HomeMy WebLinkAbout20040363.tiff HEARING CERTIFICATION
DOCKET NO. 2004-03
RE: SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT #1444
FOR A MINERAL RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT FACILITY, INCLUDING WET AND DRY
OPEN PIT MINING AND MATERIALS PROCESSING AND AN ASPHALT AND CONCRETE
BATCH PLANT, IN THE A(AGRICULTURAL)ZONE DISTRICT-HEIT FARMS, LTD, LLP
A public hearing was conducted on January 7, 2004, at 10:00 a.m., with the following present:
Commissioner Robert D. Masden, Chair
Commissioner William H. Jerke, Pro-Tem
Commissioner M. J. Geile
Commissioner David E. Long
Commissioner Glenn Vaad
Also present:
Acting Clerk to the Board, Esther Gesick
Assistant County Attorney, Lee Morrison
Planning Department representative, Chris Gathman
Health Department representative, Char Davis
Public Works representative, Donald Carroll
Public Works representative, Keith Meyer
The following business was transacted:
I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated December 19, 2003, and duly published
December 25, 2003, in the South Weld Sun, a public hearing was conducted to consider the
request of Heit Farms, LTD, LLP,for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review
Permit #1444 for a Mineral Resource Development Facility, including Wet and Dry Open Pit
Mining and Materials Processing and an Asphalt and Concrete Batch Plant in the A (Agricultural)
Zone District. Lee Morrison, Assistant County Attorney, made this a matter of record. Chris
Gathman, Department of Planning Services, presented a brief summary of the proposal and
entered the favorable recommendation of the Planning Commission into the record as written. He
gave a brief description of the location of the site and surrounding uses. He stated there is a
residence on the site, and the western one-third of the property is along the creek; however, all
mining activities will be outside the wetlands area. He stated 17 referral agencies reviewed this
proposal, and13 responded with comments that have been addressed through the Conditions of
Approval and Development Standards. Mr. Gathman stated the Departments of Planning Services
and Public Health and Environment met on the site with a representative from the Division of
Wildlife,who indicated many of their concerns were addressed when the applicant indicated there
will be no mining in the wetlands. He stated they still expressed concern regarding the eagle
nesting area; however,staff received no formal referral response. He further stated the City of Fort
Lupton did not respond prior to the Planning Commission hearing, although officials were present
at the Planning Commission hearing. Mr. Gathman stated the subject site is not within the
Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) area; however, it is within the three-mile referral for the City
of Fort Lupton, and he reviewed the definition of"nonurban" pursuant to the terms of the IGA. He
stated staff has received numerous letters of opposition and concern from surrounding property
owners regarding impacts to wells, wetlands, traffic, noise, dust, fumes, etcetera. He stated the
2004-0363
PL1697
00: ;�L Pttkei //L(Er) o4/
HEARING CERTIFICATION - HEIT FARMS, LTD, LLP (USR#1444)
PAGE 2
Department of Planning Services is requiring the applicant to provide evidence that the irrigation
well on the site has been repermitted in accordance with the Augmentation Plan filed with the
Division of Water Resources. Mr. Gathman stated well users within 600 feet can protest this
proposal, and staff wants to ensure there is adequate water for employees and business
operations. He stated the applicant intends to allow water storage when the mining is complete;
however, the County Attorney's Office stated that use does not need to be included in the title of
the Permit because water storage does not require a Use by Special Review Permit. He stated any
other uses would require an amendment of this permit. Commissioner Geile commented reason
of approval #2.d in the draft Resolution includes language regarding the Fort Lupton IGA and the
MUD; however, this site is not within the boundaries for either, so it is not applicable. Mr. Morrison
stated the site is outside the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB); however, it is within the three-mile
referral area, and the reference to the Mixed Use Development (MUD) is not necessary.
Commissioner Geile commented the language needs to be modified so it is specific to this case.
Responding to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Gathman stated staff considers this to be a nonurban
development. Following discussion, the Board concurred, this proposal should be reviewed as a
nonurban development.
Char Davis, Department of Public Health and Environment, stated she has no comments at this
time.
Donald Carroll, Department of Public Works, displayed an overhead transparency of the existing
gravel pits in the area, marked Exhibit KK, and reviewed the various permit approvals, terms,
operators, and haul routes. Responding to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Carroll stated each pit has
a haul route approved on a case-by-case basis, and he submitted a copy of the U.S. Highway 85
Access Control Plan, marked Exhibit S. He stated Condition of Approval#1.1 requires a Long-Term
Improvements Agreement for the haul route, which includes overlays, bridge widening, a bus pull
off area, and intersection improvement/widening. He further stated the staff is requesting that the
applicant extend the pavement on Weld County Road 25 to the site entrance. In response to
Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Carroll reviewed the layout of Weld County Road 18 from Weld County
Road 25 east to U.S. Highway 85, and added if drivers abide by the advisory speed limits,they can
negotiate the turns and bridge crossings. He stated none of the bridges are posted, the regulatory
speed limit is 55 miles per hour if there is no posting, and the posted advisory speed limit is 30
miles per hour. Mr. Morrison stated if there is an accident, law enforcement considers the advisory
speed limits in determining whether there was reckless driving; however, they are not used for
ticketing. Mr. Carroll stated the improvements agreement specifies the haul route, and if staff
receives complaints that can be investigated and confirmed, the operator is put on notice or, if
necessary, a Probable Cause hearing is set. He stated the Board can also require the applicant
to post signs at the weight houses to educate drivers regarding the haul route, speeding, etcetera.
Responding to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Morrison reviewed the Probable Cause and Show Cause
process,which allows the Board to revoke a Use by Special Review Permit and cause the applicant
to cease mining. He further stated the County can also obtain a court injunction if the operator
does not abide by the Show Cause determination. Commissioner Geile reviewed the 24-hour
traffic counts taken in 2003 for the record. In response to Commissioner Jerke, Mr. Carroll stated
the traffic count on U.S. Highway 85 is uncertain for this particular area, and he reviewed which
portions of the haul route are gravel or paved.
2004-0363
PL1697
HEARING CERTIFICATION - HEIT FARMS, LTD, LLP (USR#1444)
PAGE 3
In response to Commissioner Geile, Keith Meyer,Department of Public Works,stated the Colorado
Department of Transportation (CDOT) Access Control Plan on U.S. Highway 85 does not call for
a signal at the intersection of Weld County Road 18. He stated a Warrant Study was conducted
in June 2003, which indicates the intersection meets two of eight warrants for signalization. He
further stated CDOT has requested signalization as part of the Improvements Agreement and will
attempt to amend the Access Control Plan and require the hauler to pay a proportional share of
the cost. Commissioner Geile commented in the past it has been very difficult to get all the parties
involved to sign an amendment to the Access Control Plan. Mr. Meyer concurred and stated Weld
County and CDOT will have to do a formal presentation to the U.S. Highway 85 Plan Committee.
Responding to Commissioner Jerke, Mr. Meyer stated the improvements agreement indicates the
proportional share will be based on the number of truck trips generated by the operator, not the
type of vehicle, and they also take the background traffic into account. Commissioner Jerke
commented certain types of trucks do more damage than a car and also affects traffic flow. Mr.
Meyer stated the improvements agreement will be reviewed annually, and if there is damage that
is caused by the operator, they will be required to make the necessary repairs. Commissioner
Jerke commented the slow speed of trucks further supports the need for a traffic signal.
Robert Bruce, attorney, stated the applicant would like to delay their presentation to allow
comments from members of the public who will not be able to return after lunch.
Larry Ford stated he is the General Manager for the South Adams Water and Sanitation District
located in Commerce City, Colorado. Mr. Ford stated he has been with the District for 46 years,
he was raised in Weld County, and he is also the president of ditch companies in the Denver and
Commerce City area. He reviewed the District's service area, which covers 65 miles, and stated
they rely on gravel pit storage because wells in the area are contaminated. Mr. Ford stated the
District is building a dual system, so homes have two meters for drinking water and other water
which is used for irrigation. He stated until dams are allowed, the residents of Colorado must rely
on gravel pit storage to meet their water needs. Responding to Commissioner Jerke, Mr. Ford
stated the District bought several gravel pits south of Brighton to store water. In response to
Commissioners Vaad and Masden, Mr. Ford stated the mounding/shadow effect requires pumping
around the lined gravel pit or the use of a dual system, and it can affect wells within a one-mile
radius.
Mr. Bruce stated this property is under a sales contract pending approval of this permit. (Switched
to Tape#2004-02.) In response to Commissioner Geile, Mr. Bruce reviewed the succession of the
assigners and assignees, and their business locations. Mr. Bruce stated the applicant has tried
to address many of the concerns expressed by the City of Fort Lupton, and the Weld County staff
and Planning Commission recommend approval. He stated the applicant has committed to pay
a proportional share of the traffic signal at the intersection of Weld County Road 18 and U.S.
Highway 85, an escrow will be created for that purpose, and they are willing to work with CDOT to
ensure the safety of the community. Mr. Bruce stated the proposal will be subject to a permit from
the Division of Minerals and Geology (DMG), and it will create up to 1,600 acre feet of water
storage.
Leonard Heit, property owner, explained four family members make up the partnership. He stated
the property was purchased in 1947, and it was used for a dairy vegetable farm; however, their
children have no desire to continue farming. He stated future use of the site is limited because a
portion is located within the 100-year floodplain or wetlands. Mr. Heit stated water storage is an
2004-0363
PL1697
HEARING CERTIFICATION - HEIT FARMS, LTD, LLP (USR #1444)
PAGE 4
ideal use for the site and is compatible with wildlife habitats in the area. Responding to Chair
Masden, Mr. Heit stated they have 101 shares of the Lupton Meadow Ditch Company and one
irrigation well located in the southeast corner of the property, and the well production has not been
affected by the nearby slurry wall. Responding to Commissioners Vaad and Jerke, Mr. Heit stated
the Weld County Koenig Pit is located to the south,the farm is 111.5 gross acres, and the irrigation
well produces 1,200 gallons per minute.
Chair Masden recessed the hearing for lunch until 1:30 p.m. Upon reconvening, Paul Gesso of
Banks and Gesso, LLC, submitted a digital copy of the PowerPoint presentation, marked
Exhibit X(1). He gave a brief summary of his qualifications, and stated the application proposes
mining for seven years, and the end result will be water storage. He stated due to the recent defeat
of the Two Forks Project and Amendment 22, water storage issues will become more prominent,
and mining plays a very important role in communities. (Clerk's Note: A majority of the applicant's
presentation was read directly from the PowerPoint presentation, marked Exhibit X(1),and was not
retyped in this summary of the proceedings.) Mr. Gesso reviewed the PowerPoint presentation for
the record, and stated the mining operations, south of Brighton and extending to Denver, are near
depletion, and most are designated for water storage. He stated many of the operators have
worked to provide open space, trails, etcetera, and there will be a study released at the end of the
month which reviews the impacts and mitigation plans.
Tug Martin, Banks and Gesso, LLC,gave a brief summary of his qualifications and stated 61 acres
of the 102-acre site will be mined. He reviewed the Extraction Plan and stated the applicant
originally planned to wet mine seven acres; however, it was deemed unfeasible and they withdrew
that portion of the application. He stated they are proposing asphalt and concrete batch plants,
with production based on market demand. He further stated they plan to reclaim the mined area
for water storage,and the batch plants will reduce the life of the mining operation,which is currently
anticipated to take seven years. Mr. Martin stated the applicant will pave Weld County Road 25
from the site entrance south to Weld County Road 20.25; there is an agreement to relocate some
pipeline for Duke Energy; the berms will be appropriately spaced for flood flows; trees will be
planted between the berms once mining commences; and the slurry wall must be in place before
mining starts. He stated the neighbors' concerns regarding dust, noise, and water quality and
quantity will be controlled by other agencies regardless of this permit. He further stated the
applicant is working to address issues regarding the floodplain,wildlife,traffic,and property values,
and this project will be compatible once those issues are addressed. Mr. Martin reviewed the
Reclamation Plan, and stated staff has requested undulating shorelines for wildlife habitat;
however, the applicant is opposed due to the loss of mined materials and water storage area. He
reviewed the additional permits required for sand and gravel permits, as well as the Groundwater
Mitigation Plan. In response to Chair Masden, Mr. Martin stated the applicant will have seven to
nine wells, and they do have adequate water to meet the Mitigation Plan if water levels drop. He
further stated an Augmentation Plan has been submitted; however, it has not been approved, and
they cannot do anything until they receive approval. Commissioner Geile reviewed the water
ownership based on the application information, and Mr. Martin stated the applicant is still seeking
an operator for the site. He reviewed the mounding/shadowing aerial photo and the locations of
monitoring and existing wells. In response to Chair Masden, Mr. Martin stated, if necessary,
impacted wells will be deepened or relocated.
2004-0363
PL1697
HEARING CERTIFICATION - HEIT FARMS, LTD, LLP (USR#1444)
PAGE 5
Dave Mehan,Wright Water Engineers, Inc.,stated based on the U.S.Geologic Survey(USGS)and
models, he does not anticipate any drawdown on the east side of the site due to the recharge effect
of the South Platte River. Responding to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Mehan stated the water flow
calculations are based on the USGS Report on groundwater. He stated Wright Water Engineers,
Inc., was involved in the design of the French Drains, which he explained is an angled, perforated
pipe that uses gravity to discharge to the north. Responding to Commissioner Jerke and Chair
Masden, Mr. Mehan stated the Heit well is located in the southeast corner of the site, and he is
skeptical that a well past 1,000 feet will be impacted. He stated they will conduct groundwater
monitoring to help assess any negative impacts, and contrary to Mr. Ford's statement, their
analysis regarding the mounding/shadowing effect is very site specific, rather than a generalized
statement.
Mr. Martin reviewed the proposed haul route, and stated the applicant agrees with the
improvements requested by the Department of Public Works and CDOT. Responding to
Commissioner Vaad,Mr.Martin stated the neighbors expressed concern with establishing a wildlife
area due to more people coming to the area. Responding to Mr. Morrison, Mr. Martin stated the
mitigation actions were compiled as a result of requests from the neighbors, and they have been
approved by the DMG. He stated there is an agreement with the Aquatic and Wetland Company,
and the DMG requires the applicant to minimize the mounding/shadowing on any property effected.
Mr. Gathman stated the DMG Permit was submitted at the Planning Commission hearing, and he
reviewed the terms for the record. Responding to Commissioner Geile, Mr. Gathman stated the
agreement, marked Exhibit 6E, is signed by the Aquatic and Wetland Company, Brad, John, and
Gregory Windell, SW Meadow, LLC, and Heit Farm, Ltd. Mr. Bruce stated the sale includes 239.6
acre feet of Lupton Meadows shares, which will be adequate for the Mitigation Plan since they will
not be dewatering the site. He stated SW Meadow has invested a significant amount of money for
water storage in Colorado, and under the Business Plan, the water storage would be sold to a
municipality or government agency. He further stated there is no operator lease at this time; the
intent of SW Meadow is to hire local operators that are almost mined out;and the contract for water
mitigation is in the record. Responding to Commissioner Geile, Mr. Bruce stated if the project were
to fail, there are bonds in place, and Mark Campbell, Principal of SW Meadow and High Plains,will
be personally responsible. He further stated the bond must be posted before the DMG will allow
mining to commence.
John Aldredge, Aldredge Transportation Consultants, gave a brief summary of his qualifications,
and reviewed a PowerPoint Presentation, marked Exhibit X(2), showing the traffic controls and
volumes along the haul route. In response to Mr. Morrison, Mr. Bruce stated the still slides are
included in the CD, marked Exhibit X(1). (Clerk's Note: This digital presentation was submitted
separately following the hearing.) Mr. Aldredge stated they use data from CDOT to generate a
model which simulates the traffic movement and classifies the intersections with a level of service
A through F. He stated the model also reflects the requested improvements by CDOT, and he
reviewed the accident analysis at Weld County Road 18 and U.S. Highway 85, which appears to
be random and difficult to provide a clear solution. He further stated CDOT has indicated the
intersection at Weld County Road 18 warrants a traffic signal, which would further assist in
reducing the number of accidents, and the applicant is willing to pay a proportional share. Mr.
Aldredge reviewed the requirements of the Improvements Agreement, and concluded by stating
the improvements will upgrade intersection operations, decrease accidents, and the applicant will
contribute toward the cost. In response to Commissioner Jerke, Mr. Bruce stated the
Improvements Agreement spcifies which items are the sole responsibility of the applicant and which
2004-0363
PL1697
HEARING CERTIFICATION - HEIT FARMS, LTD, LLP (USR#1444)
PAGE 6
are proportionate. Responding to Chair Masden, Mr. Gesso stated the school bus stop is on the
haul route; however, they are not yet certain of the exact location. He further stated the applicant
will be responsible for 100 percent of the cost of improvements north of the Adel Gravel Pit, and
the rest is proportionate.
Chair Masden called a five minute recess. Upon reconvening, Mr. Gesso displayed various photos
of concrete and asphalt batch plants, and stated asphalt batch plants are much cleaner than they
used to be. He also showed photographs of gravel pits located near homes and submitted studies,
marked Exhibits Y, Z, AA, and BB, which indicate they are compatible and do not decrease
property values. Mr. Gesso displayed photographs of development adjacent or near to a mining
area that has been reclaimed for water storage. He reviewed the findings of the Pineola Property
Study, marked Exhibit CC, and stated this study was referenced by opponents of this proposal;
however, this study is inadequate when compared to his reputable studies.
Mark Campbell, applicant, reviewed his qualifications and stated he started this process two years
ago and he has made a sincere effort to address the concerns of the neighbors. Mr. Campbell
stated his partner is Terry White, there is a significant net worth behind SW Meadow, they hold
approximately 45 properties, and each is under a separate limited liability company.
Linda Piper, surrounding property owner, submitted a copy of a PowerPoint presentation, marked
Exhibit EE, and expressed concern with the asphalt batch plant and the number of trucks that will
be associated with this project. She stated the Vollmer and Lupton Meadows Subdivisions are in
close proximity, and the proposal will have a negative impact on the quality and character of the
neighborhood. Ms. Piper expressed concerns regarding health, safety, welfare, and the
application's lack of compatibility with the neighborhood. She discussed the topography of the
area, and stated the residents of Vollmer Subdivision, as well as other areas, will look down and
into this project. She displayed a screen showing 70 residences in the area, and stated they were
promised that no gravel trucks would use Weld County Road 20; however,she is not sure how that
will be monitored. She displayed slides showing the character of the neighborhood, as well as
several residences within 500 feet of the proposed facility. She stated the applicant's presentation
indicated this use is compatible with residential uses and does not affect property values; however,
the road conditions and impacts are unique to this area.
Laura Coyle, surrounding property owner, expressed concern with health issues. She stated the
asphalt batch plant will give the appearance of an industrial area, and the facility will emit toxic
contaminants and dust into the air which can cause cancer and respiratory problems. She
requested the Board consider the mistakes made by other agencies by putting a moratorium on
asphalt plants, and the proposal will also result in increased levels of dust pollution. Ms. Coyle
stated the slurry wall at the Weld County Koenig Pit affected the water table levels, so she is not
certain the Mitigation Plan for this proposal can adequately address the potential impacts to area
wells. She stated the applicant is only going to monitor three wells; however, there are 62 homes
in the area. She expressed concern with various livestock and wildlife in the area which may be
harmed by the creation of open bodies of water and the presence of the West Nile virus, and the
mining will disturb the habitat for eagles that nest within 500 yards of the site. Ms. Coyle stated the
proposal will increase traffic, conflict with the school bus route, slow traffic flow, and create traffic
hazards along the haul route and while accessing U.S. Highway 85. She stated the proposed bus
turnout on Weld County Road 25 does not address concerns regarding the three existing bus stops
on Weld County Road 18, and realistically it will be many years before a signal is located at the
2004-0363
PL1697
HEARING CERTIFICATION - HEIT FARMS, LTD, LLP (USR#1444)
PAGE 7
intersection of U.S. Highway 85 and Road 18. In response to Commissioner Jerke, Ms. Coyle
stated the proposed turn lanes on U.S. Highway 85 are too short, the Colorado State Patrol
accident statistics indicate there was an average of one accident every 3.3 days in 2002, and there
have been fatal accidents at this intersection. She stated there has been no discussion regarding
the gas pipeline which runs along the side of the narrow irrigation bridge, the large trucks cannot
maneuver the turns or bridge crossings without crossing the double yellow line, and the frequent
presence of fog along the river bottom increases the risk of accidents Ms. Coyle expressed
concern with the diversion of flood water and allowing petroleum and other hazardous products in
the floodplain. She stated 75 percent of the operations will be related to asphalt and concrete
processing, and indicated opposition to the applicant's ability to operate 24 hours, if necessary.
She stated it is uncertain who the future operator will be, and the area residents currently have
problems with the occasional operations at the County pit. Ms. Coyle stated the noise, lighting,
unsightly views, hours, and damage to property values are unacceptable, and the proposal is
incompatible based on increased traffic, loss of good farmland with water rights, and asphalt and
concrete batch plants. She stated the applicant's personal property rights are limited,the use does
not comply with the Weld County Code, and it jeopardizes the health, safety, and welfare of
residents in the area. In response to Chair Masden, Ms. Coyle stated her home is approximately
100 feet from the County pit, and 600 yards from the proposed mining operation.
Bob Temmer, surrounding property owner, stated he lives in the Lupton Meadows Subdivision
located one-half mile north of the proposed site. He stated the Heit Farm is shown as three parcels
within the Lupton Meadows Subdivision,and there is a petition showing a large number of residents
who are opposed. Mr. Temmer stated many of the homes have been built within the last ten to
fifteen years, and there are still some being planned, and some are horse ranches or include
agricultural activities. He expressed concern with this proposal impacting the irrigation of his alfalfa
because there is evidence that this type of operation affects water levels,and he submitted a news
article, marked Exhibit FF. He stated this application is solely for mining and asphalt and concrete
batch plants; the anticipated water storage will require another permit. Mr. Temmer stated mining
activities should be located in industrial areas because it will generate toxic fumes, traffic, and
noise, which are not compatible with the Agricultural area. He stated the roads and bridges over
irrigation ditches along the haul route are very narrow, the proposed improvements are not
adequate, and the additional traffic will result in accidents. He further stated the concrete and
asphalt batch plants will require importation of cement and petroleum products,and those trips are
not accounted for in the application. Mr. Temmer stated the site is currently a productive farm
under Villano Farms, and it is three parcels that could be sold for residential and agricultural uses,
which would not have adverse impacts. He stated the Weld County Code requires the protection
of agriculture, and although there are four gravel pits operating in this area, they do not have
concrete or asphalt batch plants. He expressed concerns regarding toxic emissions, traffic safety
hazards, noise, odor, poor visual impacts, and decreased property values. Mr. Temmer stated
there are many unanswered questions regarding the future operator, who is responsible for
improvements, and the final appearance of the site once it is reclaimed. He stated the final use
as water storage is not compatible with the area.
Henry Thuener, surrounding property owner, stated he lives two miles west of the proposed site
and he concurs with the prior comments. He stated Weld County Road 18 is not constructed for
commercial traffic, it is a dangerous road,access is terrible, and the State Patrol does not have the
manpower to patrol this area. He further stated Weld County Road 22 is a County-maintained,
gravel road that receives a lot of damage from heavy truck traffic from the oil and gas companies.
2004-0363
PL1697
HEARING CERTIFICATION - HEIT FARMS, LTD, LLP (USR#1444)
PAGE 8
He stated by the time the traffic signal is installed,the applicant's contribution will not be adequate,
and he requested a moratorium on gravel mining operations until a new ordinance is in place to
address these issues. Mr. Thuener stated bald eagles fly over this property; however, they leave
when Duke Energy operates. He expressed concern with excessive lighting and conflicts between
the haul route and the school bus schedule. (Switched to Tape #2004-03.) He further stated
CDOT does not have the manpower to inspect the trucks, and this proposal will make money for
the applicant at the expense of the current residents.
Chair Masden called a five minute recess. Upon reconvening, Robert Kerr, surrounding property
owner, expressed concern with dust on Weld County Road 20. He stated the average traffic count
is 50 vehicles; however, the amount increases significantly when the County pits are operating.
He further stated most of the truck traffic does not obey the posted speed limits, and he proposed
assessing a fine for trucks that do not abide by the haul route. Mr. Kerr expressed concern with
noise, and he read a quote from Planning Commissioner John Folsom regarding a similar proposal
as it relates to the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of Weld County. He stated that case
proposed a lesser impact to the neighborhood; however, the Planning Commission recommended
denial. Responding to Commissioner Jerke, Mr. Kerr indicated the location of his home.
David Norcross, Mayor for the City of Fort Lupton, stated his family has been in the Fort Lupton
area for many generations. He stated this is the first application regarding an operation west of the
river, and he expressed concern regarding adverse impacts caused by a gravel mining operation
and the associated haul route on the quality of life for residents in the area. Mayor Norcross
proposed designating areas that are zoned specifically for mining and batch plants, and stated the
applicants or operators do not typically live in the area that is being impacted. In response to
Commissioner Vaad, Mayor Norcross stated as currently written, it would not be a violation of the
IGA to approve this application outside the UGB; however,they are in the process of amending the
IGA and expanding the UGB. Responding to Commissioner Long, Mr. Norcross stated he was
sworn in as the mayor in November 2003, the City of Fort Lupton did submit a Resolution urging
denial of the Adams Gravel Pit, and that opinion is also true for this application due to the adverse
impact on the quality of life for residents in the area.
William Gee, surrounding property owner, stated his property is separated from the proposed site
by the Koenig gravel pit. He stated the Heit family has been a good neighbor for 40 years;
however, they no longer live in the area and this will impact the remaining residents. He stated
there is a precedent for gravel pits; however, this application also proposes concrete and asphalt
batch plants. He stated the Lupton Meadows Ditch Company can provide two-acre feet per share
in a normal year; however, it has not been that much for several years, and the amount is not
guaranteed. Mr. Gee expressed concern with the installation of a French drain because the
groundwater level is so shallow in this area, the uncertainty of who will be the future operator and
how they will maintain the site. He stated the Bearson Pit has a completion date, and to meet that
date the operator intends to move the stockpiles to the Koenig Pit. He stated those operations will
create a lot of trucks trying to cross the road, which is a traffic hazard along the proposed haul
route. Mr. Gee stated many of the existing surrounding uses generate a lot of truck traffic and
there is no traffic enforcement.
Kenny Vargas, surrounding property owner, stated he concurs with the concerns expressed
regarding health and safety issues, specifically, contamination of the fish ponds on his property.
2004-0363
PL1697
HEARING CERTIFICATION - HEIT FARMS, LTD, LLP (USR#1444)
PAGE 9
Leonard Vargas, surrounding property owner, stated his family moved to the area in 1924, and he
is concerned with the potential impacts to wetlands on his property. He expressed concern with
traffic delays on Weld County Roads 18, 23, and 25 caused by large trucks waiting to turn,
speeding,fumes from the proposed asphalt plant, and impacts to domestic wells. He stated there
are three wells on his farm, and 15 families in the immediate area. In response to Commissioner
Jerke, Mr. Vargas stated his farm is directly west of the property boundary, and it is leased and
farmed with corn and hay.
Gene Wagner, surrounding property owner, stated he farms and raises cattle one-half mile north
of the site; however, his irrigation wells were not shown on the applicant's map. He stated they
produce 500 gallons per minute to water his cattle. In response to Commissioner Geile, Mr.
Wagner stated he farms 117 irrigated acres.
Bruce Wilson, surrounding property owner, stated his property is not within the immediate impact
area of this pit; however, there are three pits in his area. He stated gravel and the subsequent
water storage is very valuable; however, the Board needs to be extremely judicious in defining the
requirements for this permit because the identity of the future operator is unknown. Responding
to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Wilson stated there are water agreements with the neighboring pits
which provide an extensive monitoring program; however, last summer the neighbors'wells within
600 feet were impacted and unable to get assistance from the DMG because there was not enough
data to support the claims. He stated it is difficult to determine who is at fault when there is multiple
pits in an area. There being no further comments, Chair Masden closed public testimony.
In response to Commissioner Geile, numerous members of the audience indicated they were
represented by the neighborhood Power Point presentation. Responding to Commissioner Vaad,
Mr. Meyer stated the CDOT study indicates the traffic accident volume does not meet the warrant
for a traffic signal. Commissioner Geile commented in order to justify a traffic signal without
warrants,the Upper Front Range Transportation Planning Council would have to address the need
for a signal in its 2030 Plan. Commissioner Vaad added the Access Control Agreement would also
have to be modified. Responding to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Carroll reiterated the applicant will
be responsible for 100 percent of the improvements north of the NCCI facility, and they will pay a
proportional share for bridge widening and intersection improvements. Commissioner Vaad
requested further discussion regarding the French Drain and what happens to the site after seven
years if it is not approved for water storage. In response to Chair Masden, Mr. Meyer stated staff
reviewed the concept of straightening the roadways; however, they feel traffic can negotiate the
curves if they follow the cautionary signs. Chair Masden commented with the number of pits in the
area, he would like to see the road and bridges straightened. Mr. Meyer stated that would be ideal;
however, most of the pits already exist and it would be difficult to get them to commit to paying their
proportional share. Commissioner Vaad commented the County would also responsible for its
share.
Mr. Mehan explained the slurry wall increases the water slope and the French drain will use gravity
flow or be pumped, if necessary. In response to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Mehan stated the
groundwater is four feet from the surface, the slurry wall could result in a two-foot rise, the French
drain will likely be placed three feet down, and the pipe wall is smooth so not much slope is needed
for flow. In response to Commissioner Long, Mr. Mehan stated the pipe is six inches in diameter,
and he is not sure what the end flow rate will be. In response to Commissioner Jerke, Mr. Mehan
concurred the water level is shallow, therefore, wells that are 15 to 30 feet deep should not be
2004-0363
PL1697
HEARING CERTIFICATION - HEIT FARMS, LTD, LLP (USR #1444)
PAGE 10
impacted. Responding to Chair Masden, Mr. Mehan stated the shadowing will be north of the site
by the tree farm, and the drain will equalize groundwater levels. He further stated the slurry wall
will be installed to bedrock which is 28 to 42 feet from the surface.
Allen Crockett, Walsh Environmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC, gave a brief summary of his
qualifications and stated he did three site visits during the summer, and only found the habitat for
the Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse is in the wetland area and their presence is not likely. He
stated an impact to the Bald Eagles is unlikely because the future water storage will create a better
habitat than the current onion field and they are accustomed to the existing human activity. Mr.
Crockett stated the South Platte River is mapped as a winter feeding area for Bald Eagles, and the
Colorado Division of Wildlife concurred with his report in a letter dated September 5, 2003, marked
Exhibit GG. He stated if a nest or communal roost is within one-half mile of the site, the applicant
will have to address the issue prior to construction and only commence mining after the roosting
is complete. He stated the eagles will return the following year after the operation is in place, the
wetland area will be preserved, and the South Platte River will not be affected by the operation.
Harvey Curtis,attorney,stated Mr. Ford's earlier testimony referred to projects in Denver and south
Adams County where they are building a series of gravel pits on the east side of the South Platte
River. He stated the topography and depth to ground water is different and his comment that the
impact spans for one mile is not relevant to this smaller site which has different depth to
groundwater. Mr. Curtis stated the DMG relied on a site-specific study conducted by Wright Water
Engineers,and the work was also reviewed by Leaf Engineering. He stated they all concurred with
the reported impacts of the mounding/shadowing effect. He stated the closest well is on the
Aquatic and Wetland Company property, which was completed on June 30, 1999. He submitted
a copy of the Pump Installation and Test Report, marked Exhibit HH, and stated at that time the
depth was 26 feet, the static water was at 10 feet, and the capacity was 250 gallons per minute.
Mr. Curtis stated the trigger point is still to be determined as to when the mitigation commences;
however, State statute requires protection of any well within 600 feet of a mining operation. He
stated the wells located west of the site are separated by Little Dry Creek, and they will not be
adversely impacted because the water will be pushed in that direction. Mr. Curtis reviewed various
water dispute cases and findings for the record. In response to Commissioner Jerke, Mr. Curtis
stated the 600-foot rule is required by State statute, which also requires proper notice and public
comment. He stated water storage is considered a well. Commissioner Jerke commented this will
involve much more groundwater than a typical well and 600 feet may not be adequate. In response
to Chair Masden, Mr. Curtis stated approval by the DMG is also conditioned on approval of the
Mitigation Plan,which includes monitoring wells 15 months before the slurry wall is constructed and
then after construction to study the effects. Responding to Commissioner Jerke, Mr. Mehan stated
wells shown on the map are proposed to be monitored, and the overall study does include a map
with all the wells.
Mr. Bruce stated the applicant is willing to restrict the right of contracted drivers to come back if
they exceed the speed limit, they will educate the employees regarding the haul route and traffic
controls, and the County can take enforcement measures through the Probable Cause/Show
Cause process or seek a court injunction. He stated the Business Plan involves hiring local
operators, and the concrete and asphalt plant is designed to help make the mining a temporary
use. Responding to Chair Masden, Mr. Gesso stated the asphalt plant will be regulated by the
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, and he submitted a copy of the Compass
Project, marked Exhibit II, which discusses the strides made to improve asphalt batch plants. He
2004-0363
PL1697
HEARING CERTIFICATION - HEIT FARMS, LTD, LLP (USR#1444)
PAGE 11
stated new technology reduces emissions,there are muffler systems for noise reduction, and older
plants are being upgraded to meet new regulations. He further stated the asphalt plant must report
under an Air Pollution Emission Notice (APEN)and will be inspected by the State. Responding to
Commissioners Long and Vaad, Mr. Bruce stated the 150 truck trips will include the imports of
cement and petroleum products, and there will be no importation of aggregate because the
applicant intends to complete the mining and use the site for water storage. He further stated this
Use by Special Review Permit does not include water storage; however, the Reclamation Plan is
for water storage. Mr. Bruce stated the Weld County Comprehensive Plan includes a Mineral
Extraction Overlay Map that includes this property, and the applicant has worked to mitigate
potential impacts. Mr. Bruce stated Mr. Campbell is willing to accept a Condition that states he is
financially responsible for all the improvements, and they will escrow the appropriate share for the
signal if it is installed in the future. He stated this application will improve the current road
conditions.
Mr. Aldredge stated the most significant improvement will be the addition of a right turn lane and
extended acceleration and turn lanes. He stated the proposed improvements will upgrade the level
of service from F to C. He stated the traffic accident information was provided by CDOT, and the
volume of accidents is not the issue, rather, the type of accidents is being evaluated. He stated
there is no apparent pattern on which to base a recommendation for remedying the situation. Mr.
Aldredge stated the bridge on Weld County Road 18 at Road 25 will also be improved. In response
to Commissioner Jerke, Mr. Aldredge indicated State Patrol records indicate there were seven
accidents in 2003, and CDOT takes the accident reports to pinpoint the exact location and type of
wreck. Responding to Chair Masden, Mr. Carroll stated the applicants need to meet with the
School District to determine an appropriate location for a bus pickup area to serve the most
children. Mr. Meyer stated the 2003 CDOT Warrant Study assessed traffic accident data from 1999
through 2001, and there were 19 accidents during that period at the intersection of Weld County
Road 18 and U.S. Highway 85. He stated there must be five or more injury accidents per year to
meet the warrant. Responding to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Carroll indicated there is adequate
right-of-way to accommodate a bus pullout. Mr. Bruce stated under the terms of the agreement
Aquatic and Wetland Company agreed to withdraw its objection since its concerns have been
satisfied. He clarified the entire property is 101 acres, 60 acres will be mined, the remaining area
is wetlands that will not be disturbed, and there will be landscaped berms around the pit. He
reiterated the site is within the floodplain, so there is no intent for residential development. Mr.
Bruce stated there has been citizen involvement, the Conditions of Approval and Development
Standards will ensure a good operation which will likely gain the support of opponents in the future.
He stated demographics do not support farming at this site, there will be limits on the operation,
and it will be regulated by various county,state,and federal agencies. He further stated there have
been intensive studies regarding transportation and water impacts,the regulations are enforceable,
and this proposal is in the best financial interest of the property owner. Mr. Bruce stated the
specialists have answered the questions of the opponents and Weld County officials,the applicant
will invest in improving the existing transportation system, operations will only continue for seven
years, and the water storage is important for Weld County's future as an agricultural community.
Responding to Commissioner Jerke, Mr. Meyer stated there is a condition pending approval of the
Access Control Plan that will require the applicant to escrow its proportional share based on truck
trips generated in relation to background traffic. Mr. Morrison added the Improvements Agreement
will also be subject to approval by the Board of Commissioners. Responding to Commissioner
Vaad, Mr. Gathman stated Development Standard #20 restricts the hours of operation to daylight
2004-0363
PL1697
HEARING CERTIFICATION - HEIT FARMS, LTD, LLP (USR#1444)
PAGE 12
hours. In response to Chair Masden, Mr. Bruce stated the applicant has reviewed and agrees with
the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards as proposed and modified.
Commissioner Geile expressed concern with the applicant's lack of experience with this type of
operation,although his financial portfolio appears adequate to support the costs. He read a portion
of Section 22-3-110.D of the Weld County Code regarding the U.S. Highway 85 Corridor Study and
stated it is imperative that a traffic signal be installed at the intersection of Weld County Road 18;
however,that will be difficult to accomplish because it requires the signature of all parties involved.
Commissioner Geile stated the 2030 Plan is being updated by the North Upper Front Range
Regional Planning Commission; however, it is unlikely there will be financial resources to provide
a signal, regardless of the applicant's contribution. He also expressed concerned with compatibility
issues in a rural agricultural/residential area. He stated the Comprehensive Plan does preserve
the right for mineral development; however, the Board must weigh that against Section 22-5-80.C
which requires a minimal impact on surrounding land uses, roads, and highways. He also
expressed concern with the additional impact of the proposed concrete and asphalt batch plants.
Commissioner Vaad commented the permit can be revoked if the applicant fails to comply with the
Conditions, and although there is no track record, the applicant views water storage as an
investment issue and does not ultimately intend to be a gravel operator. He stated it will be in the
applicant's best interest to locate a qualified gravel operator that will not hinder the financial aspect
of this proposal. Commissioner Vaad stated CDOT does not have the funds for the necessary
signalization; however, the free right turn will be a significant enhancement for southbound traffic.
He commented this operation would have the additional activities associated with concrete and
asphalt batch plants; however, this proposal is in compliance with the current IGA with the City of
Fort Lupton because it is a nonurban use outside of an urban area. He stated this application
does promote the reasonable development of mineral resources, and he also believes it is in a
reasonable place in the Agricultural Zone District, which is allowed through a Use by Special
Review. He further stated Section 23-2-230.B.6 requires the preservation of agriculture; however,
the site is within the 100-year floodplain and this is a suitable option because the owner no loner
wishes to farm the site. Commissioner Vaad stated the application complies with Section 23-2-
230.6.7 because all of the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards will ensure the
health,safety,and welfare of the neighborhood and County,therefore,he supports this application.
CommissionerJerke concurred with Commissioner Vaad and stated the applicant has done a good
job proving this is a reasonable use for the site. He stated although the applicant has not done this
in the past, he will likely operate a site that remains in compliance to protect his financial interest.
He stated there are gravel pits in the area, there is a drought, and water storage is needed to
preserve the overall agricultural nature of Weld County, therefore, he supports the application.
Commissioner Long stated he supports the application. He stated the application has been
modified to address concerns regarding mitigating impacts to wells and transportation. He stated
there is a lack of trust in the County; however, the gravel operations are reviewed on a case-by-
case basis and the Board does have the ability to revoke the permit, if necessary. He stated it
behooves the owners to find the best operator to ensure the financial interest and to uphold the
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards.
Chair Masden commented he appreciates all the testimony provided by the applicant and public.
He stated the applicant has agreed to put money in escrow for a traffic signal; however, the mining
will likely be complete long before a signal is installed. He further stated a light should be installed
2004-0363
PL1697
HEARING CERTIFICATION - HEIT FARMS, LTD, LLP (USR#1444)
PAGE 13
Chair Masden commented he appreciates all the testimony provided by the applicant and public.He
stated the applicant has agreed to put money in escrow for a traffic signal;however,the mining will
likely be complete long before a signal is installed. He further stated a light should be installed as
soon as possible because there has been a growing number of accidents and related transportation
issues. He stated water storage is very important; however, there have been concerns raised
regarding the impact to wells and diminished water levels outside the 600-foot zone of influence.
Chair Masden stated the County does have gravel operations in the area,and has approved private
operator pits;however,he feels this area has reached a point of saturation,and this application also
proposes concrete and asphalt batch plants,which are a concern regarding the health,safety,and
welfare of the residents.
Based on his previous comments, Commissioner Vaad moved to approve the request of Heit
Farms, LTD, LLP,for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit#1444
for a Mineral Resource Development Facility,including Wet and Dry Open Pit Mining and Materials
Processing and an Asphalt and Concrete Batch Plant in the A(Agricultural)Zone District,based on
the recommendation of the Planning staff, with the Conditions of Approval and Development
Standards as entered into the record. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Jerke.
Commissioner Geile commented he appreciates the professionalism and expertise of the applicant
and the residents of the area. He reiterated his concerns with compatibility,the background of the
applicant, and additional facets of the application with asphalt and concrete batch plants affecting
the health safety and welfare of citizens. Chair Masden thanked the applicant for their
professionalism and the public for its involvement because their information is vital in considering
applications. Upon a call for the vote,the motion carried three to two with Commissioners Geile and
Masden opposed. There being no further discussion, the hearing was completed at 7:00 p.m.
This Certification was approved on the 12th day of January 2004.
APPROVED:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
ATTEST: gay
Z,4)'4 Robert D. Masden, Chair
Weld County Clerk to e: $11j
WamHJe, Pro-Tem
Deputy Clerk to th t� N ,/
eile
TAPES #2004-01, 02, and 03 eiCc
David . Long /
DOCKET#2004-03 Glenn Vaad
2004-0363
PL1697
EXHIBIT INVENTORY CONTROL SHEET
Case USR#1444 - HEIT FARMS, LTD, LLP, CIO BANKS AND GESSO, LLC
Exhibit Submitted By Exhibit Description
A. Planning Staff Inventory of Items Submitted
B. Planning Commission Resolution of Recommendation
C. Planning Commission Summary of Hearing (10/21/03)
D. Clerk to the Board Notice of Hearing
E. Ann Carrington Letter of Opposition (11/06/03)
F. Applicant Letter re: Waive 45 Day Requirement
G. Planning Staff Certification and 2 Photos of sign posting
(12/22/2003)
H. Lavenia Temmer E-mail of Opposition (01/05/2004)
I. Linda Piper E-mail of Opposition (01/05/2004)
J. Robert Temmer E-mail of Opposition (01/05/2004)
K. Willis Piper E-mail of Opposition (01/05/2004)
L. Dustan, Deborah and Haley Flanagan Original Letter of Opposition received
01/07/2004 replacing E-mail received
01/05/2004
M. Neil and Laura Coyle E-mail of Opposition (01/05/2004)
N. Linda Gardner E-mail of Opposition (01/05/2004)
O. Gary and Mary Ann Merritt E-mail of Opposition (01/05/2004)
P. Henry and Frances Chavez
and Ralph Chavez E-mail of Opposition (01/05/2004)
Q. Lavenia Temmer Revised Traffic Counts, Fort Lupton
Resolution, and Various Newspaper Aritcles
(01/05/2004)
R. Lavenia Temmer Copy of Power Point Presentation
(01/06/2004)
S. Public Works Staff US Highway 85 Access Control Plan 1-76 to
WCR 80 dated December 1999
(01/07/2004)
T. Public Works Staff Draft Long-Term Road Maintenance and
Improvements Agreement (01/07/2004)
U. Public Works Staff E-mail re: traffic counts and paving status
and map (10/06/2003)
V. Public Works Staff Traffic Accidents chart, aerial photo, and
map (01/07/2004)
W. Dustan, Deborah and Haley Flanagan Letter received 01/07/2004 - Duplicate of
Exhibit L
X (1). Banks and Gesso, LLC CD and Printed Copy of Power Point
Presentation (01/07/2004)
X (2). Aldridge Transportation Consultants Power Point Presentation (01/07/2004)
Y. Applicant Property Valuation Report dated 10/2002
Z. Applicant Impacts of Rock Quarries on Residential
Property Values for Rail Line Quarry, dated
05/08/1998
AA. Applicant Impact of Rock Quarry Operations on Value
of Nearby Housing for Davidson Mineral
Properties, dated 08/24/1987
BB. Applicant Social, Economic and Legal Consequences
of Blasting in Strip Miners and Quarries,
dated May 1981
CC. Applicant Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League
Pineola Property Study re: Asphalt Plants
dated 11/06/2003
DD. County Attorney Proposed revisions to Draft Resolution text
EE. Linda Piper Power Point Presentation (Duplicate of
Exhibit R)
FF. Bob Temmer Newspaper Article from Daily Times-Call,
dated 12/28/2003
GG. Applicant Letter from Fish and Wildlife Service dated
09/05/2003
HH. Applicant Pump Installation and Test Report for Well
Permit#050354-F
I I. Applicant The "Compass" Project - A Compliance
Assistance Pilot Project, Final Report dated
July 2003
JJ. Planning Staff Vicinity Map Overhead Transparency-
Surroundinq Permits
KK. Public Works Staff Vicinity Map Overhead Transparency-
Surrounding Gravel Pits
LL. Sue Hubert Letter of Opposition (01/06/2004)
MM.
NN.
OO.
PP.
QQ.
RR.
SS.
TT.
U U.
VV.
WW.
XX.
W.
ZZ.
ATTENDANCE RECORD
HEARINGS ARE AS FOLLOWS ON THIS 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2004:
DOCKET#2004-03 - HEIT FARMS, LTD
PLEASE legibly write or print your name and complete address.
NAME ADDRESS
John Doe 123 Nowhere Street, City, State, Zip
lu
nie g ��e0 r'5, o .r7 coR0 S/ l v.C/C: - -23 7C11-12/60 C• 'O ? /
_ IN.`"- V I L-e- G 3--? /�5' u -' 4- 2- `1" UL A-S L7,4-n - C o
onr ;3 r e rd s 73J/ e Pi'd 77 Slelt 'v /1-4 -o7,-.ie,4 (O ?Oa
,,e r s r+-, 1 C2 / 9C_o t-G L ci 3
, pay\ 4, 1\ bkRt216S 4r f\. t1 Sk , lt , 1 Ft. &yPIa ;I Crsent ` rt r,t� O/AY "
St1r1/J L
/J7Afi JA-,Uh p R gL R7// (lice 3 F{. /v -4( N ( .6 h't c(o 421 < '
p.A\WInO fitN aNC(0 w, a-6 A`J sis 1ooii; 0&jv&, co aOd- I1
&f nY1ybUvGAN SasW. 14AmeDFAJ fve ao0 &NaLEwoocl 0080/10
,Ert�AMlnf WAt_DrnAN] tSSaS- E c•-, CNWoc) .\)1Z-Ivt Auizo2aA Co. COO i3
k.LIM&"T%f k?trN, 4/CM/D 4S 20 tic 2. a'7 Fo2r 1„kr n-) &() 0)6:il
(YG1lA/C) _srAvy, ;(l-f 'J Sit u,y-HP-17' /ire 2r,yti +dn, n3ID k co t
APdWeri 41$ #9.L7�//fr rf A?raia4 r , ,--0d 3
{GY0 ,V,< 16- -C. Li„114.,4 s - -4' 3-/s-i w„ i do Q-0�0-z
/nay iti
�i ,z- Javov uJezz- f1 ip6o/ no t2&21
/�1a,h 1-, CI,/ Gs`Is f Ton' 4cQ (7oni74Nvrce (-,-t--,,\I Co . oo22. .
fC.sGt. 02� ', WC/2_ Z:3 PLl f4-ev)' I ICI lo S0cSJ
/L "Jr- t OlilU / /0102 Intl CC ds a Lion-A_ ucT; 1
ATTENDANCE RECORD
HEARINGS ARE AS FOLLOWS ON THIS 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2004:
DOCKET#2004-03 - HEIT FARMS, LTD
PLEASE legibly write or print your name and complete address.
NAME ADDRESS
John Doe 123 Nowhere Street, City, State, Zip
94a -7/.a e-27B72-71-72-71- z �� c_5 13 e r, // Y .. c. 'eel � a , c., —.r) c _ ≥C /
� oiv/� Rr(' /�AR Ar J / 3? 7 L-Vc s 2o t-r j<7. 2, , 6z / -
2 r,t � 1/71, et- a? S /) .1?/y�"( 3` 1 V.) ( @G 7- �TYta,,,�Z5, T .7 2 62, zJ _( c,.-V -,_--„LV)..etip ,.._
Q31HI I
c j. & E ct'rsoh ^ ok J5
j/v ' >` uer �p /% .1,Hl 1�,� .,� . 72 ?o la/CP e2 Z, 7:7L,Kgo 0ini Cc ili; 2i
IA) a- J1 q ex- 99ly GUQC_ X23 F H Lic 7' n : C' 220 02/
eN e it()a 1 eJ .e.-r- y 9yg6 4'C/A . i -F f .L-k p f v Ill, Cato go 61- (
S-VI tY Le 1 al U, e d' Q Q/) (loci, 2:5 f-1-- A, i[ /1-LT) , - &4/o ?6 c 2/
a ,... .C.--2-,...,-,en. /&'G /� /f� ig ��1"--�-- G ; koG
e 11— A. .Sfcfrn on // o / /rt/d,,i, /8 A-itAn? ,-, co .9062/
.--- s--- ‘1/4,,,, , 1- \S S . Qu"uv. L30,* 1-.,.1csx.,.„-a/ No 18 iJisA„ has --e-1 Q
iE%v' N ST 3�t j tee4'-(- Lo r 6,/,n oNT C o 805-�'�
7W 12�i F/�ir i �j,Z,�S ///D4 l/1. e 'JO 'f J Y ri, go x./
in/AA e- 1x . Hr'IC ///as Y w c R- 27 F . /afro t-- 49 '"--c-7 Oil /
q, kei (7ter-74 FW9c std ,2h' r---i. L,t p;e/J1 C'' 9wa.(
7/
ATTENDANCE RECORD
HEARINGS ARE AS FOLLOWS ON THIS 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2004:
DOCKET#2004-03 - HEIT FARMS, LTD
PLEASE legibly write or print your name and complete address.
NAME ADDRESS
John Doe 123 Nowhere Street, City, State, Zip
1..‘tJa-A Rt Lf CR 1123 O v(ZD -to fotrZT LuPTUnD Co 2Dta(
LLca ( o\ it Qoticp wCk as 4- kJ-0-0=1 , CcD E0Coz I
erl ern>1t nv I keg t Lori"? tali- Fr �.0 fon , £ Cue;94
vewnwt-e•C- (Ca ( (i)ck)cP( ti�f-Ok, C0 906x(
Wt L 2U , T LuPrON
Hello