HomeMy WebLinkAbout20052646.tiff BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Moved by,that the following resolution be introduced for approval by the Weld County Planning Commission.
Be it resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the application for:
CASE NUMBER: USR-1514
APPLICANT: Petro Canada
PLANNER: Sheri Lockman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot A of RE-1244 being part of the N2NE4 Section 35,T6N, R67W of the 6th
P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for an oil
and gas production facility (2 oil and gas wells) in the I-1 (Industrial) Zone
District
LOCATION: West of and adjacent to CR 23; 3/4 mile south of CR 64.75.
be recommended favorably to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons:
1. The submitted materials are in compliance with the application requirements of Section 23-2-260 of
the Weld County Code.
2. It is the opinion of the Planning Commission that the applicant has shown compliance with Section
23-2-220 of the Weld County Code as follows:
A. Section 23-2-220.A.1 -- The proposed use is consistent with Chapter 22 and any other
applicable code provisions or ordinance in effect. Section 22-5-80.B (CM.Goal 2) states
"Promote the reasonable and orderly development of mineral resources". The proposal will
have little impact on the surrounding area or subject properties.
B. Section 23-2-220.A.2 --The proposed use is consistent with the intent of the I-1 (Industrial)
Zone District. Section 23-3-310.D.1 of the Weld County Code provides for oil and gas
production facilities as a Use by Special Review in the I-1 (Industrial) Zone District.
C. Section 23-2-220.A.3--The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with the existing
surrounding land uses. Conditions of Approval and Development Standards ensure that the
proposal will have little impact on the surrounding land uses.
D. Section 23-2-220.A.4 -- The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with future
development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zoning and with the future
development as projected by Chapter 22 of the Weld County Code and any other applicable
code provisions or ordinances in effect, or the adopted Master Plans of affected
municipalities. The site lies within the three mile referral area for the Town of Windsor and
the City of Greeley. Both listed items that the applicants should take into consideration such
as setbacks, future road rights-of-way and directional drilling.
E. Section 23-2-220.A.5 --The site does not lie within any Overlay Districts.
Effective January 1, 2003, Building Permits issued on the proposed lots will be required to
adhere to the fee structure of the County Road Impact Program.(Ordinance 2002-11)
F. Section 23-2-220.A.6--The applicant has demonstrated a diligent effort to conserve prime
agricultural land in the locational decision for the proposed use. This site is not zoned
Agricultural.
G. Section 23-2-220.A.7 -- The Design Standards (Section 23-2-240, Weld County Code),
Operation Standards (Section 23-2-250, Weld County Code), Conditions of Approval and
Development Standards ensure that there are adequate provisions for the protection of
health, safety, and welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood and County.
This recommendation is based, in part, upon a review of the application materials submitted by the applicant,
other relevant information regarding the request, and responses from referral entities.
EXHIBIT
2005-2646 1 _
Resolution USR-1514
Petro Canada
Page 2
The Planning Commission's recommendation for approval is conditional upon the following:
1. Prior to Scheduling the Board of County Commissioners Hearing:
A. The applicant shall submit evidence that an agreement has been reached that addresses the
surface and mineral owners concerns or the applicant shall submit evidence that a
reasonable attempt has been made to mitigate the mineral owners concerns.
2. Prior to recording the plat:
A. The Town of Windsor has indicated in a referral response dated June 3,2005 that drilling of
oil wells will likely have some impact to the required setbacks from oil and gas facilities and
that the site lies in close proximity to the City of Greeley's proposed expansion of"O"Street.
Written confirmation that the applicant has taken these concerns into consideration shall be
submitted to the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
B. The applicant shall attempt to address the conditions (concerns) of the City of Greeley as
indicated in a referral response dated March 25, 2004. Written evidence of such shall be
submitted to the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
C. The applicant shall attempt to address the conditions (concerns)of the Windsor/Severance
Fire Protection District as indicated in a referral response dated May 2, 2005. Written
evidence of such shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services.
(Windsor/Severance Fire Protection District)
D. County Road 23 is designated on the Weld County Road Classification Plan as a local gravel
road,which requires 60 feet of right-of-way at full build out.There is presently 60 feet of right-
" of-way. A total of 30 feet from the centerline of County Road 23 shall be delineated right-of-
way on the plat. This road is maintained by Weld County. (Department of Public Works)
E. The applicant shall submit evidence of an Air Pollution Emission Notice (A.P.E.N.) and
Emissions Permit application from the Air Pollution Control Division (APCD), Colorado
Department of Health and Environment. Alternately,the applicant can provide evidence from
the APCD that they are not subject to these requirements. Written evidence that the
requirements have been met to the satisfaction of the Weld County Health Department shall
be submitted to the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Public Health and
Environment)
F. The plat shall be amended to delineate the following:
1 X All sheets shall be labeled USR-1514. (Department of Planning Services)
Z'B. The attached Development Standards. (Department of Planning Services)
G. The applicant shall submit two (2) paper copies of the plat for preliminary approval to the
Weld County Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
3. Prior to Construction:
A. An overweight and over width Weld County Permit for the purpose of hauling equipment to
drill the proposed oil and gas wells shall be obtained from the Weld County Department of
Public Works. Contact Ted Eyl at 970-356-4000, Extension 3750, to obtain the necessary
transport permits prior to moving on site. (Department of Planning Services)
B. A stormwater discharge
g permit may be required for a
development/redevelopment/construction site where a contiguous or non-contiguous land
disturbance is greater than or equal to one acre in area. The applicant shall inquire with the
Water Quality Control Division (WQCD) of the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment at www.cdphe.state.co.us/wq/PermitsUnit if they are required to obtain a
Resolution USR-1514
Petro Canada
Page 3
stormwater discharge permit. Alternately, the applicant can provide evidence from WQCD
^ that they are not subject to these requirements.Written evidence that the requirements have
been met to the satisfaction of the Weld County Health Department shall be submitted to the
Department of Planning Services. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
C. All required building permits, as described on the Department of Building Inspection referral
response, dated March 31, 2005, shall be obtained. (Department of Building Inspection)
D. If interested,the applicant can contact the Weld County Sheriff's Office to assist in a security
plan for the site free of charge. (Sheriff's Office)
4. Upon completion of 1.above the applicant shall submit a Mylar plat along with all other documentation
required as Conditions of Approval.The Mylar plat shall be recorded in the office of the Weld County
Clerk and Recorder by Department of Planning Services' Staff. The plat shall be prepared in
accordance with the requirements of Section 23-2-260.D of the Weld County Code. The Mylar plat
and additional requirements shall be submitted within thirty(30) days from the date of the Board of
County Commissioners resolution. The applicant shall be responsible for paying the recording fee.
(Department of Planning Services)
5. In accordance with Weld County Code Ordinance 2005-7 approved June 1,2005,should the plat not
be recorded within the required thirty(30)days from the date of the Board of County Commissioners
resolution a$50.00 recording continuance charge shall be added for each additional 3 month period.
(Department of Planning Services)
6. The Department of Planning Services respectively requests the surveyor provide a digital copy of this
Use by Special Review. Acceptable CAD formats are.dwg, .dxf,and.dgn(Microstation); acceptable
GIS formats are ArcView shapefiles,Arclnfo Coverages and Arclnfo Export files format type is.e00.
The preferred format for Images is .tif(Group 4). (Group 6 is not acceptable). This digital file may be
sent to maps(aco.weld.co.us. (Department of Planning Services)
7. The Special Review activity shall not occur nor shall any building or electrical permits be issued on
the property until the Special Review plat is ready to be recorded in the office of the Weld County
Clerk and Recorder. (Department of Planning Services)
r
SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Eastman Kodak Company c/o Petro-Canada Resources(USA) Inc.
USR-1514
1. The Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit is for an oil and gas production facility
(Two oil and gas wells) in the I-1 (Industrial)Zone District, as indicated in the application materials
on file and subject to the Development Standards stated hereon. (Department of Planning Services)
2. Approval of this plan may create a vested property right pursuant to Section 23-8-10 of the Weld
County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
3. All liquid and solid wastes (as defined in the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act,
30-20-100.5, C.R.S., as amended) shall be stored and removed for final disposal in a manner that
protects against surface and groundwater contamination. (Department of Public Health and
Environment)
4. No permanent disposal of wastes shall be permitted at this site. This is not meant to include those
wastes specifically excluded from the definition of a solid waste in the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites
and Facilities Act,30-20-100.5,C.R.S.,as amended. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
5. Waste materials shall be handled, stored, and disposed in a manner that controls fugitive dust,
fugitive particulate emissions, blowing debris, and other potential nuisance conditions. (Department
of Public Health and Environment)
6. The operation shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of the Colorado Oil and Gas
Conservation Commission. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
7. Fugitive dust and fugitive particulate emissions shall be controlled on this site.(Department of Public
Health and Environment)
8. This facility shall adhere to the maximum permissible noise levels allowed in the Industrial Zone as
delineated in 25-12-103 C.R.S., as amended. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
9. Adequate toilet facilities (part-a-potty) shall be provided during the construction of the facility.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
10. Bottled water shall be utilized for drinking and hand washing. (Department of Public Health and
Environment)
11. All potentially hazardous chamicals must be stored and handled in a safe manner in accordance with
product labeling and in a manner that minimizes the release of hazardous air pollutants(HAP's)and
volatile organic compounds (VOC's). (Department of Public Health and Environment)
12. If applicable,the applicant shall obtain a stormwater discharge permit from the Colorado Department
of Public Health & Environment, Water Quality Control Division. (Department of Public Health and
Environment
13. Access shall be gained from County Road 23 as indicated on the Weld County Access Information
Sheet. (Department of Public Works)
14. The access road to the oil and gas production facility(for oil and gas wells)should be a graded and
drained road to provide an all-weather access to the facility. (Department of Planning Services)
15. Effective January 1, 2003, Building Permits issued on the proposed lots will be required to adhere to
the fee structure of the County Road Impact Program.(Ordinance 2002-11)(Department of Planning
Services)
16. The operation shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of the State and Federal agencies
and the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
Resolution USR-1514
Petro Canada
Page 2
17. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Design Standards of
Section 23-2-240, Weld County Code.
18. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Operation Standards of
Section 23-2-250, Weld County Code.
19. Weld County Government personnel shall be granted access onto the property at any reasonable
time in order to ensure the activities carried out on the property comply with the Development
Standards stated herein and all applicable Weld County regulations.
20. The Special Review area shall be limited to the plans shown hereon and governed by the foregoing
standards and all applicable Weld County regulations. Substantial changes from the plans or
Development Standards as shown or stated shall require the approval of an amendment of the Permit
by the Weld County Board of County Commissioners before such changes from the plans or
Development Standards are permitted. Any other changes shall be filed in the office of the
Department of Planning Services.
21. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with all of the foregoing
Development Standards. Noncompliance with any of the foregoing Development Standards may be
reason for revocation of the Permit by the Board of County Commissioners.
Motion seconded by John Folsom
VOTE:
For Passage Against Passage Absent
Michael Miller
John Folsom
Bryant Gimlin
Bruce Fitzgerald
James Rohn
Chad Auer
Doug Ochsner
James Welch
Tom Holton
The Chair declared the resolution passed and ordered that a certified copy be forwarded with the file of this
case to the Board of County Commissioner's for further proceedings.
CERTIFICATION OF COPY
I,Voneen Macklin, Recording Secretary for the Weld County Planning Commission,do hereby certify that the
above and foregoing resolution, is a true copy of the resolution of the Planning Commission of Weld County,
Colorado, adopted on July 5, 2005, 2005.
Dated the 5th of July, 2005.
\ a
V
Voneen Macklin
Secretary
7 -5- Zoo;
the brinewater is placed in a cistern that needs to be taken to a separate facility hence the need for this operation.
This operation places the water in tanks where the water is separated and the oil is skimmed. The water is then
filtered then injected into a 9000 foot well.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Patty Schwalm, neighbor, stated she did take a tour of facility and her concern is still with traffic and the trucks taking up
the entire roadway when turning onto CR 47. There needs to be a turn lane or shoulder or something to alleviate this
possible dangerous situation.
Don Carroll, Public Works, indicated there is a long term maintenance agreement and item#2 on the agreement states
road improvements to the intersection of CR 64 and CR 47 with adequate turning radius. If the radius is not adequate
there will need to be modifications to widen the turning radius to the south. Typically brine tankers are single unit but if
there are double units or pups there will need to be some additional changes.
The Chair closed public portion.
Dale Butcher stated that there are times when the oil truck has a pup. The truck arrives approximately three times a
week. It is understood that the trucks will need to be careful. Mr.Butcher addressed the applicants concerns with item 1.
C.3 that requires an approved retention facility,the applicant does not need one. The storm water can be designed to run
to the trench. Mr. Ogle indicated staff would agree to strike 1.C.3. Mr. Butcher continued with concerns on item 4.G
regarding a vault system for effluent flows. There is a vault system at another facility and the portable toilet is better
maintained. Ms. Etcheverry indicated she does not have the authority to allow portable toilets, it will need to be a Planning
Commission decision.
Dale Butcher stated there are one or two employees with the different drivers on a daily basis so there will not be a lot of
use, Mr. Fitzgerald stated that the vault system was in lieu of the leach field and there needs to be a permanent facility.
Ms. Etcheverry indicated they were looking for something more permanent than a portable toilet.
— Michel Miller stated they have required vault systems in the past and this has far too many people for a portable toilet. (2
employees and up to 50 trips per day) Mr. Rohn added that this is permanent facility and an amended facility,he does not
see the increase as much of a problem.
Kim Ogle indicated staff would like to have 5.A deleted and 4.D amended to reflect Eaton Fire District. Mr. Carroll
recommends widening the road radius south on CR 47 since there are some larger trucks using the facility. Mr. Miller
stated that could be addressed in the improvements agreement.
James Rohn moved to delete 1.C.3 and 4.G. Bruce Fitzgerald seconded. Motion carried.
Chad Auer moved to delete item 5.A and amend 4. D to reflect the Eaton Fire Protection District. James Rohn seconded.
Motion carried.
Dale Butcher agrees with the amended Development Standard and Conditions of Approval.
Tom Holton asked for some clarification. Mr.Miller indicated there were 30 trucks arriving presently and the increase will
be to 50 trucks. Mr. Holton asked why the need for a rolling average per day based on a 30 day average. Mr. Miller
stated there is no operation on Sundays and there is the effect of weather.
Tom Holton asked where the nearest house was located. Mr. Ogle indicated it was approximately 800 feet south where
the Schwalms live. There is a home that belongs to the Lyster family which is located on the property.
Doug Ochsner moved that Case AmUSR-729, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the
Conditions of Approval and Amended Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of
approval. Bruce Fitzgerald seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John Folsom, yes;
James Welch, yes; Michael Miller, yes; James Rohn, no; Chad Auer, yes; Tom Holton, yes, Doug Ochsner,yes; Bruce
Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried.
— CASE NUMBER: USR-1514 '
APPLICANT: Eastman Kodak Company
PLANNER: Sheri Lockman C/.'►
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot A of RE-1244 being part of the N2NE4 Section 35,T6N, R67W of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for an oil and gas
production facility(2 oil and gas wells) in the I-1 (Industrial)Zone District
LOCATION: West of and adjacent to CR 23; 3/4 mile south of CR 64.75.
Sheri Lockman, Department of Planning Services presented Case USR-1514, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record.The Department of Planning Services is recommending approval of the application along
with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards. When this application was submitted Eastman Kodak
Company owned the surface rights to the property. They have sold out to The Broe Company. You have been
handed copies of a letter from Broe which outlines how the proposal is incompatible with their plans for the property.
You have also been handed a copies of the response from Petro Canada. This is an unusual situation in that we
have contention between surface and mineral rights interest.
Michael Miller asked whether there was any concern with the change of ownership and the transfer of the application.
Ms. Lockman stated that surface rights are not a part of the application. Petro Canada has the mineral rights and
can go forward.
Mike Wosneak, attorney for Petro Canada, provided additional information. Petro Canada has a lease with Eastman
Kodak not the Broe Company. This proposal is for two oil wells to be located on the site. The comments from the
referral agencies are generally positive or have been addressed. Mr. Wosneak addressed some concern for the
directional dwelling. This development is compatible with the surrounding area. The mineral owners have directed
them to develop the additional oil &gas and minerals. There has been neither plat filed nor any surface
development. There are proposed developments but nothing concrete. The Town of Windsor suggests the applicant
take into consideration the extension of O Street and the applicant is willing to do this. The Oil &Gas Conservation
Commission establishes two drilling windows and these are 400 foot by 400 foot square. They are at the southern
edge of the drilling window and can be moved within that 400 foot square. There has been no concrete information
as to where O Street will be located so there is some flexibility within those windows. The applicant is aware of the
setbacks required by the State to be 150 feet from a building. This location is suitable since there are no buildings in
— the area and there can be development located in the area. Once the wells are drilled and completed there will
remain a pad 20 feet by 20 feet. This area is industrially zoned and the surface development can be compatible with
the mineral development. The ground is currently being farmed and will remain this way until after harvest when the
drilling will begin. There will be minimal impact on the industrial development that could be in the area. Another issue
raised by the City of Greeley ware to drill one well directional. The nearest pad is the Christianson pad and this would
require both to be drilled directionally approximately% mile or 1300 feet. To drill directionally is a large expense and
it is not economical to do from any further away. The Broe Company would like to continue this hearing and have
them drill directionally. The wells can be located in the windows that the Oil & Gas Commission suggest. The best
scenario would be for the wells to be done first so there could be development later knowing where the pads are
located. The applicant has no other concerns with the Development Standards and Conditions of Approval. This will
be an industrial site and this is a use by right in that zone district. The windows are defined but there is flexibility
within the windows provided. The applicant does not want the conditions that were set forth by the Broe Company
applied. There are several possible solutions and the applicant is willing to work towards this.
Tom Holton asked where the tank batteries were located. Mr. Wosneak stated they are located to the south.
John Folsom asked if an attempt was made to accommodate the surface developer. He further indicated that the
applicant has the right to drill anywhere within the windows established by the State. Mr. Wosneak stated they do but
they are willing to work with the surface developer.
Tom Holton asked for clarification on the directional drilling. Mr. Wosneak stated that if it was to be directional they
would need to move south off of the site.
Chad Auer asked why not directional drill from one site and direct drill the other. Mr. Wosneak stated that could be a
possibility but would need to be worked out. Mr. Wosneak added the only suggestion was to do the wells directionally
but the applicant would like to have the USR proceed and continue to work with the Broe Company as well as the
future location of O Street. There are presently no developments under consideration for this location and the
applicant believes it would be best to have these wells completed prior to the future development.
Michael Miller indicated it was zoned industrial Ms. Lockman stated it was not a use by right there was a need for
the special use permit. Mr. Miller indicates that this is not an agricultural piece of property which puts a different
impression with regards to compatibility. This development will contain more than just a well head, there will be flow
lines and other supporting factors that can be a deterrent to possible development. Mr. Miller stated the window
indicates the bottom hole drill location the drill location does not have to be within the window. Mr. Wosneak stated
that the bottom hole location needs to be at the same location when there is absent surface owner consent. Mr.
Miller indicates that the surface owner can suggest moving the location of the drill sites to the south to the windows
containing the bottom hole drill location. The applicant believes that the State would prevail in the location of the well
locations. The applicant is unwilling to accept the need for directional drilling. If there is an agreement in the future
addressing this it will be acceptable. Mr. Miller stated that an approval would put them in an advantageous situation.
Mr. Wosneak stated the applicant is agreeable to working with the Broe Company.
John Folsom stated that when the mineral rights were sold there was no industrial development but there will be
development with the new owners. It should have been the Broe Company's responsibility to have looked at the
agreement which was in place. Mr. Wosneak stated the oil & gas lease was done but the applicant will still work with
the surface owners. He further emphasizes the applicants need to move forward with the case.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Alex Yeros, Broe Company representative indicated their concerns. They have no objection to the mineral owners
accessing their minerals. The Broe Company owns parcels of ground,one where wells are being proposed and south of
the proposed site. The issue is location of the wells being in the proposed O Street location. The well location is in the
way of the proposed O Street re-alignment. Mr. Yarros indicated that directional drilling is feasible and could be a
reasonable as $60,000. Some of the alignment for O Street is set in this development area already. The 1300 feet
needed for direction drilling would take them out of the way of O Street and still be able to have the bottom drill hole within
the windows delineated. Mr.Yeros indicated that approving this would prove to be a disadvantage to future development
and especially with O Street. The Broe Company would like to see this case continued since they are not recommending
either denial or approval. The Broe Company would like to see new locations for the wells.
Michael Miller asked where they could be located. Mr.Yeros stated they could consolidate at the Christianson site. Mr.
Miller stated that directional from the Christianson site would be too expensive and a closer leg would be less costly and
more reliable. Mr. Miller added that it was the responsibility of the Planning Commission to balance the needs for
everyone.
Doug Ochsner asked who really owns the mineral rights. Mr.Yeros stated the Broe Company owns the percentage that
Kodak previously owned. The Broe Company is asking for time to wrap up discussions to make sure the location is
adequate for all.
James Rohn indicated that this is a premature application and he would recommend continuing this until the agreements
have been done.
Greg Thompson, City of Greeley, stated that the City believes the oil&gas should precede the surface agreement. The
City of Greeley has continued a similar case until all are in agreement. The City of Greeley would like to see them
directionally drill at least one of the wells.
The Chair closed the public portion.
Michael Miller asked if the cases were continued for 30 days could there be an agreement reached. Mr.Wosneak stated
they have been working on the agreement for approximately a year. He is concerned that a continuance will accomplish
nothing. The applicant is willing to work to get this resolved and there are a lot of possible solutions.
Sheri Lockman stated language could be added that states"the applicant shall submit evidence that an agreement has
been reached that addresses the surface and mineral concerns or the applicant shall submit evidence that a reasonable
accommodations have been made to address the surface owners concerns." This could be added as a Condition of
Approval. This would allow for middle ground but would still allow the application to go forward.
James Rohn stated that the way the applicant and the Broe Company have communicated in the past indicates the
possibility that there will be no agreement. Mr. Rohn believes they should take the time and come to an agreement.
Doug Ochsner asked how long before a Board of County Commissioners meeting could be set. Ms. Lockman indicated it
was typically a month. Mr. Ochsner stated it would be a month before the Board of County Commissioners even with a
Planning Commission approval. Mr. Morrison stated it would be a month at the quickest. Mr. Miller indicated he would
favor placing the language in the Conditions with the understanding that a serious attempt needs to be made at reaching
an agreement.
Doug Ochsner stated they have incentives to make an agreement with Broe having several options. They are both on
equal ground. Mr. Miller stated he believes Petro Canada has an advantage since the windows are approved.
James Rohn asked Ms. Lockman where this condition would be located. Ms. Lockman suggests placing this prior to
scheduling the Board of County Commissioners hearing. This gives them incentive to get this done. Ms. Lockman
indicated the language shall consist of"the applicant shall submit evidence that an agreement has been reached that
addresses the surface and mineral owners concerns or the applicant shall submit evidence that a reasonable
accommodation has been made to address the surface owners concerns."
James Rohn moved to accept the language suggested by staff and locate as 1 A and renumber. Bruce Fitzgerald
seconded.
Doug Ochsner stated that since this is prior to scheduling what would be considered a reasonable amount of time for the
parties to work this out. Ms. Lockman stated she usually gets the information back within a good time frame. Mr.
Morrison stated it is not just the effort but it is also a demonstration from the applicant and the surface owner.
Mike Wosneak indicated they should give due regard to surface owners and will attempt to reasonably accommodate
those needs. They will also attempt to do this in a timely fashion.
Alex Yeros added that they are just asking for some time to deliberate and work through the issues.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John Folsom, yes;
James Welch,yes; Michael Miller,yes;James Rohn,yes; Chad Auer,yes;Tom Holton,yes, Doug Ochsner,yes; Bruce
Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Mike Wosneak stated they are in agreement with the Development Standard and Conditions of Approval.
James Rohn moved that Case USR-1514,be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions
of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of approval. Doug Ochsner
seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John Folsom, yes;
James Welch,yes; Michael Miller,yes;James Rohn,yes; Chad Auer,yes;Tom Holton,yes, Doug Ochsner,yes; Bruce
Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
James Rohn commented that he hopes an agreement is reached quickly so everyone is satisfied.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1515
APPLICANT: Nextel Communications
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part E2SW4 and W2SE4 and E2NW4 and W2NE4 of Section 34, T6N, R66W of the
6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a Public Utilities
facility including a Major Facility of a Public Utility or Public Agencies (Nextel West
Corporation - 110 foot Telecommunications Tower) in the A(Agricultural)Zone
District
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to F Street and % mile east of 59th Ave.
Please note the Planning Commission has final determination on this proposal.
Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services presented Case USR-1515, reading the recommendation and comments
into the record. The Department of Planning Services is recommending approval of the application along with the
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards.
Stacey Mathis, representative for Nextel, provided clarification on the proposal. This location is one of six sites that
were approached to co-locate or place a monopole. This location was satisfactory to all involved parties. There is
also the potential for others to co-locate onto this site.
James Rohn asked if there was a way to mediate the color and attempt to make the tower blend in more with the
surrounding area. Mr. Ogle stated the application has indicated it will be painted a neutral color and there has been
no referral received from the Division of Wildlife indicating a conflict with their interest.
Michael Miller stated it seems odd to place the pole at the lowest point in the valley. Mr. Mathis indicated this was not
Hello