HomeMy WebLinkAbout20051746.tiff April 14, 2005
Weld County Planning Department
Attention: Sheri Lockman, Planner GREELEY OFFICE
Department of Planning Services
918 10th Street APR 15 2005
Greeley CO 80631
RECEIVED
Dear Ms. Lockman
I am in receipt of the Department of Planning Services letter dated April 7, 2005, Case Number:
USR-1504. The April 7, 2005 letter indicates a request to build and operate an Aerial Spraying
operation just south and west of our home at 14149 WCR 26, Platteville (Mailing Address: 14149
WCR 26, Fort Lupton) has been made.
I have a number of concerns as you might expect. Also, I'm not at all happy with this proposal.
I moved my family out to the country for some peace and quiet, and the possibility of selling my
home one day. I can't market my home as a quite country home if I have planes buzzing my
house everyday. Also, I'd like to see a site plan and have specifics to where buildings, runways,
and storage areas will be. In addition, I think the combining of industry of this type and homes
is a bad idea. So, for the moment, I'm completely against this operation this close to my home
and property.
However, I know I'm just one voice and seldom listen to. So, my concerns are:
How large is this operation? How many buildings, hangers, and storage buildings? How tall are
they going to be. Where will they be located in proximity to my property? Where will the
runways be? How many. How much noise does this operation make? Is it seasonal, or year
round?Will these runways only be used for business, or will local private planes be allowed to
use this facility? Does Weld County have a noise ordinance, and does it apply to industrial noise
pollution? What are they planning to store, chemical, oils, fuels, etc.? How toxic are they? Who
is responsible for monitoring the safe use of these substances, Weld County, The State
Environmental Department? Who? What will the procedures be for reporting, responding, and
clean up of spills and leaks. How will the State, County, and Company guarantee air and ground
water cleanness and safety? Who is responsible for responding to spills and clean up of potential
accidents? How far away are the emergency response teams? Will the company have any
emergency people at the site, are employees trained to handle response and clean up if not? Are
they state certified for this type of clean up? Is this company required by the State and / or
County to carry insurance for accidental spells and injury to people, pets, and livestock in the
area? How about, but most unlikely, insurance if a plane lands in my living room? I know, but it
has happened in recent months in other parts of the country... Who monitors if the company
complies with insurance requirements year to year (if there are any)? Will we see any general
improvements to road and access in and out of the area? Also, will the company be required to
do landscaping to help beautify, hide, control noise pollution, and provide spill and leak barriers?
In addition, Will they have any security in place to safe guard any dangerous chemicals or
substances on site?
Also, getting down to the nuts and bolts of it? What does this do for the property value; does
this affect me insurance, property tax, etc., in a negative way? How will the County compensate
for lose of revenue or devaluation of property for allowing this company to operate so close to
my property line and home. This is my family home after all. We live there pretty much 24/7, 12
months out of the year.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Kurt R Wilcher
14149 WCR 26 EXHIBIT
Fort Lupton CO 80621
„5-
2005-1746
•
@ !ter IV
March 22, 2005
Weld County Department of Planning Services
918 10th Street
Greeley Colorado 80631
Dorothy Boock Re Case # USR-1504
396 Portsmouth Drive
St. Charles, Missouri 63303
Dear Sheri Lockman, Planner:
Both my co-owner Pat Kugel and myself strongly object to the construction of a crop dusting
and spraying operation facility being proposed for construction on Pt. of the N2 section 5,
T2N, R66W of the 6`h P.M., Weld County Colorado. This fertilizer&insecticide storage
facility, hanger and landing strip is proposed to be built within 500 feet of the property that our
family has owned for over 60 years. We feel that the proposed spraying service would
significantly reduce the potential for resale of our property in a negative direction. We would
strongly recommend that you turn down this proposed spraying facility and preserve the use as
farmland as is our goal of our adjacent property.
Thank you for your help in this matter.
Sincerely,
s ra-c-cck
Dorothy Boock and Pat Kugel
A Colorado
ep Interstate Gas
an El Paso company
March 24, 2005 W3'I Cr' , I' aartment
2
r) t 7
Weld County Planning Dept.
Attn: Sheri Lockman—Planner
918 10th St.
Greeley, CO 80631
Re: Aerial Sprayers— Spraying facilities development: USR- 1504
Hi Sheri,
Colorado Interstate Gas Company("CIG") has reviewed the area in question and has determined
that it does not have any facilities or any property/mineral interests in the NV2 of Section 5, 2
North, 66 West. Our nearest facility is about 3 miles away. Thus, CIG does not have any
concerns regarding this proposed project. Thank you for allowing us to review and comment.
Sincerely,
Stephen D. Bacon
Right of Way Analyst
Colorado Interstate Gas Company
Colorado Interstate Gas
Two North Nevada Colorado Springs,CO 80903
PO Box 1087 Colorado Springs,CO 80944
tel 719.473.2300
May 9, 2005
Weld County Planning Department
Jeffrey L. Boock/Dorothy L. Boock GREELEY OFFICE
396 Portsmouth Dr. MAY 1 1 2005
St. Charles, MO 63303
RECEIVED
Ms. Sheri Lockman
Weld County Department of Planning Services
918 10th Street
Greeley, CO 80631
Ref Case # USR-1504
Dear Ms. Lockman,
I am writing this letter on behalf of my mother, Dorothy L. Boock, and co-
owner, Pat Kugel, expressing our strong objection to the construction of a
crop dusting facility and airstrip proposed for construction on PT of N2
section 5, T2N, R66W of the 6th P.M. Weld County, Colorado.
I am a registered architect in Missouri, but have done hospital design work
on behalf of my employer in Loveland, Denver, Grand Junction,
Westminster, and La Junta, Colorado. I have durable power of attorney for
my mother and I will inherit this property upon her death. She is currently
in a skilled nursing facility. Pat Kugel is wheelchair bound. Neither of
these elderly women can attend the public hearing before the Weld County
Planning Commission scheduled for Tuesday, May 17, 2005 at 1:30 p.m.
We have employed Joseph French of French & Stone P.C. to represent us at
this public hearing. I am also trying to attend to represent the Dorothy L.
Boock Revocable Trust agreement. The revocable trust and Pat Kugel are
co-owners of the '/z section of property south of CR 26 and just to the east of
the proposed airstrip and aerial spraying operation requested thru USR-1504.
I am representing the ownership interest of my mother, Dorothy L. Boock as
well as Pat Kugel. I recently received the file on USR-1504, and am in the
process of reviewing same. Below are my preliminary comments, but I
reserve the right to supplement the submittal with additional items upon
further review.
1. This is not just a crop dusting operation; it is an airstrip as well. It is
going to be utilized not only for landings and take offs of a
commercial spraying operation, but also an airstrip for a fluctuating
amount of family and friends private aircraft. What F.A.A.
regulations pertain to an airstrip so close to adjacent property owners?
My wife and I plan to build our retirement home on this property in
two years. We plan to landscape and plant trees. Will the chemicals
and pesticides harm our plantings? At what altitude will the aircraft
be as they cross our property line? Are there noise restrictions that
these aircraft must follow? Who will enforce these restrictions? The
recommendation from Charlotte Davis of Environmental Health is
that this facility adhere to the maximum permissible noise levels
allowed in the commercial zone as described in 25-12-103 C.R.S. as
amended, in her comments dated March 14, 2005.
2. The application claims that if the wind speed is above 10 mph that
planes used for the spraying operation will not fly. What about the
other family and friends' planes stored on site. They also claim take
offs will primarily occur to the west and landings to the east. My
father was Vice-President of Ozark Airlines for 35 years; as well I
have taken hundreds of flights on our corporate Lear for my job
related trips. It is a fundamental aviation principal that you take off
and land into the wind. Not land downwind. With the primary winds
coming from the West their aircraft would make there landing
approach directly over our property. With the proposed airstrip
immediately to the west of our property what altitude will aircraft be
as they cross over our property line? 50 feet, 100 feet or?
3. Who will provide fire protection in case there is an aircraft accident?
Have these firefighters received proper training to fight aircraft fires.
How far away is the fire department? Do they have the proper
equipment to control aircraft fires, or will the county have to purchase
additional equipment?
4. As I mentioned earlier we have planned for some time to build our
retirement home on our adjacent property as well as develop some of
the land for additional residences. Sec 23-2-230 duties of Board of
County Commissioners states that the applicant requesting a special
review permit must demonstrate that "the uses which would be
permitted will be compatible with future development of the
surrounding areas as permitted by the existing zone and with future
development as projected, by Chapter 22 of this code and any other
applicable code provisions or ordinances in effort, of the mapped
master plans of affected municipalities." How can a commercial
spraying operation and airstrip with its inherent storage, handling and
usage of chemicals, refueling and fuel storage adjacent to our
property, which we plan to develop into residential property, be
compatible? This is primarily a risk-associated business due to the
inherent nature of its operations. With the storage of pesticides,
chemicals and fuel there is always the potential of migration of these
liquids through the soil to adjacent properties and water sources if a
spill should occur.
5. Sec 23-2-220 duties of planning commission also states in item 6
"That if the Use permit is proposed to be located in the "A"
(agricultural) zone district the applicant has to demonstrate a diligent
effort has been made to conserve "Prime Farmland" in the locational
decision for the proposed use". How did the applicant identify the 80
acre parcel of land from the larger parcel that is left over? Did they
choose the best, the worst?
6. A special use permit will require a site plan review. Sec 23-2-160
Application requirements for site plan reviews states that the
following document be submitted under item F; "evidence that the
zone district shall have an adequate source of potable water and meet
the requirements of the zone district" The applicants own statement
regarding water provision states "a well permit will be applied for
through the state division of water resources once the special use
permit has been approved. The 80 acre parcel is liable for a well
permit per the State Division of Water Resource, but must be
surveyed first. The property will not be surveyed unless the special
use permit is approved." How can this statement possibly assure the
planning commission that an adequate supply of potable water will be
on site. The letter from Scott Parker, Anderson Consulting
Engineers only gives the restriction for a commercially exempt well, it
does not assure that there will be an adequate supply of potable water
on site. What are the specific demands in total gallons/day that they
will need? Normally when well water is used for crop irrigation it is
returned back to the land to replenish the water supply. The water
used in this operation will be used off site.
7. The applicants soils map show that the soils in the area of the
proposed airstrip and storage/hanger facilities is Renohill clay
loam with 3 to 9 percent slopes. Their own soil information states
"this soil has poor potential for urban and recreational development".
The chief limiting features are the underlying shale, the low strength,
and the moderate to high shrink swell. These features present severe
problems in dwelling and road construction and in use of septic
tank absorption fields and sewage lagoons." With this highly unstable
soil in the proposed storage and airstrip site it seems to suggest the
potential for leaks and deteriation. Who will monitor that the facility
is properly maintained and potentially dangerous chemicals and
pesticides are not leaking into the soil?
8. Item G under section 23-2-160 states that a document be submitted that
the applicant shows "evidence that the use in the zone district shall
have adequate sewage disposal facilities and must meet the
requirements of the zone district". The applicants own soils
information states that the site is also made up of Nelson fine sand
loam as well as Renoihill clay loam. To quote their soils information
again "the underlying sandstone is the most limiting feature of this
soil". "Neither septic absorption fields nor sewage lagoons operate
properly." Who will be responsible to assure that the sewage on site is
being properly handled to not cause a health problem to adjacent
property owners?
9. The applicants application states that their aircraft will operate from
4:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Will this airstrip have runway lights? Will there
be instrument landings? What F.A.A. regulations must be met to
operate under these conditions?
10.Who will monitor the "United Agricultural Products" pickups of
chemical containers and drop off of new chemical containers and
pesticides that they are following proper and correct procedures? How
will they assure that there will be no spills as they fill the large storage
tanks? What affect will their trucks have on CR 26 as well as the
existing well access road that they plan to access the site? Who will
maintain these roads? The county? And what effect will it have on the
taxpayers? As I stated earlier in item 4, this is a risk related operation.
We need more specific information from the applicant on how they will
avoid such risks and specific steps that they will take if an accident
should occur.
11.The applicant's "plans for small to medium-sized agricultural chemical
bulk storage and mix/load facilities" is a very general set of diagrams
by Midwest Plan Services out of Ames, Iowa in 1991 and are not
specific to this site with its highly unstable soil conditions. There is no
information in the application on how the airstrip is to be constructed.
The letter from PUCD dated February 10, 2005 states their concerns of
to the application. "Soils in the area of proposed buildings and runway
have moderate to severe limitations for foundations, septic tanks and
roads. Special engineering design may be required. Site soils have a
high potential for wind erosion." The letter from Roger Vigil, building
official, with the Department of Building Inspection, Weld County
Administrative offices dated March 4, 2005 states that a plan review for
such building for which a building permit is required bear the wet
stamp of a Colorado registered architect or engineer. He also states
numerous codes that the applicant must follow to obtain a building
permit. As an architect registered in Missouri I know how thorough
these plan reviews are by local building officials. Is there adequate
information in these general diagrams to allow The Department of
Building Inspection to review and grant a building permit?
12.The letter from Donald Carroll, engineering administrator, dated
February 25, 2005 states that "applicant needs to identify on the Plat
Plan Drawing all public rights of way with dimensions. "The applicant
Shall complete a nonexclusive license agreement for the upgrade and
Maintenance of Weld County right-of-way." "This is associated with
the Proposed access shown adjacent to this section line utilities, public
of-way to the proposed USR facility." Have these items been taken care
of to Mr. Carroll's satisfaction?
13.The three page letter from Charlotte Davis from the Department of
Environmental Health lists many recommendations to the Planning
Commission that, "numerous requirements be incorporated into the
Permit as conditions that must be met prior to the issuance of the
Certificate of occupancy" as well as "be incorporated into the permit
As development standards." There are over two dozen recommendations
to this planning commission. How will these very specific
Environmental Health issues be analyzed, and who will enforce them?
14. Under section 23-2-160 application requirements for site plan review
item "2" "the applicant shall submit to the Department of Planning
Services a copy of an agreement with the owner of any ditch located on
or adjacent to the site, or shall provide written evidence than an adequate
attempt has been made to mitigate the concerns of the ditch owners. The
agreement shall stipulate that ditch activities have adequately been
incorporated into the design of the site." I note the letter from Platteville
Irrigating and Milling Company dated February 21, 2005, stating
"please be advised that the concern the Platteville Irrigating and Milling
Company has concerning this facility is the possibility of a chemical spill
into the ditch which is on western border of the said property. This
company wants the assurance that there will be no such occurrence of a
chemical spill." Accidents happen. I did not see any letter of agreement
of their concerns from the applicant.
15.What effect will this airstrip have on the existing wildlife and their
habitat? As you noted there are numerous prairie dogs as well as
rabbits on this site.
On Thursday, May 5, 2005, I received a telephone call from Mr. Ray
Edmiston asking to talk to my mother who is currently in a nursing home
with failing health. Ray explained his operation and I related our
concerns. I asked if he could move his runway and storage
faculties to the west. The end of the runway on his current site plan is
approximately, 250 feet from our west property line. He stated that
"this was where the runway had to be". I have not heard back from Ray
Edmiston regarding our other concerns with his proposal.
Sheri these are only my preliminary comments since, I recently
received this packet of information and I reserve the right for Mr. French
and myself to further document our concerns and objections. I would hope
that with numerous discrepancies in the applicants application for a
special use permit that the Planning Commission recommends to the
County Commissioners that they refuse the applicants request for a
special use permit. Section 23-2-200 clearly states "the intent of the
special review is to protect and promote the health, safety, connivance and
general welfare of the present and future residents of the county."
In summary this is a risk related operation. The burden is on the applicant
requesting this special use permit to safe guard the rights of surrounding
property owners. I don't see documentation in the application that this has
been accomplished.
Thank you for your time in this matter.
Je oock in behalf of Dorothy L. Boock and Pat Kugel.
Cc: Joseph C. French
French & Stone P.C.
Attorneys at Law
720 Pearl Street
Boulder, CO 80302
May 15 05 06: 28p Robert Brunelle 7199-954588 p, 1
P°t44 910 - 3oq — dime
/.!o• 0feage_s 2
Ma• /r ,2605"
y w ``h`' ("3
'•ASR-;so
\j/fie etret,%- , ,X0\"(.2 •-&,-cyJ)2x-,_J >ze
..."4-e e4 / ee L,,,, ,AerAteLw a
a) 2 ./A au1 v c et-6„2/ den" ,.tza'/o),
T zAe r2> .u� Yfc e Lu
c n-dvc e a,C etc.a 11174.w?a-eVours,
(2/QLGItt- 6-x)� a tip. _.&-c.4.) ��/�2'7/".1-/,. t OZx/�iFt.7.2�zczety 61444 L-41.471-e2 OZZAre--C.1.4ct V-4-ASZ
� WIC e o-6 6nccse{: u s �-.c a
. .te-(
tz lcc Vo 4. —ea-=1 au4. r e,C3, •&I-4)*
ente ,tea . - rata. -:-Ccoce-e
01-ce_ ea-u-Lei Lie a 6Zer
at./
May 15 05 06: 28p Robert Brunelle 719g,.B54588 p. 2
gar
z c2-6, emcee s yiz 3
atuk
(AIL. iter7r3 VAC
-(QP-G� .d�.I�LG „,r,. r.ZC Zit
Lanzej
c o-r,'. a 'z-otcci ‘taf,
.c otee c,, a azchc.e KO'lceG z� '�t-e7" 4 ,��Ce`�%J ezi
c.>j Zei --At_nve.ocJ 4 yo 4, Sto- >t,q.7
re);(-1 YK 6Lecurize,e
a 3 V.
'ruff ° city" ...49- tee zt a—
--ea, Wu eihget citafroar 2nc. tittny—
C
✓✓ • ;Cu rt."; ..4,-ty e `1�2 en., !, e.vec a-
.Ah_ez-ua. ✓fete dim. ice
dJ L4(a/€//1, due late-tx_eze
vza- ,_L( enti C!.rrn,i r,,14-- `Gcv , Gam%u-c4 aieav✓
thy o ec nutp c.tke 48 Af rL
chic chx., e O n) a 6424 Lit ete.d...c..-
34'30 am) ad- ad/e-C ,s .cc v >rei -4%t j`
per. c a� � �/ , e .
d CezZ c.e l '7fl4,,tc7 ` t'&I6 -ero
c&-et day-
V
05/12/2005 15: 37 9705359854 AGPROS PAGE 02/04
Jesse Ferge
15038 Weld County Road 33
Platteville, CO 80651
Sheri Lockman, Weld County Planner
Department of Planning
91810`" Street
Greeley, CO 80631
May 12, 2005
Dear Ms. Lockman,
I am writing in support of Ray Edmiston's proposed airstrip, Case # USR-
1504.
I have lived at 15038 WCR 33 for over two years. My property is about %2
mile off the north end of the Kugel Strong Airport where Mr. Edmiston
operates his current crop dusting operation.
I have never had a problem with the crop dusters as they only operate for a
few months in the summer. The other aircraft at the airport don'tfly very
often.
Living as close to Mr. Edmiston's current operation, I can say that they
operate in a professional manner and they are not noisy or disturbing. I am
enclosing a picture to show the proximity ofmy property to the airport.
Sincerley,
Je Ferge
05/12/2005 15: 37 9705359854 AGPROS PAGE 03/04
-"'a-- -•^..D„' •���� •.w.1..u.41v nu. DJ rmttcvule, LU 500)1
Page 1 of l
t Map
for 15038 CR-33, Platteville, CO 80651
Maps
i
{
n•
huu://maos.aooale.com/
5/12'2005
05/12/2005 15:37 9705359854 AGPROS PAGE 04/04
Rich Ferge
15426 WCR 33
Platteville, CO 80651
Sheri Lockman, Planner
Department of Planning Services
918 10th Street
Greeley, CO 80631
May 12, 2005
Dear Ms. Lockman,
I live at 15426 WCR 33. My house is just across the road from the Kugel Strong Airport.
I aut writing in support of Ray Edmiston's proposal for an airstrip on WCR 26. I think
Mr. Edmiston conducts his business very safely. His pilots are professional and don't
mess around. The airplanes are very quiet compared to the old radial engine powered
planes that most people associate with crop dusters.
I own the Double Tree restaurant in Platteville and work very late. I can say that I
normally sleep through the takeoffs and landings of the airplanes. My house is very close
to the end of their runway and the planes don't bother me at all.
I also own 62 acres of the southeast quarter of Sec. 28 on WCR 26& 31. This property is
about a mile from Mr. Edmiston's proposed airstrip. I would welcome him to our
neighborhood. I have spoken to my other neighbors on WCR 26. They don't have any
problems with Mr. Edmiston's plans.
I am in support of Case tiUSR-1504.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter,
Rich Ferge
05/16/2005 16: 44 9705359854 AGPROS
PAGE 02/02
Gary&Joyce Herman
12994 Weld County Road 28
Platteville,Colorado 80651
May 16, 2005
Weld County Planning Department
918 10th Street
Greeley,Colorado 80631
ATTN: SHER1 LOCKMAN
RE: CASE NUMBER IISR-1504
RAY EDMISTON,AERIAL SPRAYERS,INC.
Dear Ms. Lockman,
As landowners and farmers of land adjacent to the proposed crop dusting facility and
airstrip,we wish to state that we have no objection to this proposal. We have dealt with
Mr. Edmiston in the past and find him to be conscientious and an utmost professional.
At this point in time our area is designated an agricultural zone and the right to farm
statement needs to be considered.
Sincerely,
Gary and Joyce Herman
z. EXHIBIT
I
05/16/2005 14:41 9705359854 AGPROS
-- -_ =•u-ror[typ PAGE 02/02
AERIAL SPRAYERS, INC
PAGE 01
Flights from Kugel Strong Airport
Per Pilot Logs
Ag Operations
Daily Avg.
During
2005 April Ma Takeoffs Season
.�- 41 _-----.--__
200. __ A ril - Se ember_ --- 693 3.8
2004
2003 April - October 755 __.
2002 �----�- �?
0 April October 661 3.7
Personal
2005 25
2004 - - -- 42
2003 --- - .�.._ , _._.___ -- -..
_ _ -33
2002 41
EXHIBIT
Hello