states: "All reasonable efforts will be made to provide maximum protection from visual and noise impacts. " Such indeterminate, unspecified, undefined statements are meaningless and unenforceable. As we will be living with this gravel mine for the next quarter of a century,which means for the rest of our lives for many of us,we ask that as a condition for granting any permit for this mining operation, the County require that the Applicant provide written specifics for mitigating noise, lights and other disturbances, rather than general reassurances. We also ask that a Noise Study be submitted by the Applicant. D. Dust. Excessive amounts of dust drifting onto our crops, our windbreak trees, and into the Sage Hill Farm Wetland can damage or even kill plants. Excessive dust also constitutes a health hazard for humans and livestock. We question whether the dust abatement measures proposed in this application will adequately protect our plants, animals and families from this hazard. We ask that as a condition for granting any permit for this mining operation, the County require that a Dust Abatement Study be submitted by the Applicant. E. Term of Permit. The proposed indefinite term of operation (estimated at 25 or possibly many more years depending on "market conditions") seems excessive. On page 2, point 13, of the Regular(112) Operation Reclamation Permit Application Form included in the USR application, it states: "Raw material will be crushed and sorted using crushers and screens and stockpiled prior to sales. " This would indicate that the gravel could be mined within the shortest time limits proposed in point 7.C of the Use By Special Review (Mining Operation) Application and then stockpiled for sale as market conditions dictate. The shortest time limit can be estimated by adding together the minimum number of years listed for each stage of the mining operation, as detailed in point 7.C., i.e., 13 years. Material mined in Phase I could be stockpiled on Phase II land. This way our rural neighborhood could return to normal as quickly as possible, thus reducing the impact this gravel mining operation would have on our farms, our property values and our quality of life. We ask that as a condition for granting any permit for this mining operation, the County require that a maximum 13 year term of operation be instated. F. Fencing. Section 5.7 of the application mentions that "an existing three-strand barbed wire fence along the western and northern perimeter of the southwestern portion of the property...will be maintained throughout the life of the mine. " Such a partial and unsubstantial fence seems to us to be completely inadequate to protect against the dangers present where large excavation equipment and extremely deep pits are present. We ask that as a condition for granting any permit for this mining operation, the County require that a fence with a minimum height of 6' and impenetrable to United Neighborhood Response to USR-1343 July 2, 2001 Page 9 humans be constructed around the entire perimeter of the Nix Sand and Gravel Mine. G. Concrete Batch Plant. Banks and Gesso's letter to the Weld County Department of Planning Services dated June 12, 2001 states: "Owens Brothers Concrete has decided to withdraw its request that construction and operation of a concrete batch plant be allowed as part of the approved USR permit " We ask that the Concrete Batch Plant be denied under this permit. 4. RECLAMATION A. End Use. On page one of the USR-1343 application, it states: "The end use of Planning Area One after reclamation will primarily be for open water bodies. Agricultural and rangeland uses may also be incorporated in reclamation efforts." This is also the end use stated on page two of the Regular(112) Operation Reclamation Permit. However, in question 8.A. of the Use by Special Review (Mining Operation) Application, the applicant lists the proposed reclamation land uses as: "Unlined, open water bodies; limited residential development. " No mention is made of agricultural or rangeland uses here. The End Use given in the county application should match the End Use being approved by the Reclamation Permit. Furthermore, adding in "limited residential use" on one part of the USR application but not another leads to confusion about what end use really will be allowed. Very little agricultural or grazing land will remain after these pits are reclaimed, especially considering that much of the remaining land will take the form of roads for oil/gas well access. If even a few residences are built on the remaining land, the agricultural and rangeland uses will become insignificant. We ask that as a condition for granting any permit for this mining operation, the County require that the End Use be limited to open bodies of water, agriculture, and rangeland, and that the End Use not include limited residential development. 5. DEGRADATION OF PROPERTY VALUES A. Lower Property Values. Both the purchase value and the rental value of residences and farms in the neighborhood of the proposed Nix Property Sand and Gravel Mine will drop significantly during the lifetime of the mine, which in many cases means during the remaining lifetimes of the current owners of surrounding properties. Most people who wish to move to the country, either as renters or owners, are seeking relief from the noise and unrest of city life. This gravel mine will destroy both the silence and the rural tranquility of our neighborhood, making our farms and homes less attractive to United Neighborhood Response to USR-1343 July 2, 2001 Page 10 prospective buyers and renters. This application does not address this issue of degradation of the property values of neighboring landowners. B. Buffer Zones. We think that serious consideration should be given as to how to make this mine less disruptive to the existing rural tranquility of our neighborhood. While we do want Owens Brothers to provide large, continuous soil berms on the south and west Phase I boundaries as noise and visual buffers, such berms are not in any way attractive. Therefore, in addition to continuous soil berms, we suggest that wider setbacks could be instituted, dense windbreaks could be planted as screens, and other such permanent landscaping measures could be undertaken which would then become part of the permanent reclamation plan. We ask that as a condition for granting any permit for this mining operation,the County require that the Applicant provide a detailed landscaping plan showing permanent attractive buffer zones on the south and west Phase I boundaries. Such buffer zones shall be designed for the purpose of minimizing the loss of property values in the neighborhood during the lifetime of the mining operation. 6. OMISSIONS, CONTRADICTIONS & INADEQUACIES The application contains many serious omissions, contradictions, inconsistencies, errors, meaningless generalizations, unsupported reassurances, and other inadequacies. The application does not provide sufficiently detailed information regarding many aspects of the proposed mining operation to allow an accurate assessment of the degree of impact on surrounding properties to be made. In addition to references elsewhere in this letter, we have listed a few of the other most serious omissions, contractions and inadequacies below: A. USR-1343 is asking to permit 112 acres for operations, but the Division of Minerals application M2001-046 is asking to permit 312 acres for reclamation (see page one, point 3, of the CDMG application). This discrepancy brings into question the validity of the water augmentation figures, the reclamation plan, and many other things. It also suggests that the applicant is trying to obtain permits from the state and County and commence mining without having disclosed all of its plans and their impacts to the County. B. The applicant states on page 6 of the CDMG 112 Permit application that: "To minimize groundwater impacts on the adjoining properties, the Applicant will dewater the future basin areas throughout the course of the mining operations." Such a program will in fact maximize negative impacts by maintaining the dewatered state for the maximum period of time. C. The dewatering method is inadequately described. A full report describing the proposed pump locations, pump hours of operation, noise levels of pumps, etc. is needed. Data regarding proposed dewatering should be provided, specifically anticipated United Neighborhood Response to USR-1343 July 2, 2001 Page 11 pumping volumes, anticipated effects on groundwater resources of adjacent properties, and expected groundwater recovery time after termination of operations. Data should be substantiated by a hydrogeologic study with pump test data to support the hypotheses. D. Item 7.A of the Use by Special Review application regarding types and number of operating and processing equipment to be used in this mining operation has not been answered. A detailed answer to this question is a necessary part of evaluating the noise levels and other impacts associated with this operation. E. Item 6 of the Use by Special Review application lists only one prior permit for mining held by the Applicant. The question requires that any prior permits be identified. Furthermore, the permit listed is for a mine which has not yet begun operations. A complete list of permits should be provided, in order to evaluate the Applicant's previous record regarding possible permit violations in other mining operations. F. The locations of the administrative offices, machine shop, scale office, gravel truck and equipment parking area, and all other industrial structures and buildings (except for the aggregate processing plant) have not been identified in this application. The location of these structures and buildings are of especial importance to the surrounding neighborhood, as some of these items may be associated with longer hours of operation, increased night security lighting, increased night traffic, etc. A complete evaluation of the effects of this mining operation on the surrounding neighborhood cannot be made without knowing the proposed location for these buildings. G. The Applicant is proposing to use bottled water and port-a-potties on a permanent basis for this 25-year operation. This is inadequate to meet minimal levels of sanitation and health standards. Such a substandard facility can only devalue our neighborhood. H. The Applicant has failed to provide evidence that various required agreements and permits have been obtained, including but not limited to agreements with all owners of permanent man-made structures within 200', agreements with all well owners within 600', a CDPS State Discharge Permit, a Noise Permit, a Flood Hazard Development Permit, a Storm Water Permit, written permission from the ditch company to allow use of ditches for conveying de-watering flows, and a Fugitive Dust Permit. I. On page 12 of the CDMG 112 Permit application, it states: The Applicant will need to import approximately 1.2 million tons of clean fill material to satisfy reclamation efforts under the current plan. " The truck traffic generated by hauling in this fill material is not included in the projected traffic impacts. We ask that as a condition for granting any permit for this mining operation, the County require that the omissions, contradictions and inadequacies of the application as detailed in Section 6 above and elsewhere in this letter be corrected, ^ be made available to the public for review and comment, and be reevaluated by the County before any permit is issued. f.f United Neighborhood Response to USR-1343 July 2, 2001 Page 12 In conclusion, we ask that you give careful consideration to the issues discussed in this letter. Please make this letter a part of the Public Record for this application. Because of the serious nature of the concerns expressed in this letter, our personal letters, and the water engineering reports to be submitted under separate cover, we ask that you deny this permit until such time as the application is in full compliance with the Weld County Zoning Ordinances and the Weld County Comprehensive Plan, and until all the concerns outlined above have been fully remedied. Sincerely, SIGNATURE PRINT NAME ADDRESS A 36o -0 7e2 1. 212.<2,6,,,k, . ja-a-ciYt-E.�. ti, 1 arY e.1 1`'i, cS a r c h et. yrr .s..o. f .en s,oa`c( 201('_tt1 -7>'J. 7&t L;s . M. Ooley i'a io iiatcICo.Rd. l7, &n vrvif Co 'o5G OJ6, neAnn si 4#sea, ��'i /2.s&6 e. er9 A/a a,7/, rob b-r — Oh4G rf V 1114 We 970 L4JV - P/4frz v tie 40 tad5.4A' VrVatte,i/ 4'f "n'. lr�ii cew ‘aS filfrEll 7. 6✓Lace VU✓JStiv_.' I3nacs & 1seN (i(,B t c2z8 PLA-7rs�; 4) Co >N'fc //tinee/S1 9e47 P/sa,r 4 tat 8414-791, 9. Luca,` C'y,,-Hirst s ,a3`I cda p(Q ```) , 10. l� A r ra a R. t 1'J 1t*7 .is IN tacit I') lo...�.�.e..r}- co cco co 1 +++tttJJY.. 11 arbL;nLa Ry R.d•*�- 4 rata (e la) 14�C� iC 4S1 12. /fu,v &0 4 C Gope ab lel6 aft)11 c',l'Af4P+ 1'4b1 Lck Ctlee SYY6 Weft 36 retio �btl 15. rti Oro e mrlter 13g12, wcr 19 Fitf $0651 United Neighborhood Response to USR-1343 July 2, 2001 Page 13 e''' 17. flka wrJt- ty Mau rite C Ru3e q8gov.vdeout ,�r 5 1s. U a 1 r ,u..�, -4711 a Eel 988oUkldaan/ fdZ, FWLv t4 19. 51 . � ` & I1oYAn4a �k. �.h(a3ol 9833 I�rc c 24, Fi. L�yin%Ma/ 20. Pa* ttcia Js.cK, P64l4-L ' Pe, ets;3L.)c&2t. pr. `°t;a �7 �� ` _ Boa'Lk 21.��k��l�l Q66 4)4644 3 a 41c '4�_ rieir ew co time 22.C., � , ..,,r(/1t gy4w001024 FaLy�K., 6 Po402/ 23. ,r ,t, Ca' eie /SJ! vvan Ai /y`c QQ33 LtC12 Jan Co / 2 . nreatY 9/73 wee ar,7G �/ /-'� .,z.do "06-2 25. Iv ,wu #63 WCR-3g' cc/Seu f r p 6.57 ,2L %Gast,44yra ffA,/eee 4 le , 7/63 tOP! 8'M heet4 4 dons, 717 Mad &e-i ldojoOar- ►q ; Obsi 1 01. 49 P/a6t 0 7 Watudv ay ,w 130w C4C.e- la Y?-fin.! ' tliSti a like Liss; VA 1tbtR 13G(i2 wuz19 9L4A eJilk co iscEm 3/. 5��p� 't7 i /fat liesnkr 9a 59 w t 6 N 71\Pe /e Co��s-� 3a. da0. , L'i\w no `r W53'( viols 'ai�1\ems ScDlast di -f as-11 Sr) U/kiiAk/MfroVVI [& f/"aif/IiJliti SYeat- w A!' �eat4kS. µoy, 1`IS34watt°, Qlow tc �S. C, 4,17-4:e L.4c4rr Gt, pattmiat.ce Weld Weld County Department of Planning Services C°unty planning Deft Attn:Mr. Chris Gathman\Planner 1555 N. 17th Avenue `I-JL 0 6 2001 Greeley, Co. 80631 w E CEO V ED RE: USA-1343 Special Use Permit-Owens Brothers Concrete Company Dear Planning Department: Having lived on WCR 28 for the past 18 years,you can imagine how concerned we were to hear about the proposed sand and gravel mine referenced above. The influence of this operation on our water well,the safety of our family traveling up and down WCR 28,and the effects on the quality of life in this rural area, are very real concerns for us. We understand that Owens Brothers could locate this plant on the northwest corner of the Nix property, in the area currently proposed for Phase 2. Varra Sand and Gravel currently has a plant near this area so the sites would be fairly close together,thus leaving the surrounding areas as unaffected as pow. Our major concerns over this proposed site are: 1.A very high volume of gravel trucks traveling up and down WCR 28. There is no way these trucks could make the turn onto WCR 19 without impeding traffic. This is a dangerous intersection due to a hill just south of 28. School buses must travel WCR 28 in order to pick up and drop off the kids for school. 2.Owens Brothers has apparently made no plans to protect the groundwater of neighboring residents arid farmers.Most people in this area have domestic wells, irrigation wells,and wetland areas which will be severely affected by this gravel pit. 3. Finally,how can those of us who live in this area possibly judge the effects of the proposed concrete batch plant,when no information has been provided by the applicant? We feel this application should be denied due to insufficient information. In conclusion,we feel that there are far to many issues that need to be resolved,before this Special Use Permit should be considered. Sincerely, Dan and Mary Hemker 9247 WCR 28 Platteville Co. 80651 EXHIBIT WeiarC044ty p/u ' nuns,h Mr. Chris Gathman, Planner aU( 0 ePt, Weld County Department of Planning Services A�� 9 coot 1555 N. 17th Avenue •` Greeley, CO 80631 C VD RE: USR-1343 Owens Brothers Concrete Company/Special Use Permit i Dear Mr. Gathman: As a member of the Platte& Prairie Chapter of the National Audubon Society, I am deeply concerned about the proposed mining operation referenced above. This mining operation is directly across the road from the 19-acre Sage Hill Farm Wetland, located at 8234 WCR 28, and poses a serious threat to the continued well-being of the wetland and all the species of animals and plants-which live there. Our local Audubon chapter"adopted"the Sage Hill Farm Wetland several years ago, and many of our members have volunteered numerous hours of work towards improving the already high quality habitat to be found on this site. The traffic, noise, lights, dust and other disturbances associated with the gravel operation will negatively impact the ideal habitat currently found in this wetland. Also, the proposed mining operation may lower the water table and thereby destroy the wetland. Therefore, I ask that you consider implementing the following changes to the proposed mining operation: • (1) Move the aggregate processing plant to the northwest corner of the Nix/Owens property, placing it near the already existing Varra plant and as far away from the Sage Hill Farm Wetland as possible. (2) Route the gravel hauling traffic onto State Highway 66 or onto WCR 19, both of which are paved roads which already carry commercial truck traffic. Don't allow gravel truck access onto WCR 28,which runs along the north border of the wetland. (3) Require a substantial dirt berm along the entire length of the boundary where the gravel operation borders the wetland, to protect against noise and disturbance. (4) Keep night lighting at the gravel pit well away from the wetland and limit mining and processing activities to daylight hours only (not 24-hour operation as requested). (5) Disallow the Concrete Batch Plant proposed under this Special Use Permit, as insufficient information has been provided in the application to determine the environmental impact (location of plant, number of mixing trucks, etc.) of such a plant. (6) Require evidence of adequate protection to the high water table which is the source of the Sage Ifill Farm Wetland. Thank you for your attention to the above points. Sincerely, gg p(H18R My Address: gi y /5 t �1 tSI ��h , Co X06 Weld County Penn -- Weld County Department of Planning Services �� /ngO�'Pt Attn: Mr. Chris Gathman, Planner 9 dOo 1555 N. 17th Avenue EC E/ Greeley, CO 80631 C V L D RE: USR-1343 Special Use Permit—Owens Brothers Concrete Company Dear Planning Services: According to the Zoning Ordinance of Weld County, companies applying for Uses by Special Review are required to ensure that their proposed business is established and operated in a manner which is compatible with existing land uses in the neighborhood (24.1.1). As the Owens Brothers' application is currently written, it doesn't appear to me that any effort has been expended to make this gravel mine, aggregate processing plant, and concrete batch plant compatible with the existing rural neighborhood. The vicinity of the proposed gravel mine is mostly farmland, with scattered rural residences. We value the solitude, silence and serenity of our rural existence. We are agricultural, not industrial. We enjoy driving unhurriedly along our dirt roads, admiring our neighbors' crops and cattle. We know our neighbors. We love our farms and homes. Can you tell me in what way this is compatible with a gravel mine that wants permission to operate 24 hours a day, which plans to put almost 200 trucks per day on our back roads, which intends to use port-a-potties for the next 25 years or more rather than put in a proper septic system, and which has made no provision whatsoever to protect the irrigation wells and wetlands of adjacent properties? Section 24.7.1.3 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that the applicant explain how the uses which would be permitted will be compatible with the existing surrounding land uses. Only one corner of the Owens/Nix property touches on a gravel pit. All the other boundaries of this odd-shaped piece of land border agricultural farmland. I believe that the Qwens aggregate processing plant should be located next to the existing Varra plant and that the truck traffic should be routed out onto State Highway 66 like Varra's trucks are. That would be a much better solution and would make the Owens pit more compatible with its rural neighbors. Furthermore, the Owens application contradicts itself regarding noise. In section 4.3 it says that most of the noise sources will be set back from the property lines by a significant distance. Yet the accompanying map shows the aggregate processing plant, the biggest noise source of all, right next to WCR 28. In conclusion, I challenge this application on the grounds that insufficient thought has gone into making this gravel operation really compatible with the surrounding properties and into generating the least possible impact on this rural neighborhood. Sincerely, EXHIBIT 5 -GI rzl O %� � c L ' - u. "l cr.-2'j G2 (,C_ /«a-� u �, Weld County pia nn!ne De pt. `'J( 0 9 2001 Mr. Chris Gathman, Planner ^ ` Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Avenue C ED Greeley, CO 80631 RE: USR-1343 Owens Brothers Concrete Company/Special Use Permit • Dear Mr. Gathman: As a member of the Platte & Prairie Chapter of the National Audubon Society, I am deeply concerned about the proposed mining operation referenced above. This mining operation is directly across the road from the 19-acre Sage Hill Farm Wetland, located at 8234 WCR 28, and poses a serious threat to the continued well-being of the wetland and all the species of animals and plants which live there. Our local Audubon chapter"adopted"the Sage Hill Farm Wetland several years ago, and many of our members have volunteered numerous hours of work towards improving the already high quality habitat to be found on this site. The traffic, noise, lights, dust and other disturbances associated with the gravel operation will negatively impact the ideal habitat currently found in this wetland. Also,the proposed mining operation may lower the water table and thereby destroy the wetland. Therefore, I ask that you consider implementing the following changes to the proposed mining operation: (1) Move the aggregate processing plant to the northwest corner of the Nix/Owens property, placing it near the already existing Varra plant and as far away from the Sage Hill Farm Wetland as possible. (2) Route the gravel hauling traffic onto State Highway 66 or onto WCR 19, both of which are paved roads which already carry commercial truck traffic. Don't allow gravel truck access onto WCR 28, which runs along the north border of the wetland. (3) Require a substantial dirt berm along the entire length of the boundary where the gravel operation borders the wetland, to protect against noise and disturbance. (4) Keep night lighting at the gravel pit well away from the wetland and limit mining and processing activities to daylight hours only (not 24-hour operation as requested). (5) Disallow the Concrete Batch Plant proposed under this Special Use Permit, as insufficient information has been provided in the application to determine the environmental impact (location of plant, number of mixing trucks, etc.) of such a plant. (6) Require evidence of adequate protection to the high water table which is the source of the Sage Hill Farm Wetland. Thank you for your attention to the above points. Sincerely, / ' Ct 4 EXHIBIT MyAddress: I _C_ sase Hiii raPiny July 9, 2001 Weld County Planning Dept. Weld County Planning Commission JUL i 0 2001 Attn: Mr. Chris Gathman, Planner Weld County Department of Planning Services RECEIVED 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE: USR- 1343 Special Use Permit Owens Brothers Concrete Company, Nix Property Sand and Gravel Mine Dear Weld County Planning Commission: I am writing to express my concern regarding the above referenced gravel mine. Because this proposed gravel mine would be located directly across WCR 28 to the north of my farm, I have some very specific concerns about this application. Overview of Sage Hill Farm: This 160-acre farm has been in my family for 36 years. I am the second generation to live on, own and operate this farm. For the past seven years I have grown alfalfa as my primary crop, sometimes leasing out a portion of my fields but mostly farming them myself I have also grown oats and wheat and am currently transitioning some fields to grass hay. In addition to traditional farming, this farm functions under the auspices of United States Department of Agriculture and State of Colorado grants awarded specifically to farms for preservation of wetlands, reforestation, and protection of native habitat. In the eyes of federal and state agencies, farming and habitat preservation go hand-in-hand, and as such are encouraged and financially incentivized and rewarded. Because windbreaks, shelterbelts, and other habitat features function as an integral part of my farm, any interference with these farm improvements directly interferes with my Right to Farm. 1. WILDLIFE AREAS In conjunction with many government and community agencies, I have done a great deal of work during the past decade to develop wildlife habitat on my farm. The proposed gravel mine would greatly impact three valuable and unique habitat areas on my farm. Furthermore, the fluctuating water table resulting from the mining operation would greatly restrict my ability to create future habitat areas on my farm. EXHIBIT 1 W 8234 WCR 28 • Platteville, CO 80651 • P/F 970-785-6034 • cparker@sagehillfarm.com Sage Hill Farm Public Comment Regarding USR-1343 Page 2 A. Sage Hill Farm Wetland Description: An approximately 19-acre wetland exists on the north boundary of my farm, adjacent to WCR 28 and less than 100 feet away from the proposed mining operation. This wetland lies in the hundred-year floodplain and is clearly visible on the exhibit map titled Soils/Wetlands/Floodplain that was included with the application. The Sage Hill Farm Wetland is the last remnant of a much larger wetland system. It provides habitat to many species of birds and wildlife. This wetland has been the recipient of a$20,366 grant from the Natural Resources Conservation Service Wetland Reserve Program, which is offered and funded by the United States Department of Agriculture. As my share of the grant, I have provided 25% of the costs, i.e., an additional approximately $5,000, towards further improvements of the wetland and related habitat. As part of the above grant, we planted approximately 400 native peachleaf and coyote willows in the wetland during 2000, at a total initial cost of approximately $3,050. At additional cost, all these willows were hand watered and hand weeded throughout their first summer to insure their survival until their roots grew big enough to draw upon the high water table. Naturally, in their second year of growth, these willows are worth significantly more than when they were first planted. In 2001, at my own expense, I planted another 82 willows(at an initial cost of$628) and about 8 acres of native grass in the wetland. In addition to substantial governmental support, this wetland has also received considerable community support. In 1996, by action of the Board of Directors, this wetland was "adopted" by the Platte& Prairie Chapter of National Audubon Society. Local Audubon members have contributed many hours of volunteer work in the wetland in recent years, helping to control noxious weeds and generally improve the habitat. Problem: The gravel mining operation poses a threat to the well-being of this wetland and the trees, plants, and animals which live there by potentially lowering the groundwater level and through increasing the wetland's exposure to dust, noise, night lighting, and traffic. If the wetland were to dry up due to the gravel mining operation next door, the willows and wetland grasses would die. Even a small change in the groundwater level can significantly degrade the quality of the habitat. The wildlife which depends on this habitat would either die or be forced to relocate if possible. The application does not acknowledged the existence of this wetland and has not evaluated the risk to the wetland posed by mining operations. Furthermore, as stated in the attached letter from Mr. Tim Carney of the NRCS Longmont office, eligibility for the Wetland Reserve Program grant was based on wetland habitat being identified on my property. Destruction of the wetland will result in the potential for damages to be paid to the US Commodity Credit Corporation. In other Sage Hill Farm Public Comment Regarding USR-1343 Page 3 words, if the wetland goes dry, I will have to pay the entire $20,000 grant back to the USDA. Moreover, the value of my farm would be degraded by the loss of this wetland, as the wetland adds beauty and variety to this property. My quality of life would be negatively impacted also, as enjoying the wetland and its wildlife is a great pleasure for me. Solution: Prior to receiving any recommendation of approval by the Planning Commission, the Applicant should be required to demonstrate through hydrogeologic studies the absence of impact to the groundwater table beneath my property. Furthermore, the Applicant should propose and agree to a monitoring regime for the life of the mine, said regime to be a permit condition and a contractual commitment to me. This monitoring regime would be designed to detect fluctuations in the water table before damage is done to the wetland or any of my other water rights, crops and/or habitat resources. Both the hydrogeologic study and the monitoring regime should be subject to my review and approval. To represent me in this issue, I have contracted with the water engineering firm of Hydrosphere in Boulder and also with David Cooper, Ph.D., of CSU, an ecologist and wetland consultant, for these services relative to the water and habitat resources of Sage Hill Farm. Both Hydrosphere and Dr. Cooper will provide testimony to the County at the appropriate time. In addition, the Applicant should be required to document specifically how the wetland will be protected from increased dust, noise, traffic and night lighting resulting from mining operations. B. Shelterbelt Adjacent to WCR 28 Description: A 900' long, eight-row windbreak/shelterbelt runs parallel to the north boundary of my farm, adjacent to WCR 28 and directly across the road from Stage 3 of the proposed mining operation. Four rows of this shelterbelt were planted in 1995 under the Colorado State Forest Service Forest Stewardship Program for a total cost of approximately $3,000. These trees and shrubs are now in their seventh growing season, are large enough to provide nesting habitat and some windbreak functions, and have increased greatly in value. The second four rows of this shelterbelt were planted in 2000 under a Division of Wildlife Colorado Habitat Improvement Program(CHIP) grant of$2,661. The 470 trees and shrubs in this planting include Austrian Pine, Ponderosa Pine, Hackberry, Bur Oak, Lilac, Chockcherry, Rocky Mountain Juniper and Eastern Red Cedar. Problem: The proposed mining operation poses a threat to the long-term survival of these trees and shrubs. As trees and shrubs are growing, they adapt their root structure to the existing water table level. Many of their roots stay in the top three feet of the soil, but r. Sage Hill Farm Public Comment Regarding USR-1343 Page 4 tap roots are often sent down deeper. When the water table is lower, the tap root will go deeper. If, at a later date, the water table suddenly rises, the deeper roots may rot out. Just as a potted plant on the windowsill rots out and dies when the roots are saturated with water for too long a period, the same phenomenon can occur in the field. When Stages 2, 3 & 4 of the mining operation are underway, these trees will still be actively growing. As the water table drops from dewatering, the trees may send down deeper tap roots. Then when the mining is complete, the ponds will fill with water and suddenly the water table on my farm will return to normal. But during the estimated 10 - 14 years that Stages 2, 3 & 4 are being dewatered, the water table on that portion of my farm will have been lowered significantly. The trees and shrubs will have adapted to a lower water table and are likely to die from root rot when the water table returns to normal. Besides suffering the staggering financial and emotional loss of a full-grown shelterbelt of approximately 1,000 mature trees and shrubs, I would be required to repay the grant money to the above mentioned agencies if I fail to maintain the contracted habitat practice. Solution: The Applicant should be required to preserve the existing water table on my farm at all times throughout the entire mining operation, as detailed in the solution portion of point 1.A above. Anything less than this interferes with my private property rights and puts this shelterbelt at risk. C. Spring-fed Pond Shelterbelt Description: A natural spring (described in detail in section 2.C of this letter) forms a pond on this farm. In 1996, a six-row shelterbelt of 500 shrubs (including three-leaf sumac, sand cherry, woods rose, and four-wing saltbrush)was planted adjacent to this pond with the help of a Division of Wildlife Colorado Habitat Improvement Program grant. The initial total cost of this planting was $1,998. These shrubs were hand weeded and regularly irrigated for the first three years and have now achieved full maturity. This shelterbelt was located near the pond in order to provide good cover for animals approaching the pond to drink. The pondside location was also felt to have additional beneficial value as potential nesting habitat for ducks, and over the years this has indeed proved to be the case. Problem: If the spring goes dry due to the proposed mining operation, the value to wildlife of this shelterbelt planting is greatly diminished. Solution: The Applicant should be required to demonstrate that the mining operation will have no negative impact on this natural spring, as detailed in the solution portion of point 1.A above. Sage Hill Farm Public Comment Regarding USR-1343 Page 5 D. USDA Wildlife Habitat Improvement Program Grant Description: My farm has just been awarded a $4,374 Wildlife Habitat Improvement Program(WHIP) grant from the Department of Agriculture. This grant was obtained based in large part upon the high water table in the northwest portion of my farm. This area, which borders a large drain ditch on my west boundary, can be developed into good riparian habitat because the water table in that field has been documented by NRCS as being at 3' in the summer. This means that willows should do very well in this area. This grant, which will be implemented in spring of 2002, is for planting a six-row, 720'- long riparian shelterbelt which will include peachleaf willows, coyote willows, and red dogwood. Problem: If the gravel mining operation lowers the water table in the front portion of my farm, these willows will not survive, since willows require that wet soil be accessible to their root system. Changing the existing water table level of my farm would effectively disallow me to undertake this habitat improvement program. This is a violation of my Right to Farm and of my personal property rights. Solution: The Applicant should be required to preserve the existing water table of my farm at all times throughout the entire mining operation, as detailed in the solution portion of point 1.A above. 2. WATER RIGHTS There is a great likelihood that the following water rights will be negatively impacted by the proposed gravel mine. Because of the extremely porous nature of the soil on my farm, groundwater may be sucked into the deep pits on the Nix property from greater distances than would be predicted for clay soil. The Applicant has not provided any hydrogeologic studies demonstrating that no negative impact will result to my three wells. I would therefore ask that, prior to issuing any permit for this mining operation the County require that the Applicant demonstrate conclusively that no negative impact will result to these wells and that the Applicant have in place a written agreement with me to that effect, as detailed in the solution portion of point 1.A above. A. Domestic Well I have a domestic well located 615' south of the north section line of my farm (this section line adjoins the Nix property). This well is decreed in Water Court as Case Number W-3431. Although I do have Central Weld County Water for my farmhouse, this domestic well is an important water right which I want to protect. In fact, for the past year I have been planning on putting my farmhouse (which is on Lot A of my farm)back fully on the well water in order to transfer my existing CWCW tap to a new location for a building I am planning on Lot B of my farm. This is allowable by Central Weld County Water and would save me buying a new CWCW tap at the current cost of$18,600. Sage Hill Farm Public Comment Regarding USR-1343 Page 6 B. Irrigation Well My irrigation well has Permit #11262F and was decreed in Water Court as Case Number W-3431 on April 9, 1967. This well is located 1565' south of the north section line of my farm. This well is adjudicated to irrigate 80 out of my 160 acres and plays a vital role in the productivity of my farm. Any negative impact on this well would interfere with my Right to Farm. C. Parker Spring Well The Parker Spring Well was adjudicated in Water Court as Case#82CW25I on November 24, 1982. This well is located approximately 1800' south of the north section line. The Parker Spring Well is a natural spring which was flowing on this farm when the first homesteaders arrived in this area over 100 years ago, long before any irrigation began here. This spring is a unique, invaluable, irreplaceable feature of this farm which lends great interest and beauty to the land. This spring well is adjudicated for stock watering which, according to the Water Referee, also includes wildlife watering. Because the spring water never freezes, this spring well provides an essential and precious year-round water supply for both livestock and wildlife. 3. RIGHT TO FARM Historically my farm has had certain very specific seasonal water table levels. Based on long experience of these levels, I plan my crops and irrigation schedule taking these known water table factors into consideration. A change in these water table levels may require me to plant different crops or irrigate my crops differently. A lower water table may require significantly more irrigation water to be run on my farm, increasing both my labor and water costs. Furthermore, perennial crops such as windbreak trees or pasture grasses depend on consistent seasonal water table levels. Any change in the existing water table level interferes with my guaranteed Right to Farm, plus may actually kill my existing perennial crops. This is contrary to the mandates of Section 24.7.1.3 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance, which requires that an applicant show that "uses which would be permitted will be compatible with the existing surrounding land uses." Furthermore, the amount of water required for mediated lake surface evaporation for the gravel pit ponds is significant. This water would be removed from agricultural application in perpetuity. Such use is in direct conflict with the surrounding agricultural production to which the county has pledged its support. The Weld County Comprehensive Plan states under A. Goal 8 that "[w]ater currently associated with a farm or rural unit of land should be retained for agricultural uses." • Sage Hill Farm Public Comment Regarding USR-1343 Page 7 In addition, the Applicant has made no provision for recharging the aquifer which lies beneath my farm and which will be dewatered by this mining operation. The dewatering of the aquifer followed by unlimited years of excessive evaporation from the gravel pit open ponds may over time adversely affect my guaranteed Right to Farm. The Applicant has provided no engineering studies showing that no injury will result to this aquifer. 4. NEIGHBORHOOD ISSUES This gravel mine will negatively impact the peace and tranquility of my rural neighborhood and lifestyle. It will interfere with my Right to Farm. I fully support the requests made in the United Neighborhood Response letter dated July 2, 2001. Specifically, I ask that: A. Location of Aggregate Processing Plant In order to maintain the rural character of the land surrounding the mining operation, the aggregate processing plant should be located in the northwest corner of the Nix/Owens property (in the current Phase II area), as near as possible to the existing Varra plant. Since this area around the Varra plant is already industrial, the two plants could be grouped together, thus protecting the rural nature of the surrounding properties as much as possible. B. Access and Haul Route Because of the restricted visibility at the intersection of WCR 28 and WCR 19, the gravel mine access should not be permitted on WCR 28. A haul route should be designated, and all truck traffic to and from the gravel pit should be restricted to State Highway 66 or WCR 19, both of which are paved roads which carry lots of commercial traffic. No gravel pit traffic should be routed over WCR 28 or 17, both of which are dirt roads mostly used by slow-moving farm equipment and by local residents. C. Hours of Operation In accordance with Zoning Ordinance 44.4.2., hours of operation should be limited to daylight hours, with no exception for government contracts. D. Term of Permit In order to reduce the long-term impacts on our neighborhood, the term of permit should be limited to 15 years. Sage Hill Farm Public Comment Regarding USR-1343 Page 8 E. Noise A Noise Study should be submitted for review, showing exactly how the applicant intends to keep the noise levels within acceptable limits. This report should include the details of the power source and hours of operation of the dewatering pumps. F. Night Lighting Details of the planned night lighting should be made available, including the placement of lights. Specifically, night lighting should be kept as far away as possible from the wetland on my farm, as artificial lighting would have a detrimental effect on the wildlife in that area. G. Degradation of Property Values If this gravel mine is approved, both the sale value and the rental value of my farm and farmhouse will significantly diminish. This negative financial impact will be both real and long-lasting. My farm will only regain its true value when the gravel mining operation is complete, which in my case means at the end of my lifetime at the earliest. I believe that the Applicant should be asked to address this issue of the degradation of property values of surrounding farms and should be required to implement significant landscaping measures (including continuous soil berms, wider setbacks, and thick shelterbelts) in order to reduce as much as possible the financial impact on surrounding farms. In conclusion, I ask that this permit be denied until the above concerns are fully addressed and real solutions are agreed upon and adopted. Sincerely, ( C/„laid. a-- Cynthia Parker Owner, Sage Hill Farm USDAUSDA United States Natural Resources Longmont Field Office Department of Conservation 9595 Nelson Road Agriculture Service Suite D (NRCS) Longmont , CO 80501-6359 Serving Boulder, SW Weld,and NW Adams Counties Telephone: 303-776-4034 X105 tim.carney@co.usda.gov Fax:303-684-9893 May 31, 2001 Cynthia Parker 8234 WCR 28 Platteville, Colorado 80651 Subject: USDA Wetland and Wildlife Habitat Contracts on Your Farm Ms. Parker, At your request I am providing documentation of two USDA Wetland and Wildlife Habitat contractual agreements between yourself and my agency on your home farm. In April of 1999 yourself and the USDA entered in to a wetland habitat enhancement, restoration and creation agreement covering 61.5 acres of wetland and upland habitat on your farm. The contract is part of the USDA Wetland Reserve Program. The original agreement amounted to $20,366 in cost share grants at the rate of 75% of the actual cost of the contracted structural conservation practices. The contract was slightly modified in January of 2001 and will be active until Sept. 30th of 2012. In order to be eligible for the grant restorable and existing wetland habitat and associated upland wildlife habitat were identified on your property. The associated participation of the US Fish and Wildlife Service Partners for Wildlife Program on your land was a factor in awarding you the WRP grant. We are currently in the process of developing a 5-year Wildlife Habitat Improvement Program (WHIP) contract for the enhancement of additional wetland and upland habitat along the west boundary of your farm. You applied for and were conditionally granted $4374 in WHIP funds pending the completion of the required plan and contract documents. At this time the papers are 80% complete and should be finalized within the next 45 days. The WHIP contract will run through September of 2006. Other non-USDA complimentary conservation programs such as your Colorado Division of Wildlife Habitat Improvement Program projects were a factor in awarding you the WHIP grant. Under both USDA program agreements you are required to maintain the cost shared conservation practices for their expected life. Any destruction of these conservation practices prior to the completion of your agreements will result in the potential for financial liquidated damages payable to the US Commodity Credit Corp. Call if you have questions. C Tim Carney District Conservationist Cc: file The Natural Resources Conservation Service works hand-In-hand with the American people to conserve natural resources on private lands AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Town of Platteville �.. 400 Grand Avenue • Platteville,CO 80651 ADMINISTRATION • PUBLIC SAFETY • PUBLIC WORKS • RECREATION July 12, 2001 Weld County Planning Dept. JUL 1 6 2001 Chris Gathman RECEIVED Department of Planning Services 1400 N 17th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 RE: Weld County Referral USR-1343 Dear Mr. Gathman: One June 11, 2001, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously against Referral Case Number USR-1343. The Commission feels that this does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan. As a member of the Platteville Chamber of Commerce, we are writing to express our concerns regarding the sand and gravel mine referenced above. While the Chamber welcomes new businesses to the area, we do not feel that existing businesses and homeowners should be jeopardized in the process. As the above permit is currently written, I have serious misgivings that the surrounding farm businesses and rural residents will be impacted in a negative way by this gravel mining enterprise. Furthermore, we think this gravel mine will have a negative impact on the agricultural buffer zone which contributes to the quality of life in the Town of Platteville. In order to maintain the rural character of the land surrounding the mining operation, we propose that the gravel processing plant be located in the northwest corner of the Nix property (in the current Phase II area), as near as possible to the existing Varra plant. Since this area around the Varra plant is already industrial the two plants could be grouped together,thus protecting the rural nature of the surrounding properties as much as possible. All truck traffic to and from the gravel pit should be restricted to State Highway 66 or County Road 19, both of which are paved roads which carry lots of commercial traffic. No gravel pit traffic should be routed over County Road 28 or 17, both of which are dirt roads mostly used by slow-moving farm equipment and by local residents. The Commission is also concerned about the increase in traffic that would be imposed on the residents of the Town of Platteville. Hours of operation should be limited to daylight hours,with no exception for government contracts. / Cann 49 Town Hall • Recreation • P.O. Box 70 • Fax: 970-785-2476 • 970- Public Safety • P.O. Box 389 • Fax: 970-785-2476 • 970-785-22 Public Works • P.O. Box 70 • Fax: 970-785-2476 • 970-785-6415 Town of Platteville 400 Grand Avenue • Platteville, CO 80651 ADMINISTRATION • PUBLIC SAFETY • PUBLIC WORKS • RECREATION The concrete batch plant should be denied under the current application, due to insufficient information provided by the applicant. From the meager information supplied, it is impossible to determine the impact on the surrounding area. Finally, please note that it is most important for the survival of the nearby farm businesses that their groundwater levels not be impacted by the gravel mining operation. Nearby farms have irrigation wells, domestic wells, wetlands and springs, all of which are highly dependent on stable groundwater levels. Please do not issue this special use permit until the groundwater question is fully addressed to the satisfaction of the surrounding farmers. On behalf of the Town of Platteville Planning Commission, 6Xlaktic 1V-012-1 Karen Miller Town Administrator RK Town Hall • Recreation • P.O. Box 70 • Fax: 970-785-2476 • 970-785-2245 Public Safety • P.O. Box 389 • Fax: 970-785-2476 • 970-785-2215 Public Works • P.O. Box 70 • Fax: 970-785-2476 • 970-785-6415 Town of Platteville 400 Grand Avenue • Platteville, CO 80651 ADMINIS I'CATION • PUBLIC SAFETY • PUBLIC WORKS • RECREATION July 12, 2001 Division of Minerals and Geology O 1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 Denver, Colorado 80 80203 RE: Nix Nix Sand and Gravel Mine Regular 112 Construction Minerals Operation Reclamation Permit Dear Sirs: As a member of the Platteville Chamber of Commerce, The Town of Platteville is writing to you to express our concerns regarding the proposed Nix Sand and Gravel Mine referenced above. While the Chamber welcomes new businesses to the area, we do not feel that existing businesses should be jeopardized in the process. As the Nix permit is currently written, I have serious concerns that the surrounding farm businesses will be impacted in a negative way from this gravel mining enterprise. I propose that the following points in the Nix permit be addressed, in order to protect the existing farm businesses near the mining operation: 1. The gravel processing plant should be located n the northwest corner of the Nix property, as near as possible to the existing Varra plant. Since this area is already industrial, the two plants could be grouped together, thus protecting the rural nature of the surrounding properties as much as possible. 2. The life of the Nix gravel plant should be limited to 15 years, not open—ended as is currently proposed. This would allow the surrounding area to return to normal as quickly as possible. 3. Slurry walls should be put in place before mining begins. It is most important for the survival of the nearby farm businesses that their ground water levels not be impacted by the gravel mining operation. Nearby farms have irrigation wells, domestic wells, wetlands and springs which are highly dependent on stable groundwater levels. 4. Incoming and outgoing traffic to the gravel pit should be only on State Highway A6 nr County R nad 1 Q, bath of which are payed roads which carry tots of commercial traffic. No gravel pit traffic should be routed over County Roads 28 or 17, both of which are dirt roads mostly used by slow-moving farm equipment and by local residents. Town Hall • Recreation • P.O. Box 70 • Fax: 970-785-2476 • 970-785-2245 Public Safety • P.O. Box 389 • Fax: 970-785-2476 • 970-785-2215 Public Works • P.O. Box 70 • Fax: 970-785-2476 • 970-785-6415 Town of Platteville 400 Grand Avenue • Platteville,CO 80651 . ADMINISTRATION • PUBLIC SAFETY • PUBLIC WORKS • RECREATION 5. Berms should be required on the south, east and west sides of the gravel it, to protect the neighboring farms from the noise and commotion of the gravel pit operation. As much as possible, every care should be taken to preserve the rural nature 0th surrounding properties. '1 Thank you for.your consideration of the above points. On behalf of the Town �nof��Platteville Planning Commission, ci Karen Miller Town Adminsitrator RK Town Hall • Recreation • P.O. Box 70 • Fax: 970-785-2476 • 970-785-2245 Public Safety • P.O. Box 389 • Fax: 970-785-2476 • 970-785-2215 Public Works • P.O. Box 70 • Fax: 970-785-2476 • 970-785-6415 rt1,t, i;"*•,-; Weld County Referral 111 ' May 21, 2001 k COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Owens Brothers Concrete Case Number USR-1343 Company Please Reply By June 11, 2001 Planner Chris Gathman Project Special use Permit for Sand and Gravel Mining/Aggregate Processing /Concrete Batch Plant Legal S2SW4, W2SE4, and NE4 of Section 28, Township 3 North, Range 67 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Location North of and adjacent to WCR 28, Approximately 1/4 mile west of WCR 19. Parcel Number 1209 28 000003 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) July 17, 2001 q[ We have reviewed the request and find that it does o 'amply with our Comprehensive Plan ❑ We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts to—our interests. LSee attached letter. • Comments: Signature . CA ci• (�- • //L c_- r-� Date -C v - Agency �11111ny (1ni11 t6n. 4•Weld County Planning Dept. +1555 N. 17th Ave. Greeley, CO.80631 ?(970)353-6100 ext.3540 4(970)304-6498 fax • l '�•' w�..,* -'a�- ww, L",Y 155 i`. '`,4 ti + EXHIBIT r 01 • 'Audubon ,® ounty Planning Dept` " a ' S T "24' US IZ- 1343 ;A. UWENS (312.05 . CoIVG trCUN 2 6 40M � CO/SPECIAL U56 P _A. save, w► i rvThck\ohcAs ECEIVED -.....�.. UJ(_. uG — - rvir. Chris CIA-1^Molh OVIC.C CAOYIC, wt- COI vinod Welt,' C+7 Dce: of__ ‘prck ( WC Pl Ann incl ScvvicL,5 v cc11 t0 \" EEP SAGE �( L *5 NI- IT11_..E Y .;-:--c----Al WE'tLAN°• T_ iAAN GY cir., ff _ ..__ SD63J_ Green tree frogs you 1 Louisianas Atchafalaya Swamp,home to these two lJ p tree frogs,is also a nesting and feeding habitat inn n o fingree than 1700 bibirdssppeeecciesr . if . tind out how ybi]'c�help sa`e Ame riica s wildlife by µ t ! ! ^®2001 National Autubon Seemly �bbift �OC II I(MBfI 4V thilt Ti1b11!'^II MI i1�llIIIi11IIiiiiiiii.h.i11I1ri''t in the USA on Recycled Paper Wind,.•. Weld County Planning Dept?, LIND, LAWRENCE & OTTENHOFF LLP RECEIVED ATTORNEYS AT LAW THE LAW BUILDING 1011 ELEVENTH AVENUE P.O.Box 326 GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 WEB PAGE:LLOLAW.COM GEORGE H.OTTENHOFF TELEPHONE KENNETH F.LIND (970)356-9160 KIM R.LAWRENCE (970)353-2323 TELECOPIER P.ANDREW JONES 356-1111 RICHARD T.LIPUMA paj llolaw.co paj�llolew.com July 11, 2001 VIA FACSIMILE AND & U.S. MAIL Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Ave. Greeley, CO 80631 Re: USR - 1343 Special Use Permit Owens Brothers Concrete Company, Nix Pit Application Ladies and Gentlemen: This firm represents Mayer Family Farms, LLC, Dorothy Mayer, Manager, owner of property directly adjacent to the proposed Nix Property gravel mining site. The purpose of this letter is to protest the Use By Special Review Permit Application filed by Owens Brothers Concrete Co. in May 2001. Mayer Family Farms is concerned that the proposed dewatering activity will injure water rights that the Farm relies upon for irrigation. Mayer Family Farms owns a 160 acre property immediately to the south of the proposed mining site, a 160 acre tract at the intersection of County Road 19 and Highway 66, and another tract approximately 1 mile east of the proposed mining site. These properties are irrigated by six large scale irrigation wells, each of which could be impacted by the applicant's dewatering activities. One well is of particular concern. The property located directly to the south of the proposed site is irrigated using a large capacity irrigation well, Permit No. R-15750-RF, which feeds a center pivot pond. Well No. R-15750-RF and the center pivot pond are located within 300 feet of the proposed mining area. As such, dewatering activities at the proposed mine site would have a profound impact on this well, and could affect the center pivot holding pond. Mayer Family Farms has hired a water engineer to assess the magnitude of harm likely to be caused by dewatering, and I will provide Planning Staff with EXHIBIT F:IPAJVdayenletterskounty planning 010711.wpd the engineering report as soon as it is available, or, at the latest, provide this information to the Planning Commission on July 17th. In addition to Well No. R-15750-RF, there are also a number of large windbreak trees located on the north side of the Mayer property, directly south of the proposed mine site. These trees depend upon ground water, and the lowering of the water table via dewatering could injure or kill these trees. As the USR application stands, the applicant has failed to carry its burden in demonstrating that the proposed use is compatible with existing surrounding land uses and that adequate provision has been made for the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood. See Weld County Code §23-2-220(3),(7). The application should be denied. Mayer Family Farm will continue to study the application and may submit additional comments. Sincerely, WRENCE & OTTENHOFF LLP . A ew Jones PAJ:mt F:\PAJ'MayerVetters\county planning 010711.wpd Hello