HomeMy WebLinkAbout20040728.tiff STATE OF COLORADO
WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING
November 29, 2002
Case No. PF-1021
TRANSCRIPT OF TAPE RECORDED PROCEEDINGS
The PORTION of the Planning Commission Hearing proceedings, In
Re: REI, LLC c/o Christine Hethcock, Applicant; Sections
4 , 5, 8 , 9, 10 & 17 , TCN, R65W of the 6th PM, Weld County,
Colorado; Request , PUD Final Plat for the 2nd Filing of Beebe
Draw Farms, was heard before the Weld County Planning
Commission, at the Weld County Public Health/Planning Building,
Room 210, 1555 North 17th Avenue, Greeley, Colorado.
MICHAEL MILLER, President
PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT
BRYANT GIMLIN JAMES ROHN JOHN FOLSOM
STEPHAN MOKRAY CATHY CLAMP
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT
Monica Daniels-Mika, Department of Planning Services .
Pam Smith, Department of Health.
Drew Scheltinga, Department of Public Works .
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
/`CENS'tArt A: EZ/D/j 9 3
2004-0728 r� CO 0-
2
SPEAKING TO THE APPLICATION
Jim Fell , original applicant, current consultant .
David Clinger, representing the applicant .
David Schupp, Environmental engineer, for the applicant .
Chuck Carpenter, .Esq. , .oil .and.gas, representing. the.developer.
Chris Greneaux, representing Kerr-McGee Corporation.
Dale Hayhurst , representing Encana Energy Resources .
David Padgett, representing Patina Oil and Gas .
Molly Summerville, Esq. , representing Anadarco.
Scott Knutson, representing Kerr-McGee Gathering.
Carl Jebson II , 20121 Road 42 , LaSalle . Property owner.
Donna Harr, neighbor, Pelican Lake Ranch.
John Jebson, 20121 Weld County Road 42 .
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
3
1 [The tape recorded REQUEST PF-1021, as set forth on page
2 one is transcribed as follows : ]
3 CHAIRMAN MILLER: The next case we' re going to hear
4 is
5 PF-1021 . The applicant is REI , LLC, care of Christine
6 Hethcock.
7 The request is PUD Final Plat for the 2nd filing of
8 Beebe Draw Farms, for 406 lots . The location is south of and
9 adjacent to Weld County Road 32 , east of and adjacent to Weld
10 County Road 39, north of and adjacent to Weld County Road 38 .
11 Monica .
12 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Monica Mika, Department of
— 13 Planning Services . I guess before I go into my staff
14 presentation, Lee Morrison does have a question he' d like to
15 answer for the record.
_ 16 MR. MORRISON: Yes . Kerr-McGee, among -- well ,
17 Kerr-McGee specifically has alleged that the applicant did
18 not provide the 39-day notice pursuant to 24-65 . 5 (101) .
19 And I ' m wondering if there' s any representatives of
20 Kerr-McGee or if the applicant can address that allegation as
21 to whether or not notice was sent out as part of the process,
22 as currently required prior to the first hearing, in the land
23 use process -- land-use approval process?
24 There are other letters from other mineral interest
25 owners that raise other related issues, but don' t raise the
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
4
1 issue of lack of notice . So would someone want to
2 address that?
3 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Please come forward, give us your
4 name and address, and --
5 MR. GRENEAUX: My name is Chris Greneaux, and I'm a
6 landman for Kerr-McGee, Rocky Mountain Corporation. Address is
7 1999 Broadway, Suite 3600 , Denver, Colorado.
8 CHAIRMAN MILLER: What was your last name, again?
9 MR. GRENEAUX : Greneaux, G-R-E-N-E-A-U-X. And as to
10 Mr. Morrison' s --
11 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Raise your microphone up. Speak
12 up. There you go.
13 MR. GRENEAUX: Is that better?
14 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Yeah.
15 MR. GRENEAUX: Does that work?
16 CHAIRMAN MILLER: You -- speak right into it .
17 MR. GRENEAUX: Okay. As to Mr. Morrison' s question
18 about the letter that was submitted by Kerr-McGee, as to the
19 lack of notice under House Bill 1088, I would like to defer to
20 the applicant to address whether or not the specific notices
21 were sent out .
22 Kerr-McGee submitted that letter in objection to lack
23 of notice at that point in time . We did receive notice under
24 the current county statutes, which provide for 30-day notice
25 under -- under the current code .
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
5
1 So I am not aware as to - - I ' d like to let the
2 applicant address whether or not notice was provided under
3 1088 .
4 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. Lee, the requirement is 30
5 days notice --
6 MR. MORRISON: Mm-hmm.
7 CHAIRMAN MILLER: -- is that correct? So you' re
8 acknowledging that you did get 30 days notice?
9 MR. GRENEAUX: As per the county statute, correct .
10 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Is that any different from the
11 state statute?
12 MR. MORRISON: Well, yeah, the process is somewhat
13 different . They may affect the same -- may result in the same
14 notice .
15 One is required from the applicant, and one -- and
16 we' re working to reconcile these differences . But one is also
17 then required from staff at this point in time .
18 CHAIRMAN MILLER: And you got the one from the staff?
19 MR. GRENEAUX: We did, yes, sir.
20 CHAIRMAN MILLER: But you didn' t get the one from the
21 applicant?
22 MR. GRENEAUX: That is our belief, yes . And I' d --
23 I ' d like to go further and just say that that was mentioned in
24 the letter. However, since we did receive notice under the
25 county statute, we are willing to forego that, since we are --
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
6
1 CHAIRMAN MILLER: All right .
2 MR. GRENEAUX: We do have other issues to bring up,
3 as I'm sure Mr. Morrison has pointed out .
4 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Is that satisfactory?
5 MR. MORRISON: That' s satisfactory. If that notice
6 is sufficient for them to participate, and they' re not going to
7 raise that issue, why, we can proceed.
8 CHAIRMAN MILLER: So you are acknowledging that you
9 accept the notification that you've got, as being sufficient?
10 MR. GRENEAUX: No comment -- no -- yes .
11 CHAIRMAN MILLER: You have to comment .
12 MR. GRENEAUX: Yes -- yes, we do, but we would -- we
- 13 do obviously want to speak to the other issues --
14 CHAIRMAN MILLER: All right . Okay. You' re not
15 giving up the right to speak to the other issues .
- 16 MR. GRENEAUX: Right . Yes .
17 CHAIRMAN MILLER: We' re just -- we've settled the
18 issue of notification.
19 MR. GRENEAUX: Absolutely.
20 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay.
21 MR. GRENEAUX: Is that it?
22 CHAIRMAN MILLER: That' ll be fine.
23 MR. GRENEAUX: Okay. Thank you.
24 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Go ahead and have a seat .
25 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Okay. Monica Mika. What we' re
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
7
1 going to go through is a series of pictures and a map that' s
2 going to give you a better understanding or feeling of this
3 particular subdivision.
4 As proposed, we' re looking at a final plat for those
5 areas identified in green. You will note that there is --
6 there are two areas associated with this, and the middle area,
7 which is this area right in here, as well as the lot -- Outlot
8 A -- Outlot A is not part of the final platting process . This
9 middle area has already received a final platting for 188 lots.
10 So much of the discussion today is concerning just the green
11 areas .
12 what we' re looking at is a total of 2 , 307 acres, and
- 13 of this, it' s divided into approximately 406 residential sites,
14 with an average lot size of 2 . 5 acres . Also included in this
15 development is a 36-acre outlot for a school site location, and
16 approximately one acre area identified for fire district area.
17 If you look at this, roughly 44 percent of the site
18 has been dedicated for open space on the site, which is about
19 1, 000 acres . And there is approximately a 2 , 000 acre lease
20 that is associated with this development around the Outlot A,
- 21 which does pertain to the amenities .
22 The applicant is proposing that this development
23 occur over an eight-year period. They' re proposing development
- 24 to occur from approximately 38 to 58 residential lots per
25 phase. They do have a water agreement with central well that
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
8
1 does limit them to 100 residential water taps per year.
2 This case is unique in the fact that it did receive a
3 change of zone in 1983 . Subsequent to 1983 , there were three,
4 first filing plats recorded that included various activities;
5 some pertaining to the entire area subdivision, and some
6 primarily to just the internal areas .
7 There was also one case that was petitioned and
8 denied. And then you can remember, most recently they came
9 back with a substantial change. The original proposal on this
10 dealt with approximately 100 -- I mean, 801 lots .
11 You also will notice it' s a little bit different --
12 I 've given you guys copies of ordinances to look at for review,
13 because this case is being processed under a previous set of
14 rules and regulations . So you guys should all have those, too.
15 So when we' re making references to number citations, they' ll be
16 a little bit different . You' re not as comfortable with those.
17 The other unique factor in this subdivision is in the
18 Outlot A. Because this area was identified as the amenity for
19 this subdivision, to include a sundry of uses -- and I can read
20 some of those into the record -- it' s all identified as one
21 parcel . Therefore, attached to your comments today, you' ll
22 also see development standards to be employed at the time of
23 site plan review.
24 What will happen to this -- with this proposal is, as
25 the areas developed out in phases, there will also be
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
9
1 corresponding developments on the outlot, with a marina,
2 tennis court, and those types of activities, that were part of
3 the original in change of zone .
4 We have received referral comments today, and seven
5 comments have been received that were in favor of this . Three
6 surrounding property owners have written you letters in
7 opposition, and several oil and gas providers have also written
8 letters in opposition, and those were the ones that you
9 received today.
10 We did not receive referral agencies from -- referral
11 responses from three agencies; the Oil and Gas Commission, the
12 South Fire Protection District and the Platte Valley Soil
13 Conservation District .
14 It is the opinion of the Department of Planning
15 Services staff that this case does meet the requirements as
16 established in -- the key to my section here -- in Section 2813
17 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance for the following reasons :
18 that the proposed PUD final plan is consistent with the Weld
19 County Comprehensive Plan, and compatible with the PUD zoned
20 district .
21 The property in request received its change of zone
22 specifically on December 28th, 1983 . The change of zone was
23 for PUD residential units, and with equestrian residential
24 activities . Specifically those are identified, on your staff
25 comments, as equestrian center with indoor riding arena office,
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
10
1 equestrian club, building outdoor arena stables, paddocks,
2 dressage areas, jumping areas, cross-country courses .
3 In addition to that, this was also approved -- the
4 subdivision was also approved with water and other recreational
5 facilities . As proposed in the original change of zone, there
6 are approximately 19 miles of different types of trails
7 throughout this subdivision.
8 The PUD does conform to the PUD zoned district, as it
9 called for residential and recreational activities . The use of
10 buildings and structures will be compatible with the future
11 development of other surrounding areas .
12 The property is not located in a municipal growth
- 13 boundary, nor is it affected by anybody' s municipal
14 comprehensive plan.
15 The proposed PUD does conform with the performance
- 16 standard as set forth in Section 3503 of the Weld County Zoning
17 Ordinance .
18 And finally, the proposed PUD final plan will be in
19 conformance with the section -- section 50 , which deals with
20 the overlay zoned district .
- 21 Now let me take you through the subdivision, so you
22 can have a better idea.
23 This is the entry gate into the facility, the sign.
- 24 And this is all - - these amenities are located on the first,
25 final plat, which covered the first 188 lots .
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
11
1 This gives you an example of the landscaping
2 activities on the site; an existing house . This is an example
3 of one of the streets and cul-de-sacs, and it does reference
4 the oil and gas activities .
5 There' s a portion of this area that has been
6 identified as environmentally sensitive . And you will note
7 that in some of the lots, particularly those lots that front up
8 to the reservoir, there is a EPA identified environmental
9 assessment area. And it ' s approximately 300 feet, and in some
10 places, it ' s a little less .
11 This identifies into the lots A for the outlot . It
12 is served by a private roadway.
- 13 One of the components and elements associated with
14 the subdivision is for the identification of an eight-acre RV
15 and storage facility to be utilized by the residents . And this
16 is an area where they started to undertake this activity.
17 This is some additional oil and gas in the area.
18 This is located in Outlot A.
19 And I guess I need to say it was a really dreary day
20 when I went out to take these pictures.
- 21 So this shows you the existing marina ramp in the
22 outlot, and you can see Milton Lake to the back.
23 There was some question, and we have a hard copy of
- 24 this, whether or not there were -- this was part of an area
25 identified for coal and mineral extraction, and this map was
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
12
1 scanned in, and we have some hard copies . And we just needed
2 the confirmation that yes, it is part of that . And it was part
3 of the previous records as well , as far as the coal exploration
4 onto the site.
— 5 And with that, I can answer any questions that you
6 might have . And I note that Pam' s here, Drew and Dawn, to
7 answer additional county questions .
8 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Thank you. Are there any
9 questions for Monica?
- 10 Just for point of clarification, we are bound to deal
11 with this on the code that was in place when the application
12 was made in 1983 ; is that correct?
— 13 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Yes, that' s my understanding.
14 That' s how it' s been processed up to this point .
15 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Jim.
16 MR. ROHN: Why is a development this large - - why
17 were they not required to use some sort of a septic system,
18 instead -- or a sewage system, instead of septic?
19 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: In 1983 , when the application was
20 proposed, the applicant apparently sought different --
- 21 different opportunities to take care of the sanitary sewer.
22 And it was approved at the county at that time . There is some
23 documentation in the file that the county did accept a
- 24 concentration of 800 septic systems to be located in this area.
25 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Any other questions? Thank you,
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
13
1 Monica. Would the applicant please come forward. State your
2 case .
3 MR. FELL: My name is Jim Fell . I , at the present
4 time am a consultant to Beebe Draw Pelican Lake Development .
5 Up until March of this year, I was in charge of the
6 development of the project, and I resigned at that time, but
7 agreed to stay on as a consultant .
8 We have hired the outstanding land planner in the
9 area, and maybe the outstanding land planner in the country in
- 10 David. And he has been awarded various and sundry awards from
11 numerous - - numerous and different planning organizations .
12 David Clinger has been in this business for about 30
- 13 years, and when we had the -- the last time that we had applied
14 for Filing 2 , and it was turned down, we thought we' d better
15 get with it , and be sure and cover those things that had been
16 brought up by the others . So David has undertaken to re-plan
17 this project, and with that, I' d like to turn it over to David
18 Clinger.
19 MR. CLINGER: Monica, could I have that picture of
20 the plan on the screen put up?
- 21 CHAIRMAN MILLER: State your name and address?
22 MR. CLINGER: Yes . Mr. Chairman, members of the
23 commission, my name is David Clinger.
24 And I 'm a land planner with a terrible cold. I 've
25 been fighting this sinus infection for some time, so I hope you
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
L
14
1 can understand me . Can you hear me all right?
2 This project , Pelican Lake, is 3 , 471 acres . That' s
3 the total area.
4 The Filing No. 2 , which is the area in green, as
5 Monica stated, is 2 , 307 acres .
6 In Filing 1 , the area in -- the white area in the
7 center, that was approved, and that is under construction for
8 188 lots .
9 The current filing plat that we' re asking you to
10 approve is for 406 lots . This will be a total of 594 lots .
11 We are asking for the 406 lots, which is somewhat
12 less than what you approved when we came before you last
- 13 December. I don' t know if you recall that . Some of you were
14 on that commission -- this commission, and some were not .
15 But since we've gone into this detailed plan, we now
- 16 actually have less lots than you approved when you gave us the
17 okay for this substantial change, to allow us to go ahead and
18 process this plat .
19 The open space in this Filing 2 is for 1, 007 acres,
20 approximately, which is 44 percent of all the land. This is
21 one of the highest open space acreage percentages I have ever
22 seen in my thirty years.
23 The total of the 1 and 2 filings, combined, is for
- 24 approximately 1, 596 acres, which is 46 percent of the overall
25 site . The minimum lot on this plan will be two and a
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
15
1 half acres .
2 In the first plat, in Filing 1, the lots were a
3 little bit smaller. And we decided, on this re-design and this
4 lowering of the density and the increase in the open space, to
5 make all the lots a minimum of two and a half acres, which
6 would conform to your code, for lots with septic fields .
7 After the filing was approved, the developer went out
8 there and spent 1 . 5 million dollars, relying on the 1983
9 approved PUD. This was approved -- this entire project, in
- 10 1983 for 801 lots . Keep in mind, we' re asking for 594 now.
11 Went out there and built a large water tank, complete
12 water distribution systems, and brought them into the
- 13 subdivision, and spent 1 . 6 million dollars relying on that
14 approval .
15 As James indicated, why are -- why was this approved
16 with septic fields? Well, when it was approved out there, they
17 did extensive studies and found that the soil was such that it
18 would easily handle the septic systems, rather than building a
19 plant out there.
20 Since that time, we have developed additional
- 21 technology, and hired one of the best septic system engineers
22 in the state, and he will be addressing, briefly, because I
23 know you've been going on here for sometime, how these septic
_— 24 systems work.
25 And we formed the Beebe Draw Metro District to look
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
16
1 after these septic systems . This will be one of the first
2 times in the state -- I 'm now working on a couple others --
3 where after these septic systems have been installed, with the
4 full approval of The Health Department, they will be maintained
5 not by the homeowners, or anyone else, but by the metro
6 district, and they have professional people that will be
7 maintaining these systems to see that they are working
8 properly, and they will have a minimum maintenance schedule,
9 which Mr. Schupp will go into in detail on the maintenance
- 10 of this .
11 Many people when they have homes and they have septic
12 fields, they don' t maintain them properly. And this has been a
- 13 problem, and this has been thoroughly addressed.
14 Also in relying on the approval of this overall PUD
15 zoning, the developer, to date, has invested 5 . 6 million
16 dollars in infrastructure on this property.
17 I have a few pictures that I'm going to hand out .
18 Some of you probably have seen these in the past hearing, but
19 just for the record, I 'd like to give them out to you, again.
20 MR. MORRISON: Are these in the application, or are
21 these new?
22 FEMALE VOICE: (Inaudible)
23 MR. MORRISON: Do you have another set for Planning?
- 24 [Inaudible comment . ]
25 MR. CLINGER: Monica, here' s a set for you. Yeah, in
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
17
1 number -- number one, and Monica had some slides on the screen,
2 it shows the entry sign and the entry building. The entry
3 building is also used by the Sheriff' s Department, as an area
- 4 out there for them to kind of use as a satellite office out
5 there in the country.
6 Number 2 shows the big water tank that was built .
7 Number 3 is the community building. This is where the sales
8 office is located, and its currently the community building.
9 This architectural style is what we might call
10 "Parkitecture . " It' s kind of patterned after the national park
11 architectural theme . And I think it' s a very beautiful
— 12 structure, and we intend to carry this theme throughout the
13 project as it develops . This will later on be turned over to
14 the homeowners as a community building.
- 15 Then the next -
- number 4 shows the marina that has
16 been built out there . Boat slips and ramps ._ P That was
17 constructed in the past year.
18 And 5 and 6
just shows some general pictures of areas
19 that have been re-vegetated to preserve the soils out there,— 20 and they have a very vigorous program for re-vegetation.
21 Now, Filing No. 1 was approved --
22 CHAIRMAN MILLER: How big is the water tank?
— 23 MR. CLINGER: Pardon me?
24 CHAIRMAN MILLER: How many gallons do you have in
25 that tank?
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
18
1 MR. CLINGER: J. L. ?
2 MALE VOICE : Three million.
3 MR. CLINGER: Three million. Filing 1 was approved,
4 of course, and they started construction. But Filing 2 was
5 denied for technical reasons, and a lot of it had to do with
6 the septic systems .
7 And so in 2001, in December, these technical issues
8 were addressed. The density -- we came to you, and promised
9 the density would be lowered, open space would be increased,
- 10 the minimum lots were increased to two and a half acre minimum.
11 Maintenance of all the septic systems was placed
12 under the metro district, and a substantial hearing was held,
- 13 and your board, and the county commissioners agreed that there
14 was a substantial change in the plan, and therefore agreed to
15 hold these hearings on this revised plat for Filing 2 , and
16 that' s why we' re here today.
17 Now the plan, as you can see on the screen, what I 've
18 tried to do in this re-design, is try to cluster the houses in
19 groups, rather than just spread them all out . And I 've tried
20 to locate them in conjunction with the rolling topography out
- 21 there, and take advantage of the terrain.
22 And I 've integrated the equestrian and pedestrian
23 trails, so that they wind throughout the development , lead down
- 24 to the clubhouse, and then lead over here to this Outlot A,
25 which is the main amenity area. And that' s when the future --
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
19
1 the clubhouse will be built for the swimming pool , tennis
2 courts, and amenities for horse activities will occur, along
3 with the marina.
4 We then were asked to address other issues . We were
5 asked with this plat -- could I -- turn that off, again? Or
6 maybe I should go over here . Can you hear me all right?
7 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Yes .
8 MR. CLINGER: We were asked to address what areas we
9 are going to landscape, and so we indicated these landscaped
- 10 areas which would occur at the main entrances from the south,
11 and the north, and around these key intersections .
12 These areas will be landscaped with xeroscape
_ 13 materials to enhance these prime spots on the site . We' re also
14 going to landscape this area, which is where the security gate
15 will occur, which leads out to the main amenity area.
16 Now all these roads in here are public roads, except
17 beyond this point out to the amenities -- the amenity area.
- 18 Those roads will be private .
19 So we' re going to have a gate there, and there' s a
20 large roundabout . Before the gate will be a box here, where
- 21 you insert your homeowner card, or a code, and if you have
22 clearance, then you will proceed through the gate . If you do
23 not have clearance, and you' re not a member of the amenity
24 area, then you merely turn around and come out .
25 This has worked very well for projects we've designed
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
20
1 all over the country. Rather than putting the security card
2 right in front of the gate, and then if you' re denied, you have
3 to back up. There' s people in back of you, and it becomes a
4 real problem. So this way, it allows people who don' t belong
5 there just to go out -- turn around and go out the sites .
6 We've also located throughout the property these
7 common mailbox areas, and that' s on the plan. There' ll be
8 three of those. And these are designed as common mailbox
9 areas, and as bus stops . And these are designed also to be
- 10 handicapped accessible .
11 These will also -- these facilities will also be
12 designed with the parkitectural theme, with the same roof,
- 13 materials, logs, et cetera. Also the signs, I think as you saw
14 the first signs, those will continue with this patterned forms
15 and this parkitectural motif .
16 The mail box areas and the bus stops, have all been
17 cleared and approved by the postal department, and with the
18 school district . We met with them as to locations, and with
19 respect to the size and numbers and spaces with the facilities .
20 So that' s all been approved by these agencies .
- 21 Now in many subdivisions, people really don' t pay
22 enough attention to what occurs on the lots . I 've talked about
23 the open spaces, and how we' re going to integrate the trails,
- 24 et cetera, but what we' re doing here on these lots is, I think,
25 somewhat unique.
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
21
1 For instance, this area in the green - - the dark
— 2 green, or medium green, that area -- those disturbed areas
3 shall be seeded with native grasses or other approved
4 xeroscape .
5 The houses must be a minimum of 1, 900 square feet,
6 and must include a three-car garage . The maximum building
7 height will be two and a half story, and all garages must have
8 side entries . They cannot occur in the front of the house .
9 All lots will have to have a 50-foot side setback.
10 Each individual lot will be allowed to have a fenced
11 paddock for horses . Keep in mind that only twenty percent of
12 all the lots can have horses . All other lots cannot have
— 13 horses, and that is on the final plat . Those lots have been
14 indicated on the final plat .
15 In the fifth paddock area, it can only be as large as
- 16 five percent of the total lot area . We' re not going to let
17 horses graze all over this land. They' d overgraze.
18 A typical barn will be permitted on these twenty
19 percent of the lots . And that typical barn can only be 864
20 feet, maximum size . So we don' t want these barns to become
— 21 these big metal barns which dominate the scene .
22 The area around the house, we want to landscape that .
23 But again, that area cannot exceed -- I believe it' s five
— 24 percent, again, of the total lot . The idea is to just
25 landscape the area around the house with plant materials and
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
22
1 irrigation, but the rest of the lot cannot be irrigated with
2 the water system. It' s to preserve the water consumption,
3 lower water consumption.
4 And these lots, also, where it is going to be
5 irrigated, must use xeroscape material, and must be approved by
6 the architectural committee .
7 The septic fields are indicated here, and those will
8 average 5 to 7 thousand square foot, including a primary and a
9 secondary system. So that has been allocated on the site .
10 The design and installation of all septic systems
11 must be under the supervision of the Weld County Health
12 Department , and inspection will be under the jurisdiction of
- 13 the metro district .
14 So those are just some of the items that we' re trying
15 to look at to create a really first-class, quality project as
- 16 it' s developed.
17 Now, the oil and gas people are here, and over the
18 years Mr. Fell and his group have worked very closely with
19 them. And if you' ll look closely here, you can see it better
20 on Filing 1 , all these oil and gas tanks and batteries have
- 21 been surveyed out on the property. We spent about two months
22 going out there and surveying those. And before I created this
23 new plan, those were placed on these maps with all the
- 24 environmental overlays, so that those only occur in the open
25 spaces .
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
23
1 We' re looking at 400-foot diameter, or 200-foot
— 2 radius, where you have a tank and a battery, and 300 where you
3 only have a well . And that conforms with the Weld County Code .
4 So those have been indicated in the open spaces .
5 Also Monica talked about this environmental zone.
6 There was a complete study that took about two and a half
7 years, and was fully approved by the EPA, Division of Wildlife,
8 and the National Wildlife Service . And that area precludes any
9 development along the reservoir.
- 10 The reservoir attracts terrific amounts of bird life;
11 migratory and some resident . And so they wanted that area not
12 to be developed. And so that has been incorporated in the plan.
- 13 In addition to that, there is a building setback
14 beyond the environmental zone . And then the Planning
15 Department asked us, as well as the federal agencies, to
16 allocate areas along here which indicates the building
17 envelopes; the only places on the lots where you can build. So
- 18 they' re sure that no one later on will go out there and build
19 within these setbacks . And the septic systems are located
20 within these building envelopes .
21 So you can see that this plan is one where we' re
22 trying to marry the feeling in (inaudible) of this high plains
23 environment . We' re trying to create architecture that, again,
- 24 has a good feel and essence of trying to capture the beauty of
25 this area.
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
24
1 I'm going to sit down for a minute and then I ' ll
2 conclude, right after David Schupp spends a few minutes talking
3 about these septic systems . Okay. I ' ll be right back after
4 he' s finished. Thank you.
5 MR. SCHUPP: Good evening, members of the commission.
6 My name is David Schupp. I 'm a Colorado Registered Civil
7 Engineer, and have spent about 35 years or more in the process
8 of developing and designing, installing and inspecting septic
9 systems .
10 In fact, I served on the committee with the State
11 Health Department in 1966 , which wrote the first state, ISDS
12 Regulations . So I 've been associated with this process for
13 quite some time, as you can see .
14 The soils at this site have been extensively tested
15 and investigated for the suitability of on-site treatment,
16 prior to dispersal . And I would like to emphasize that word,
17 "treatment . " These are not simply disposal systems .
18 What we have proposed to the Health Department, and
19 have in fact submitted a prototypical design, even, are for
20 subsurface sand filters . This soil at this site is highly
21 uniform, and also very highly permeable . It percolates at
22 rates of less than three minutes per inch over the entire site.
23 This is too fast to meet the regulations for a conventional
24 septic system.
25 And so we are proposing to build, as I said,
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
25
1 subsurface sand filters for each lot, which will be able to
2 treat the effluent on site, prior to dispersal into that
3 permeable soil .
4 Just a word about the size, because the size is
5 relatively different than, say, a conventional leech field and
6 clay area which might be three or four thousand square feet .
7 These, by contrast, take something in the range of a thousand
8 square feet . And so the five thousand to seven thousand square
9 foot envelope that you saw on Mr. Clinger' s design is more than
- 10 large enough to duplicate the system two or three times over.
11 However, this type of system normally does not
12 require a complete re-building. What you do instead, after
- 13 perhaps 25 years, is take out the top soil , remove the pipes,
14 scrape off the biomat that is formed in the top two inches of
15 the sand, replace it with new sand, put the pipes back on, and
16 you' re ready to go back into business . So that envelope which
17 you see is more than generous .
18 We felt that the health -- did you have a question,
19 sir?
20 MR. MOKRAY: Yeah. Could you describe in a little
- 21 more detail how the systems work?
22 MR. SCHUPP: Yes . It is, as I said, a sub-surface
23 sand filter -- a single pass sand filter -- which means that
- 24 the effluent is distributed over the entire surface of --
25 MR. MOKRAY: So you have no tanks?
L-MAC R & T 303 .798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
26
1 MR. SCHUPP: Oh, no. No, that' s not true . Each lot
2 will have its own septic tank. It will then have a dosing
3 chamber of -- depending on the size, the number of bedrooms,
4 the size will depend on the number of bedrooms, and that dosing
5 chamber will receive enough effluent so that a pump, when it
6 kicks on, will distribute that much effluent over the entire
7 surface of the sand filter at once.
8 MR. MOKRAY: So your tanks are collecting the solid
9 material?
- 10 MR. SCHUPP: Yes, sir. And they -- they will be on a
11 scheduled maintenance system, they will be inspected once a
12 year, and pumped on the average of at least once every three
- 13 years .
14 MR. MOKRAY: So what' s different about these systems
15 over a normal system?
16 MR. SCHUPP: The difference is that you treat the
17 material through the sand filter before it goes into the
18 ground.
19 MR. MOKRAY: "Treat it . . . " meaning what? How do you
20 treat it?
- 21 MR. SCHUPP: Sand filtration is one of the oldest
22 methods of sewage treatment known to man, as far as I know,
23 other than dumping it in the Ganges, or some place like that .
24 But what happens is that a biomat -- a mat of
25 bacteria, if you will , forms on the surface of the filter, and
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
27
1 that' s fed by the material that is being pumped out to it
2 periodically, and the -- again the size depends on the number
3 of bedrooms, and it' s designed to feed the system, probably, on
4 the average of one to two times per day. You don' t want to
5 feed it any oftener than that .
6 But it then -- it' s filtered through the biomat
7 through this mass, if you will, of bacteria, which then,
8 essentially eats the food that' s being submitted to it, and
9 then it goes on down through the sand filter. These filters,
10 we have proposed that they be four feet deep, which is twice
11 the state requirement, by the way.
12 MR. MOKRAY: The beds are four feet deep?
- 13 MR. SCHUPP : The sand filter --
14 MR. MOKRAY: Yeah.
15 MR. SCHUPP: -- is four feet deep, yes . And it goes
- 16 through the biomat, and then through the filter, and then into
17 the -- into the existing ground. The soils tests that we have
18 done over the entire site show that ground water depth is not a
19 problem, because it ' s in excess of 30 feet, virtually
20 everywhere that we tested. And -- but because of the concerns
21 raised - - am I speaking too fast? I see the --
22 CHAIRMAN MILLER: No, you' re fine.
23 MR. SCHUPP: Well , I see the secretary back there.
- 24 MS . MACKLIN: No. (Inaudible)
25 MR. SCHUPP: Because of concerns raised, we have
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
28
1 proposed to institute a series of monitoring wells on the site,
2 primarily near the reservoir, to measure any potential
3 groundwater contamination that might occur. These we have
4 proposed to build as soon as we have approval , so that we can
— 5 establish a background condition against which any future
6 measurements can be compared.
7 MR. MOKRAY: How long do you intend to monitor?
8 MR. SCHUPP: Forever. That' s a part of the ongoing
9 maintenance program projected by the Metropolitan District .
10 We have written a proposal for that maintenance schedule,
11 submitted that to the Health Department for their comments
12 and approval .
- 13 And I want to stress at this point that this
14 projected maintenance schedule will in no way preclude the
15 Health Department' s ability to come and inspect . And in fact,
- 16 we will submit to the Health Department these testing records
17 on an annual basis, or any other basis that they might
18 recommend. We can do that as often as they want to, because
19 we will keep a running record. We've set up a company to do
20 just this .
- 21 This is a type of maintenance program that to the
22 best of my knowledge does not yet exist anywhere in the state,
23 although it is prevalent in other parts of the country.
- 24 MR. MOKRAY: What do you think it' s going to cost the
25 homeowner to do this?
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
L
29
1 MR. SCHUPP : We project that it will cost $11 a
2 month, and this will be paid in his taxes to -- in his mill
3 levy to the Metropolitan District .
4 MR. ROHN: Wouldn' t it --
5 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Let' s let him finish his
6 presentation.
7 MR. SCHUPP : Okay. I' d like to stress, just at this
8 point, a few things . One is that we have tried to work very
9 extensively with the County Health Department in setting up
- 10 this program to meet their needs and concerns, as well as the
11 needs and concerns of the homeowners .
12 Second, I would like to stress that we are in fact
- 13 talking about treatment, rather than just disposal .
14 Third, we are committed to groundwater monitoring, to
15 preclude any potential that might occur for contamination.
16 And fourth, we are projecting a continuous program of
17 maintenance and system monitoring. That is an on-site
18 maintenance inspection will be made annually on every system in
19 the -- in the whole development .
20 MR. MOKRAY: Have we done this before?
- 21 MR. SCHUPP: Have we done it before?
22 MR. MOKRAY: Yes. This system.
23 MR. SCHUPP: You mean the subsurface sand filter?
- 24 MR. MOKRAY: Right .
25 MR. SCHUPP : Absolutely. I've probably designed, oh,
L-MAC R & T 303 .798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
30
1 I would say three to four hundred of them in the last 35 years .
2 MR. MOKRAY: So it' s not new.
3 MR. SCHUPP: It' s not new. It' s one of the oldest
4 techniques for sewage treatment known to man. With those
5 things in mind, maybe I could entertain whatever questions you
6 might have .
7 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Jim.
8 MR. ROHN: Wouldn' t it be cheaper to just put in a
9 traditional sewer system?
10 MR. SCHUPP : No . That ' s the short answer. There --
11 as you perhaps are aware, the EPA has changed its entire
12 attitude regarding sewage treatment dramatically, like 180
13 degrees, over the last ten to twelve years . And they are now
14 fully committed to the prospect of treating sewage as near to
15 its source as possible . You don' t get any nearer than your
16 back yard.
17 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Thank you.
18 MR. SCHUPP : All right .
19 MR. CLINGER: One of the reasons that we have gone to
20 these great lengths to design this Cadillac of sewage systems
21 is because in the past there' s been residents in the area
22 concerned. And in your package, there' s a gun club concerned
23 about sewage seeping off this site onto other people' s lands .
24 And so this sand filter system, four feet thick,
25 treating the liquid effluent, is the finest technology that we
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
31
1 can come up with. And monitoring this and making sure that
2 these are adequately maintained is another item that' s very
3 important , and we spent a lot of time to come up with this .
4 Keep in mind, that the density of this subdivision is
5 one home for every six acres . So it ' s not like you've got all
6 these houses packed on a piece of land. It' s really a very low
7 intensity of use out there .
8 And I wanted to impress upon you that we really have
9 tried to do the best we could to protect the adjacent lands and
- 10 the reservoir from being contaminated. And these monitoring
11 wells will be analyzed thoroughly.
12 On -- in your -- in Monica' s staff report, she -- she
- 13 has this package on page three which talks about the items that
14 they' re recommending be -- if the project is approved, is
15 conditional upon the following. And she goes down through
16 number one, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I , J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q,
17 R, S, T, U - - V on page five . We concur with all the items on
- 18 page 3 and 4 . We have been working with her and will continue
19 to do those prior to the recording of this plat .
20 On page 5 , number V, the clubhouse and dock master
- 21 septic system envelopes shall be located on the plat . That is
22 not in this particular plat . That was on the previous Filing
23 No. 1 plat .
24 But we agree to show these facilities on the site
25 review process, when that facility is built out there in the
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
32
1 amenity area. So we' d like to have that slightly amended.
2 Number V.
3 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Monica, is that okay?
4 MR. CLINGER: W, X, Y, Z and AA are okay with us .
_ 5 And then on BB, it talked about a plan -- this was from the
6 Sheriff' s Department . Since this was written, we have met with
7 the sheriff and that issue has been resolved. The sheriff --
8 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Which number are you on now?
9 MR. CLINGER: Number - - BB on page 5 . The sheriff
- 10 was under the impression that all these roads were private .
11 And he didn' t understand that they were public roads . So we
12 have been working with the sheriff - - and so we would ask that
- 13 would be deleted, because the sheriff in writing has asked --
14 it' s not appropriate .
15 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Drew -- or Public Works, is that an
16 accurate statement?
17 MR. SCHELTINGA: Well , I 'm sorry I can' t respond for
18 the Sheriff' s Office .
19 CHAIRMAN MILLER: I mean, as far as you' re -- is the
20 county going to maintain those roads and keep them clear and --
- 21 MR. SCHELTINGA: Well, I think the rights of way are
22 to be public, but the roadways are to be maintained by the
23 Metropolitan District that has jurisdiction here, if I
24 understand correctly. Is that right, Lee?
25 MR. MORRISON: Well , they will be public roads . The
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
33
1 Metropolitan District, I think, has in their service plan the
2 ability to do some maintenance on them. But they will not --
3 and because things like snow removal are not routine within
4 developments .
5 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Right .
6 MR. MORRISON: But I believe that' s available as a
7 function of the Metropolitan District . They still will be
8 public county roads .
9 CHAIRMAN MILLER: In other words, the rights of way
- 10 will be public; they will not be private?
11 MR. SCHELTINGA: Right . But in inclement weather,
12 the county is not going to run right out there and plow the
13 roads for them.
14 MR. MORRISON: That' s correct .
15 MR. CLINGER: The Metro District has been out there
16 when we had some inclement weather, and have been doing some of
17 the plowing, and as Lee indicated, there' s kind of a joint
- 18 provision that they will go out there when it' s inclement
19 weather, because the county can' t get out there that fast, and
20 will plow the roads in inclement weather.
- 21 MR. SCHELTINGA: Yeah. And this paragraph is simply
22 stating that a plan shall be developed.
23 MR. CLINGER: Yeah. I was under the impression it
24 was saying that we were solely responsible to do this . It' s
25 kind of a joint agreement --
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
L
34
1 MR. SCHELTINGA: Yeah, I think --
- 2 MR. CLINGER: -- so that needs to be amended
3 slightly.
4 MR. SCHELTINGA: (Inaudible) a way -- I mean, all
5 they' re asking for is that you develop a plan.
6 MR. CLINGER: Okay. All right . I understand.
7 MR. SCHELTINGA: That' s -- take care of the details
8 in your plan.
9 MR. CLINGER: Yeah. Okay. I understand. Thank you
- 10 for that clarification. I understand that .
11 Number 2 , all those items are - -
12 CHAIRMAN MILLER: After we have public comment,
- 13 you' ll have an opportunity to go through all these conditions
14 and give us any changes that you ask -- that you' re asking for.
15 That ' s generally how we --
16 MR. CLINGER: Oh, I see . So you don' t want me to do
17 it now?
- 18 CHAIRMAN MILLER: No. You' ll have an opportunity.
19 MR. CLINGER : Okay.
20 CHAIRMAN MILLER: We' ll ask you if you agree to all
- 21 the --
22 MR. CLINGER: Okay.
23 CHAIRMAN MILLER: -- conditions of approval, and
24 everything.
25 MR. CLINGER: All right . Well , then I can get right
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
35
1 to my conclusion then.
2 CHAIRMAN MILLER: We' ll get to it . All right .
3 That' s what we' re looking for.
4 MR. CLINGER: Especially at this hour. All right .
5 Well , based on the fact that the PUD was approved in
6 1983 , that a substantial change hearing was approved by the
7 Planning Board and the County Commissioners, and that we have
8 addressed and will continue to address the technical issues,
9 prior to the county commissioner hearing, which are in these
- 10 items I was going through, we request approval of this Filing
11 No. 2 .
12 This final plat is important to my client to get --
13 down the road to get approved, because we need -- we need
14 finality on this . They've spent upwards of seven, eight
15 million dollars so far, and they need to know that this final
16 plat is approved so they can continue to go to the bank, get
17 the money to fund all the improvements that are required. This
- 18 is a tremendous burden on them without having the final
19 plat approved.
20 Also, as people move out there, they' re moving out
- 21 here `cause this is a planned community, and they want some
22 assurance that this area will be developed with all this open
23 space, and this plan. So a final plat puts to bed these issues
24 that protects these homeowners.
25 They want to be assured that those mailboxes will
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
36
1 occur in these locations, and that the trails and open space
2 will be built because there' s a final plat; not just zoning or
3 the PUD. They want that assurance.
4 So we formed a Metro District, and its -- its essence
5 of existence is based on the taxing district . So the final
6 plat assures that the Metro District will have the number of
7 homes here to support all the amenities that were approved in
8 1983 . So with that, we respectfully request that you approve
9 this final plat .
- 10 I think this client has really gone the mile . Over
11 the years, he' s done everything you've asked him to do.
12 I think the main issue here was the septic system,
13 which he' s tried his very best to address . And so therefore,
14 we'd ask you tonight to approve this plan, and this final plat,
- 15 so that he can go on the road and complete this project . Thank
16 you.
17 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Any questions . John.
- 18 MR. FOLSOM: This Metropolitan District, will that
19 have bonds issued to finance it , the development that you' re
20 going to proceed with under this filing?
- 21 MR. CLINGER: No, it will not .
22 MR. FOLSOM: There won' t be any (inaudible) --
23 MR. CLINGER: No. Based on the funding from the
24 homeowners taxes on the homes . There' s no bonds being
25 requested. The district is in very good condition at this
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
37
1 point, financially.
2 MR. FOLSOM: Yes . Now I asked that question
3 because --
4 MR. CLINGER: I 'm sorry. Maybe I misspoke .
5 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Mr. Fell , you' d have to come to the
6 microphone, please, and give us your name. You can just come
— 7 over to this one right here .
8 MR. CLINGER: I had one client nodding "No, " and one
9 client nodding "Yes, " so we' ll get it clarified.
10 MR. FELL: Dave, we have already issued two million
11 dollars worth of bonds, and we can continue to issue bonds as
12 needed, if we need it .
— 13 MR. CLINGER: Yes .
14 MR. FELL: Up to now, we've been able to operate on
— 15 the income that we've had --
16 MR. CLINGER: Right .
17 MR. FELL: -- except for that two million that got us
- 18 started. And we' re in complete control of that bond issue. I
19 mean it' s being paid as it was agreed to, and there' s no -- and
20 we have reserves as -- as necessary.
— 21 MR. FOLSOM: And can I continue to ask, on the 1st
22 Filing, what percentage --
23 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Use the microphone .
24 MR. FOLSOM: -- of the lots have been -- what
25 percentage of the lots have been sold up to date?
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
38
1 MR. CLINGER: I have a -- I have a figure here. The
2 first filing, 94 lots have been improved, 55 lots have been
3 sold. There are 30 occupied homes out there . Ten are now
4 under construction, and nine builder homes are under way for
5 sales .
6 MR. FOLSOM: Thank you.
7 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Cathy.
8 MS . CLAMP: Continuing on with the first phase, of
9 the improvements and amenities that were scheduled to be
- 10 completed in Phase 1, have they all been completed. Phase 1 .
11 MR. CLINGER: The main amenities are going to occur
12 out here in this Outlot area, out by the reservoir. And those
13 will basically be equestrian facilities .
14 MS . CLAMP: Were -- but I mean, are they part of
15 Phase 1? I mean, were --
16 MR. CLINGER: They were part of the Phase 1 plat, but
17 there was no provision to have all those completed before
- 18 anyone lived there . So what we' re going to do, and we've been
19 working with Monica, is to come up with a plan after this
20 overall plan is approved, that will trigger when certain
- 21 amenities go in.
22 For instance, in Filing 1, there' s only three people
23 out there with horses . We' re finding that there' s much less
24 demand than we thought, back in the ' 80s, for equestrian use.
25 So if we project that out, we' re looking at somewhere around 60
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
39
1 homes that would want horses . So as we develop, there' s no
2 need to build a stable where no one goes into a big barn. As
3 it develops, we will install these facilities .
4 We' re looking at putting the swimming pool and the
5 tennis courts in when a certain number of homes have been built
6 out there. And all this is going to be worked out with Monica
7 prior to the County Commissioner hearing.
8 MS . CLAMP: Okay. Two questions for staff : Pam,
9 with regard to the septic systems, are you comfortable with the
- 10 proposed sand filtration, that it will not release any effluent
11 or have any contamination of groundwater downstream of the
12 reservoir?
13 MS . SMITH: Pam Smith, Weld County Health Department .
14 I guess the easy answer is "Yes . "
15 MS . CLAMP: I like easy answers . The other question
16 is for Monica . And is there a requirement, because obviously
17 we don' t have Phase 1 here, thank God -- is there a requirement
- 18 in Phase 1 that all of the features of Phase 1 be completed
19 before Phase 2 is initiated, or can they -- you know, if they
20 don' t need the equestrian center, can they not build it, or
- 21 does that -- is that required to be built before Phase 2
22 begins?
23 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Monica Mika. I wanted to be like
24 Pam and just give you a "yes or no, " answer. It' s my
25 recollection that a phasing wasn' t addressed. In the first
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
40
1 phasing that I 've seen, it' s in relationship to this plat . My
2 question would be, if I 'm not sure which of the three previous
3 plats the Outlot A was identified in. And I think that' s still
4 a question on there, to my mind.
5 I will tell you that the last two plats did not
6 address the Outlot A. And based on my review of the case, it' s
7 at the -- it was at the change of zone where they actually
8 identified conceptually what the Outlot A would look like .
9 CHAIRMAN MILLER: John.
10 MR. FOLSOM: Yeah. I 'd like to ask staff . The
- 11 denial by the Board of County Commissioners, it ' s been stated
12 that three problems they had that might have caused the denial .
13 Is this correct, that septic systems was one question; density
14 was another question, and the amount of open space was the
15 third question that they based their denial on?
16 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: I guess I can' t answer that . I'm
17 not sure what you' re referring to. I can go pull the
18 resolution, but --
- 19 MR. FOLSOM: Well, my understanding is that this --
20 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: -- I don' t know what (inaudible) --
21 MR. FOLSOM: -- request was denied, there was more
- 22 units involved, and a substantial change was processed through
23 the system, and that were approached to approve a final PUD.
24 Is that correct, Lee?
25 MR. MORRISON: Well, that' s correct . But the issues
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
41
1 raised at the denial were --
2 MR. FOLSOM: Right .
3 MR. MORRISON: -- had to be addressed as a
4 substantial change. So basically the --
5 MR. FOLSOM: Well, what I still question, are those
6 the three things that were addressed at the substantial change,
7 then?
8 MR. MORRISON: Well , those were three of them. I
9 don' t know if those were the exclusive ones .
10 MR. FOLSOM: And I guess I should remember, too,
11 since I was there .
12 MR. MORRISON: Right . I just want to keep you on
13 track, that --
14 MR. FOLSOM: Yes .
15 MR. MORRISON: -- this is essentially a new
16 application, having -- there been a finding that the proposal
17 was going to be substantially different than the first
18 application.
19 MR. FOLSOM: My concern is that I wouldn' t want to
20 pass this along for the Board of County Commissioners to hear
21 if we haven' t addressed the problems that they made a denial on
22 previously.
23 MR. MORRISON: Well , I know that staff reviewed
24 the substantial change, to see that the issues that this
25 application was consistent with the approval of the substantial
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
42
1 change. So I think --
- 2 MR. FOLSOM: Okay.
3 MR. MORRISON: -- through the process, it should be
4 addressed. We can give you that information when we locate it .
5 MR. FOLSOM: Okay.
6 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Any other questions?
7 MS . CLAMP: Oh, I'm sorry, I --
8 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Cathy?
9 MS . CLAMP: When your septic engineer was discussing
- 10 the maintenance plan of the new proposed septic systems, I
11 noted that the terms of the monitoring and maintenance were
12 different than the maintenance agreement I had in my packet .
- 13 Are you going to be amending that to provide for the once a
14 year review and the every three years? `Cause right now, there
15 is no monitoring every year, and then it' s pumped every four
16 years.
17 CHAIRMAN MILLER: David, can you address that? You
18 have to come up here, David.
19 MR. MORRISON: You can just go right over here to
20 this microphone, Mr. Clinger. You have to give us your name,
- 21 though. Push the button.
22 MR. SCHUPP: My name is Dave Schupp.
23 MR. MORRISON: Schupp, yes .
- 24 MR. SCHUPP: And if you would ask the question,
25 again, I ' ll try to address it .
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
43
1 MR. CLAMP : Okay. In the -- in your comments you
2 mentioned that the -- that the individual septic systems were
3 going to be monitored once a year by the mainten- -- or the
4 Metro District, and then they were going to be pumped
5 approximately every three years.
6 MR. SCHUPP: Yes . That would be on the basis of
7 need, of course, and then the annual inspection would measure
8 the depth of sludge in the bottom of the tank, and the level of
9 scum on top, and the distance in between --
— 10 MS . CLAMP: Okay.
11 MR. SCHUPP : -- and the pumping would be based on --
12 on need.
13 MS . CLAMP : Okay. The agreement that I have in my
14 packet, which is the maintenance agreement, does not identify
15 that there is going to be annual monitoring, and states that
16 they' re going to be pumped every four years . And I just wanted
17 to know if you were going to be amending the agreement to those
18 terms?
19 MR. SCHUPP: Well, three to four depends entirely on
20 use . Sometimes you can let a tank go five years, or even six.
— 21 MS . CLAMP: Yes, depends on how many people live
22 there -- yes?
23 MR. SCHUPP: But it will depend on how many people
24 live in the home, and the level of use to which they put the
25 system, and the level of abuse to which they subject it .
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
44
1 MS. CLAMP: Right . But they will be monitoring it on
2 a yearly basis?
3 MR. SCHUPP: We will be monitoring on it a year --
4 monitoring it on a year' s basis, yes .
5 MS . CLAMP : And that isn' t in here, so that' s why I
6 wanted to know if --
7 MR. SCHUPP: And that' s the proposal that we have --
8 the specific explicit maintenance proposal that we've submitted
9 to the dis- -- to the Metropolitan District for its approval .
- 10 MS . CLAMP: Okay.
11 MS . SMITH: Cathy, I might be able to help you with
12 that, too, because I noticed some discrepancies in the
- 13 documents that I read, and I have -- there' s -- in the
14 application, under the sewage disposal provisions, there
15 were two different documents .
16 The back document was the sewage disposal report
17 for the Beebe Draw Farms Metro District, and the revision
18 was October of 2001 . That' s what they submitted in this
19 substantial change hearing, and it had a certain -- it was
20 preliminary and it had a certain frequency.
- 21 They talked in here about pumping the tanks . An
22 annual inspection of the system, random check for toxicity,
23 pumping the tank as indicated by measurements, but no less
- 24 often than every four years, and that tanks would be pumped
25 upon change of ownerships.
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
45
1 And then the other document that I have was -- has a
2 cover page, this J.L. Walter Consulting. And it has septic
3 tank pumping was going to be approximately every four years . A
4 regular pumping --
5 MS . CLAMP: I must have missed the second one, then.
6 MS . SMITH: There' s two documents . And they --
7 there' s overlaps, but there' s not continuity between the two,
8 and in my referral, I had a whole list of items that I wanted
9 them to address, and I think that will take care of that,
10 because it ' s not all in one document .
11 And then, I guess everyone should know, I received,
12 November 13th -- I believe that was Friday?
13 MR. SCHUPP: Yes, that' s correct .
14 MS . SMITH: I think that' s right . I received a new
15 copy of the service plan addendum, which was submitted at the
16 substantial change hearing. It has -- it still has the -- it
17 says "Revision 2 of October, 2001 . "
18 The only change that' s in there is on the last
19 paragraph of page 7 . There' s some language in here about
20 whether - - whether this would be retroactive back to Filing 1 .
- 21 And they -- they delineate out which lots would be retroactive
22 back to Filing 1 , and which ones wouldn' t be.
23 And I 'm asking, in my comments, that they make this
- 24 retroactive back to all lots for Filing 1, because that' s how
25 they had presented it at the substantial change hearing that it
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
46
1 would cover all lots, all five or six hundred lots in both
2 filings.
3 And so -- so there is -- I mean, even after I gave my
4 comments, I got a new document . It wasn' t what I reviewed, and
5 the only difference was the paragraph that broke out Filing 1
6 and Filing 2 .
7 So I've got a couple different documents that I
8 reviewed and that I 'm working off of . And I notice some
9 discrepancy between the two. And I think my referral comments
- 10 caught everything that -- where there was a discrepancy between
11 the two.
12 MR. SCHUPP: Dave Schupp, again, Mr. Chairman.
13 The -- that change, Pam, was in direct response to a
14 homeowner' s association meeting which we conducted on site, and
15 we found that there were a number of people who live out there
16 already who thought it was unfair to have them have to have
17 their system inspected, and them have to pay for it .
- 18 And quite frankly, the result was that paragraph that
19 eliminated them, unless they wanted to be included. It is the
20 people who already own homes in Filing 1, can still be a part
- 21 of this program if they so desire, but they don' t have to be,
22 according to the paragraph that we have submitted to Pam for
23 review.
24 CHAIRMAN MILLER: But all lots that have not been
25 built upon, and all future lots would be part of this --
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
47
1 MR. SCHUPP: Absolutely.
2 CHAIRMAN MILLER: -- matrix?
3 MR. SCHUPP: Yes.
4 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Thank you. Pam.
5 MS . SMITH: Well, just, I guess two comments to
6 that effect . How I remember that it was presented in the
7 substantial change hearing is that they had said at the
8 commissioner hearing that it would cover all lots -- all lots
9 in Filing 1 . That was part of the basis for the substantial
- 10 change .
11 The other thing is that there' s about 30 homes out
12 there already, that aren' t going to be included in this . And
- 13 if we -- we have an incontinuity as far as which homes are
14 going to be under the maintenance agreement , because we' re
15 going to have an exclusion of various lots throughout that
16 Filing 1, that are going to be excluded.
17 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Lee, do we have the authority to go
18 back and change Filing 1?
19 MR. MORRISON: Well , I don' t -- Filing 1 isn' t in
20 front of you. I think if you get all those that haven' t been
— 21 built, and those that volunteer, you' re doing as well as you
22 can do. That' s not the best, but that' s -- compared to the
23 total number of lots, number one and number two, Filing No. 1
24 isn' t in front of --
25 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Yes.
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
48
1 MR. MORRISON: -- isn' t at issue here .
2 CHAIRMAN MILLER: So we'd have to go back and change
3 the rules, and that' s --
4 MR. MORRISON: So I think the willingness of the
5 applicant to change the rules for those lots that haven' t
6 gathered some vested right by constructing a septic system
7 and building a house, is probably the best they legally could
8 do as well . So I think that issue --
9 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Kind of out of our --
10 MR. MORRISON: You know, it' s kind of out of your
11 hands . You know, that' s not the ideal technical situation, but
12 I think that' s what you can get legally.
- 13 MR. SCHUPP: Let me say very briefly that I think
14 that once the people have first had to come up with the $350
15 cash out of their pocket to pump their septic tank, they will
- 16 be requesting to be part of the district .
17 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Thank you. Any other questions .
18 Thank you.
19 MR. SCHUPP: Thank you, sir.
20 CHAIRMAN MILLER: At this time, we' ll open this
- 21 hearing up for public comment . Is there anyone in the audience
22 who'd like to speak either for or against this application
23 please come up and give us your name and address .
- 24 MR. GRENEAUX: Thank you. Again, it ' s Chris
25 Greneaux, with Kerr-McGee Rocky Mountain Corporation. The
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
49
1 address is 1999 Broadway, Suite 3600, Denver, Colorado 80202 .
2 The reason why we' re here this evening is, Kerr-McGee
3 is an oil and gas operator that operates 30 wells throughout
4 this entire development.
5 As you heard the applicant say, they have identified
6 some of the locations, or what they think are the locations for
7 the existing wells, and tank battery facilities that are
8 located on the property and appropriate setbacks for that .
9 Kerr-McGee has submitted an objection letter back
- 10 when that -- that covered the November 5th hearing. As we all
11 know, this has been continued for 30 days until here tonight .
12 Kerr-McGee has also submitted a second letter based
- 13 on a meeting Kerr-McGee and other oil and gas operators have
14 had with the applicant since - - in that time frame . And I 'm
15 not sure if that showed up in your packages here today. It
_ 16 was a late --
17 CHAIRMAN MILLER: I don' t believe it did.
- 18 MR. GRENEAUX: -- really late letter, because of the
19 timing of the scheduled hearing.
20 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Is that the letter from -- is it
21 Gorsuch or --
22 MR. GRENEAUX: Yes, sir.
23 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Yes, we do have that .
- 24 MR. GRENEAUX: Okay. And that letter really states
25 Kerr-McGee' s objections to this proposed application. I will
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
50
1 go very briefly into a number of the major concerns that we
2 have with the plan, and address some of the applicants comments
3 made in the presentation here tonight .
4 So first we' ll start out -- and again, like I said,
5 Kerr-McGee operates at least 30 wells throughout this
6 development; it operates a number of flow lines and tank
7 batteries associated with those wells .
8 Kerr-McGee, through its subsidiary Kerr-McGee
9 Gathering, operates over 25 high pressure, natural gas
10 pipelines that traverse the property. It ' s a web of pipelines
11 that go through the property, which are not depicted on the
12 plat as submitted to the county.
- 13 And that ' s very bothersome to Kerr-McGee, because
14 most of these have rights of way of record, and recorded
15 easements that should be identified on these plats .
- 16 And to our knowledge, and based on our conversation
17 with the applicant, the county has not seen anything that
18 depicts these existing lines, or flow lines from the wellheads .
19 And based on our initial review and the lot layout
20 which, by the way like the applicant has said in his testimony
- 21 here tonight, we have been cooperating and working with them
22 for over ten years now, because there is a high activity of
23 minerals, a lot of wells being drilled out here through the
24 years . So as we've been drilling new wells, we have been
25 working with them as to the location of the tanks and flow
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
51
1 lines and pipelines .
2 However, since the density and the lot layout is
3 changed, that is changed in relation to where these pipelines
4 sit, and the way their plats actually reflect . And I ' ll give
5 you an example of that .
6 The applicant has prepared an exhibit , section by
7 section, with a breakdown of what is called -- and again, the
8 county has not seen this -- it' s the oil-well layout plats, as
9 they described it . And basically that was plats that depicted
- 10 the well locations, the tank battery locations, and the
11 approximate locations of pipelines and flow lines, based on the
12 oil and gas company submitting as-built surveys and information
- 13 to them. So they basically took the information we gave them,
14 put it on their plats, and said, "Here it is . "
15 And the problem with that -- as we also have big
16 problem with, is the plat that was submitted to the county as a
17 plat note, and I believe it' s plat note number four, and it' s
18 also referenced in our letter.
19 Specifically says that , you know, basically the oil
20 and gas wellbacks shown hereon, were not located and they' re
21 not verified, and it' s up to the individual lot owners to
22 verify whether this information is accurate.
23 And how will they know -- so basically if you' re a
24 lot owner, and you go out and you buy a lot, it' s not on the
25 plat as to where these lines run, they' re saying it' s not . . . "
L-MAC R & T 303 .798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
52
1 "We' re not even sure if this is the exact location of where
2 these wells and production facilities are . It' s up to you to
3 do that . "
4 So not only does that put the lot owners in a bad
5 situation, it puts the oil and gas operators in a really bad
6 situation that we' re not comfortable with. And we think that
7 issue needs to be addressed prior to this going to the board
8 hearing, because as the applicant said, we can address a lot of
9 these issues at the board hearing.
10 We feel differently because if, for instance, a lot
11 is burdened by a natural gas pipeline that needs to be
12 relocated, it ' s too late once it ' s at the board. It needs to
- 13 be addressed now in the planning stages and the lot design, and
14 our biggest concern is that the oil and gas operators have not ,
15 and Kerr-McGee specifically, has not had significant, or
16 sufficient time to review the lot layouts .
17 And another instance of that is on these oil and gas
18 well layout plats that we have been working with the applicant
19 on. The lot layout that is depicted on those oil and gas
20 plats refer to the old lot layout design before the county.
- 21 So it' s still -- and again, this is the basis for our
22 meeting with the applicant, because we looked at this and said,
23 "We need to sit down and talk. " And so the applicant did meet
- 24 with us, and after that meeting we discovered a lot of these
25 issues that we've been working and trying to identify
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
53
1 here today.
2 And that' s the reason why we' re here and saying,
3 "Whoa, wait a minute . You know, we need some more time to take
4 a look and review these issues, because they are serious . They
5 are very important to us . " And we would ask that the Planning
6 Commission consider them very serious .
7 And we think they can be addressed, but it definitely
8 needs to happen before this plat gets approved. And I don' t
9 want to take up -- I know a lot of other people would like
10 to speak.
11 I do - - would like to speak to just one other issue
12 that was brought up and said tonight . Mr. Clinger referred to
13 the oil and gas well setbacks that were identified on the plat .
14 And he mentioned there was a 300-foot tank and battery setback,
15 and a 200 foot well setback. The plats that --
- 16 MR. CLINGER: 200-foot radius from tank battery to
17 150 foot radius from wellheads .
18 MR. GRENEAUX: From wellheads, that was said. Okay.
19 And again, that was another conflicting issue that came up,
20 because that was -- as he said, what was submitted to the
21 county in the plats . However the oil and gas plats that they
22 asked us to review showed 300-foot setbacks for both the oil
23 wells and tank battery facilities .
24 And we submitted our -- I guess what we' re getting at
25 is that we' re in an ongoing negotiations with them to resolve a
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
54
1 lot of these issues, and it' s very important that we do that
2 prior to this going to a board hearing.
3 So Kerr-McGee is here tonight to ask for that
4 continuance of this hearing, so that we can have time to work
L_ 5 out those issues prior to it going to the board hearing. And
6 I -- I ' ll shut up now, and ask for -- if there' s any questions
7 that I can --
8 CHAIRMAN MILLER: In my experience with Kerr-McGee
9 and with other - - a lot of other oil companies, is the location
— 10 of flow lines are kind of fluid. They -- yeah, we think they
11 "kind of" go along here, and maybe they' re over there . How
12 accurate are you going to be able to be in locating your flow
- 13 lines?
14 MR. GRENEAUX: Very accurate . What we do is -- is
15 the - - we subscribe to one called the underground -- Colorado
16 Underground Utilities Notification Center - -
17 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Right .
18 MR. GRENEAUX: -- where we pay a fee to have locators
19 go out and physically put a metal detector to our lines and
20 basically they can do that by going from our wellhead and tying
- 21 a line to basically the existing line that ' s below the ground.
22 And they can flag the line as they basically walk the line and
23 put flags exactly where the line (inaudible - overspeak)
- 24 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Now this is a large property. How
25 long it is going to take you to do that?
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
55
1 MR. GRENEAUX: Well, that ' s -- We ' ll we've had 10
— 2 years and I guess that ' s all that ' s our --
3 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Well , we can' t give you 10 years .
4 MR. GRENEAUX: Exactly. It ' s not our responsibility
5 to do that . We certainly will -- Like I said we have provided
6 the approximate locations as we submitted earlier. We ' re
7 asking through our letters that the actual engineering locates
8 be done . And, you know, it shouldn' t take --
9 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Mark, now you' re saying that it ' s
10 not your responsibility to be able to tell the homeowners, or
11 the property owner where you flow lines are?
12 MR. GRENEAUX: Well , it is their responsibility
- 13 before they dig anywhere to have those lines located. We ' re
14 saying we want do that now. We ' re more than willing to help
15 do that . But at the same time we need some help from the
16 applicant to be able to do that .
17 MR. MORRISON: Could I ask a question? But if -- the
18 way the one call process works, if you use one call and locate
19 ' em on a map you' re still going to have to use one call when
20 you - - when the construction starts .
- 21 MR. GRENEAUX: Absolutely.
22 MR. MORRISON: All right .
23 MR. GRENEAUX: And my response to that is the way
- 24 this was laid out now is that if you have no concept of exactly
25 where that line is, and just this plot gets approved -- we had
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
56
1 a situation last year where we had -- and the lot was sold out
2 here in filing one, where we had a high pressure natural gas
3 pipe line that runs right through lot 122 . And the homeowner
4 went to close on the lot and had no idea that this pipe line
5 ran through the property. They ended up closing.
6 But again, Mr. Morrison, that goes back to if we can
7 locate those lines now and get ' em on these plats, it ' s going
8 to -- it' s going to save everybody a lot of (inaudible -
9 overspeak)
- 10 MR. MORRISON: How much time are you asking to do
11 this?
12 MR. GRENEAUX: We ' re willing to have -- I think we 've
- 13 demonstrated that now, to work within whatever it takes --
14 MR. MORRISON: Two weeks?
15 MR. GRENEAUX: Yes, I think we could probably do it --
16 MR. MORRISON: You can do it in two weeks?
17 MR. GRENEAUX: If the applicant did the -- The key to
18 that is having the applicant survey - - once we 've located the
19 lines, having the applicant survey them in and put them on
20 their plats to reflect the location of those lines .
- 21 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Yeah. And that won' t get done in
22 two weeks . Lee.
23 MR. MORRISON: Would that work if that had to be done
- 24 prior to the board -- the board hearing?
25 MR. GRENEAUX: I think -- I think we ' re probably
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
1_
57
1 acceptable to that .
2 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Yeah, ' cause that -- How long are
3 we looking forward ' till the board hearing?
4 MR. GRENEAUX: I 'm not looking forward to it at all .
5 MR. MORRISON: Let me rephrase that . How long will
6 it be until the board hearing? Is it scheduled already?
7 MR. GRENEAUX: I don' t know if there ' s pre-
8 advertisement or not . Tim is rattling his head.
9 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Staff got up and ran out, so I --
- 10 MR. MORRISON: So it ' s probably -- the notice
11 requirements are longer for PUD' s, so it ' s at least six weeks .
12 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Yeah, okay. So theoretically this
- 13 could all be done before the board hearing.
14 MR. GRENEAUX : We would certainly work towards --
15 CHAIRMAN MILLER: And it will be done before the
16 board hearing.
17 MR. GRENEAUX: And we would certainly request that .
- 18 And along with that is we ' re requesting a comprehensive surface
19 use agreement that also talks about not only the existing
20 pipelines and their locations but the road accesses which will
- 21 affect the county because we will be using basically your roads
22 to access these well sites in the future, once this development
23 is constructed out .
- 24 MR. MORRISON: And I believe those rights are
25 protected under the regulations as it is (inaudible) - - present
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
58
1 and future access .
2 MR. MORRISON: Well , they have a right to use public
3 roads . They have an obligation if they' re using overweight to
4 comply with our standards for that .
5 MR. GRENEAUX: And that ' s -- that ' s part of us
6 requesting that a surface-use agreement is entered into prior
7 to that board hearing that covers those issues and is separate
8 so that we can feel comfortable that those issues are discussed
9 and our rights are protected, and the applicant , and everybody
10 knows where the oil and gas companies are going to be on the
11 property and where we ' re not going to be . So that we don' t run
12 into issues down the road once the lot owners -- or are
13 building houses --
14 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Anybody else have any questions for
15 Chris? Cathy?
16 MS . CLAMP: I 've got two quick questions . Colorado
17 State law determines how many wells that you' re allowed to have
18 per section. To your knowledge has Kerr McGee maximized the
19 number of wells that you intend to have in this subdivision?
20 MR. GRENEAUX: There ' s no easy yes or no, like Monica
21 and -- but - -
22 MS . CLAMP: Well, if it ' s something that could
23 substantially clean up this plat before it goes somewhere .
24 MR. GRENEAUX: Absolutely. Absolutely. And that ' s
25 another phase to these negotiations that need to be worked out
L-MAC R & T 303 .798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
59
1 in a comprehensive surface use agreement .
2 And I 'm sure the applicant will mention, you know,
3 after I get up here, that there has been previous agreements
4 that were entered into 10 to 15 years ago that were based on
5 different rules and regulations that have since changed. And
6 our understanding is that even though there may be agreements
7 that took place years ago it did not address a lot of the
8 concerns we have here today.
9 And to answer your question specifically, yes, Kerr
10 McGee does have future drill sites locations within this
11 project that those locations are not identified on the plat and
12 need to be worked out in a comprehensive surface -- surface use
13 agreement that specifically details where those wells will be
14 drilled.
15 MS . CAMP : Okay. And the other question I have is
16 what is your normal procedure when you are burying high
17 pressure lines? What is your average depth?
18 MR. GRENEAUX: Right now there ' s a difference --
19 Well, there ' s a flow line which is a smaller line --
20 MS . CLAMP: Right .
21 MR. GRENEAUX: -- it ' s a two inch line that runs from
22 our wellhead to our production facility. We also have the high
23 pressure lines which are typically three (3) to twelve (12)
24 inches in diameter. And they' re buried at four feet .
25 MS . CLAMP: Okay. So it would support a roadway in
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
60
1 the - - they wouldn' t have to do substantial changes to roadways
2 as they exist?
3 MR. GRENEAUX: Again, yes, it would typically. And
4 that ' s -- that ' s also incorporated into a surface use agreement
5 because there are certain weight standards, and as they cross
6 us with roadways, we ' re going to want to make sure, especially
7 our flow lines, are encased --
8 MS . CLAMP: May need (inaudible - overspeak)
9 MR. GRENEAUX: Right . And also when they' re crossing
- 10 us with other utilities that we have enough clearance, enough
11 so that we can go back in there and sufficiently work on our
12 line, and not damage the (inaudible - overspeak)
13 MS . CAMP : But that is typically something you put in
14 the service use agreement?
15 MR. GRENEAUX: Absolutely. It ' s all detailed in
16 there . And that ' s -- that' s our goal here .
17 And I think we'd -- like I said in the meeting, we've
- 18 talked to the client , to the applicant, and they've suggested a
19 willingness to get there, to get to that comprehensive surface
20 use agreement that discusses all of that .
- 21 Again, we just have had not had time because it ' s
22 been here so quickly and we ' re still getting -- gathering
23 information --
24 MS . CLAMP: Okay.
25 MR. GRENEAUX: -- cause it' s such a large problem.
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
61
1 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Any other questions? Thank you,
2 Chris .
3 MR. GRENEAUX: Thank you.
4 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Anyone else who 'd like to speak?
5 Just come up and give us your name and address .
6 MR. HAYHURST: My name is Dale Hayhurst,
7 H-A-Y-H-U-R-S-T. I represent Encana Energy Resources . That ' s
8 spelled E-N-C-A-N-A Energy Resources . Our address is 1313
9 Denver Avenue, Fort Lupton, 80621 .
- 10 Encana operates in this immediate area some of the
11 Phase 1 , Phase 2 - - about 40 wells . Correspondingly, we have
12 access roads . We have a compressor site, which I 'm not sure
— 13 exactly where it is on the map there, as well as pipelines
14 throughout .
15 We have a problem in that we also would like to
16 request a delay. I don' t know what happened to the mailings .
17 We do not apparently have the mailings . I wasn' t aware of the
18 meeting until shortly before noon today.
19 We may be on the list . I don' t know what address
20 that was used. We have a couple of different addresses in
21 Denver. It' s -- perhaps it got lost . I really don' t know.
22 Anyway we would like to have time to examine all this
23 and to work out a surface use agreement with the developer, for
24 the same reasons that were just previously stated.
25 We do require such things as line lowering for road
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
62
1 crossings . We ' re very much concerned with our pipelines as
2 well as the set backs for the well locations . We really don' t
3 know -- have anything at present on this current development .
4 There may have been agreements executed at some point
5 in the past that I am unaware of, but right now we ' re really in
6 the dark. We don' t know hardly anything that ' s going on,
7 except what I 've observed today.
8 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Would you be satisfied with the
9 same request that we received from Kerr McGee, and a need to
10 depict the flow lines and pressure lines on the plat and also a
11 comprehensive surface use agreement?
12 MR. HAYHURST: That ' s exactly what we ' re looking for.
13 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. Thank you.
14 MR. HAYHURST: (Inaudible) couple questions?
15 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Go ahead.
16 MALE VOICE : He' s also asking for a continuance.
17 maybe should ask him if the same time line would work prior to
18 the board meeting.
19 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Yeah. If we ' re looking at four to
20 six weeks for a board hearing would that give you ample time,
21 do you think?
22 MR. HAYHURST: Assuming the weather cooperates, which
23 this has been a pretty dry weather, dry year, but , you know, if
24 we have six weeks of snow, that wouldn' t be enough. But
25 normally it should be.
L-MAC R & T 303 .798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
63
1 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. Thank you. Any one else
2 like to speak? Just come up and give us your name and address .
3 Monica? I forgot your name there for a minute .
4 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Monica Mika. Just for the record,
5 we did send a referral to Encana Energy Resources, Inc . , 1700
6 Broadway, Suite 2000, Denver, Colorado.
7 MR. HAYHURST: (Speaking away from microphone . ) That' s
8 one we (inaudible) --
9 CHAIRMAN MILLER: They change their name every
- 10 six weeks?
11 [Laughter. ]
12 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Would you like me to give you a
13 different address?
14 MR. HAYHURST: The one I just repeated would be
15 (inaudible) when I --
16 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Okay.
17 MR. HAYHURST: 1313 Denver, Fort Lupton.
- 18 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Okay.
19 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Go ahead.
20 MR. PADGETT: Yes, good evening. My name is David
- 21 Padgett, P-A-D-G-E-T-T. And I 'm a representative here on
22 behalf of Patina Oil and Gas, 1625 Broadway, Suite 2000 ,
23 Denver, Colorado, 80202 .
24 Echoing some of the things that Mr. Greneaux had to
25 say, I 'd like to bring up a couple other things . We, too, are
L-MAC R & T 303 .798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
64
1 requesting a continuance but I think the continuance should be
2 related to a couple of things .
3 First of all, do we want to -- does the board want
4 to go, or have us headed towards the County Commissioners with
5 the potential that lot lines are going to need to be removed
6 and relocated because we don' t exactly where these flow lines
7 are?
8 I will say that we have worked over a long period of
9 time with Mr. Fell and his organization, and there ' s been a
- 10 very good working relationship, but it ' s been on a well by well
11 basis, because their development has been on a partial basis .
12 Now we ' re looking at doing something comprehensive
13 over 2500 acres that affects 28 wells that Patina currently
14 operates . We ' re looking to drill potentially another 12 and we
15 have over 40, when you add Filing 1 and Filing 2 together.
16 So I think it ' s unfair that we don' t have an accurate
17 picture of all of our assets, all of our pipelines, and all of
- 18 future well locations . And what we were given at a meeting
19 last Wednesday did not match what was handed out to some today.
20 So here we are at the 11th hour. This process has
- 21 been going on for 20 years . And as an oil and gas operator
22 with substantial assets and investments out here, we 've been
23 left in the dark until very recently.
24 So I think it ' s unrealistic that we can have a
25 continuance that ' s going to get everything resolved in four to
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
65
1 six weeks until we have a very clear picture, exactly where the
2 assets are in relationship to the lots, in relationship to
3 building setbacks and all those other issues .
4 So I 'm taking a little harder stand than when my
5 colleagues did, only because I think it ' s more realistic that
6 once we know where everything is, then we can make a very
7 accurate picture on how we ' re going to resolve all these
8 issues .
9 The other thing, to my knowledge, we did not get - -
- 10 Patina did not get notice per -- from -- we did from the county
11 but we did not from the applicant . And -- but we ' re not making
12 an issue of that .
13 what we want is a clear picture of the situation out
14 there . We want to work with this developer as we have for
15 years and years and years.
16 But to have things crammed down our throat at the
17 very last minute when we ' re talking about millions of dollars
- 18 of investment on both sides of the table, I think is
19 irresponsible, and we want to make sure the picture is clear.
20 And we will work to the best of our ability to get to that
- 21 point .
22 CHAIRMAN MILLER: What period of time would you
23 consider fair?
24 MR. PADGETT: Well , I think it ' s going to take,
25 probably, to get a clear picture of all surveys of all assets,
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
66
1 both lot lines in relationship to our stuff, I think it ' s going
2 to take us two months, with the problem were going to have.
3 And maybe we can do it in four weeks or six weeks .
4 But Mr. Miller, if those lot lines move what we ' re pushing
5 towards the board is different than what you guys are
6 considering here today.
7 So I think we need to see what the total picture is
8 on the subdivision and where lot lines are exactly and where
9 set backs are for wells, future wells, existing wells, and flow
10 lines . And until we have that clear picture, which we still
11 don' t have today I think it ' s hard to put a time frame on it .
12 CHAIRMAN MILLER: I understand. Any questions for
13 Mr. Padgett? Okay. We ' ll take that into consideration. Thank
14 you.
15 MR. PADGETT: Thank you.
16 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Any one else who would like to
17 speak? Just come up and give us your name and address?
18 MS . SUMMERVILLE: Thank you. My name is Molly
19 Summerville . I 'm an attorney with the law firm of Krug Sobel
20 and Ritter.
21 CHAIRMAN MILLER: We finally meet . I 've gotten 100
22 letters from you.
23 MS . SUMMERVILLE: That ' s right . I 'm sure you have .
24 My address for business is 1700 Broadway, Suite 508 , Denver,
25 Colorado, 80290 .
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
l:
67
1 And I 'm here today to represent Anadarco ENP Company
2 LP, a company which you may know of as Union Pacific Resources
3 Company and RME Petroleum Company. And also a sister company
4 Anadarco Land Corp. , and that company was formerly known as
5 Union Pacific Land Resources Corporation, and RME Land Corp.
6 The Anadarco entities together, own all of the
7 minerals that underlay sections 5, 9 and 17, in Township 3
8 North, Range 65 West . All or parts of those sections are
9 included in the applications that REA has filed for this final
- 10 plat from Beebe Draw Farms .
11 MALE VOICE: (Inaudible)
12 MS . SUMMERVILLE: All right . Yes . I submitted a
13 letter to the board, and to the Planning Commission. It' s
14 dated October 31st . And it was entitled Notice of Mineral
15 Interest Owned by Anadarco Land Corp. , and Anadarco EMP Company
16 LP, an Objection. I hope you have a copy of that letter, and I
17 ask that that be made a part of the record in the proceedings .
- 18 As I indicated in that letter, the Anadarco entities
19 own the oil and gas under these three sections, the three odd
20 sections of land in the application. Kerr-McGee and Patina
- 21 have indicated they have multiple wells on the sections .
22 I believe that the Commission -- the Oil and Gas
23 Commission reports show that there are about 61 wells on the
24 three sections. More than 30 are operated by Kerr-McGee, Patina
25 has over 20, and United States Exploration, Inc . , also has 6
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
68
1 wells on those sections .
2 Now not all of those wells are included in this
3 application, because there are portions of sections 5 and 9
4 that are not a part of the application.
5 I wanted to just kind of pass out to you, so that you
6 could see kind of graphically and visually, what this land
7 looks like, in terms of the wells that are located on the
8 property. You can see how highly productive this area is for
9 oil and gas . So with your permission, could I just --
- 10 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Please give them to our county
11 attorney here, and --
12 MS . SUMMERVILLE: Thank you.
- 13 CHAIRMAN MILLER: -- he' ll pass them all out .
14 [Off microphone discussions - inaudible. ]
15 MS . SUMMERVILLE: At the present time, the Anadarco
16 entities do not have a surface use agreement in place with the
17 developer. There is an old surface use agreement, that was
18 dated in 1990 , with predecessor companies, but that agreement
19 has terminated by its own terms . So there is nothing right now
20 in place with my clients and REI .
- 21 And our goal here, as Patina and Kerr-McGee have
22 indicated, and also Encana, is to get a surface use agreement
23 in place that identifies and preserves the locations for the
- 24 existing well sites, the existing production facilities,
25 pipelines, access routes, and also identifies future well
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
69
1 site locations .
2 We don' t have that right now. We have, as the other
3 companies have indicated, met with the developer. We certainly
4 hope we can work towards an agreement . We've been very
5 successful in being able to do so in the past .
6 But we would like to include, as a condition of any
7 final plat approval , and as part of any recommendation that the
8 planning commission would make to the board, that there be a
9 condition for a final surface use agreement .
- 10 We also think that it would be appropriate and
11 support the oil companies who have requested a continuance of
12 the matter, because there is quite a bit of work to be done,
13 and there' s quite a bit of platting that needs to be looked at
14 and compared, because there apparently are discrepancies that
- 15 should be addressed.
16 But in the event that the Planning Commission wants
17 to go forward, and wants to make a recommendation to the board,
- 18 then what we are asking for is a condition for a surface use
19 agreement .
20 And I know that the Planning Department has included
- 21 some language in their Condition M, I believe it is, on page 4 .
22 What we would like to do is include some more specific language
23 in Condition M, if that' s the direction in which you want to
24 go. And I can give you that language now, or if you' d --
25 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Why don' t you just hang on to it,
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
70
1 and if it looks like it' s going that way, we' ll ask you to
2 read it .
3 MS . SUMMERVILLE: Okay. I have already provided it
4 to Monica, and also to Charles Carpenter, who is the attorney
5 for REI . So they have had a chance to review it as well .
6 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay.
7 MS. SUMMERVILLE: Okay?
8 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Thank you.
9 MS . SUMMERVILLE : I also want to real quickly address
10 the hard-rock minerals, because I noticed that in the slide
11 presentation there was included the coal resources map that
12 Weld County had put together.
13 And we did include an objection on the basis of the
14 hard rock mineral interests that are owned by Anadarco Land
- 15 Corp. There are significant coal resources under the property.
16 Your own county maps reflect that .
17 There is also a Colorado Coal Resources and
- 18 Development Map of Colorado that was prepared by the Colorado
19 Geologic Survey that reflects that this area has significant
20 coal reserves .
21 A geologist down at Anadarco Land Corp reviews
22 everyone of these applications, and looks at what coal and what
23 information they have about coal . So there is coal resources
24 under the property.
25 But in order to move this thing forward, what we
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
71
1 were -- the position that we' re taking at the present time is
2 that we' re not asking for a condition for the coal ; that there
3 be an agreement in place with the applicant on the coal .
4 We hope to be able to work an agreement with them,
5 and hopefully can do it prior to final platting. But we' re
6 not, at this point, asking for that condition; only for a
7 condition for the oil and gas .
8 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. John?
9 MR. FOLSOM: Lee, does this statute, in regard to
10 coal deposits the same as gravel deposits? That they shouldn' t
11 erect any improvement --
12 MR. MORRISON: Right .
13 MR. FOLSOM: -- that interferes with extraction?
14 MR. MORRISON: Well , it actually relates to zoning.
15 And I don' t recall , or I 'm not -- I 'm not sure what findings
16 were made, but I think that that issue, in terms of county
17 action, failed a long time ago.
- 18 So yeah, it does discuss it, but it relates it to
19 zoning. And I don' t think it applies at the final plan stage,
20 and I 'm not sure if it was -- at this point, whether it was
- 21 addressed. I think planning indicated there was indication it
22 was in the record. So it may have been addressed at that time .
23 I think that the time has passed to challenge the
24 rezoning based on that . And I don' t hear the Anadarco
25 indicating their intent to do so.
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
L
72
1 MS . SUMMERVILLE: If I -- if I may respond. We need
2 to - - Anadarco Land Corp needs to have the objection on record,
3 because House Bill 1088, the statute that requires that notice
4 be given to mineral interest owners requires that mineral
5 interest owners file objections with local jurisdictions in
6 order to preserve their rights, so that the objection we want
7 to be part of the record.
8 MALE VOICE: (Inaudible)
9 MS . SUMMERVILLE: To the coal , right . That we are
10 objecting the basis of the coal . But we' re not at this time
11 asking for a condition.
12 MALE VOICE: (Speaking away from microphone. )
13 (Inaudible) -- when this was passed in 1983 , that (inaudible) --
14 MS . SUMMERVILLE: Well , I don' t think that we waived
15 our rights, even at this point, to challenge that . But, yeah.
16 MR. MORRISON: And they' re two different statutes,
17 because the one counsel is referring to was recently enacted.
18 The one relating to mineral resource -- protection of mineral
19 resources is 25 years old, at least, and maybe 30 . And so --
20 and that, as I said, applies it' s own change .
— 21 The notice oppor- -- the opportunity -- the
22 requirement of notice, the opportunity to object by the mineral
23 owners and lessees is more recent, and I think that' s what --
24 so the two aren' t at odds . They' re just different laws and
25 different timing.
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
73
1 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Jim.
2 MR. ROHN: This is for Monica. Being the "newby"
3 still here, I would think since we' re talking about a PUD
4 that' s 19 years old, that most of these oil wells should have
5 floated. I mean, have there been more oil wells added since
6 the original PUD was brought forward?
7 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Probably added to, since we started
8 this meeting.
9 MR. ROHN: I knew I was in trouble . I ' ll just hide
10 now.
11 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Try it, Monica.
12 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: I think Brian addressed that
- 13 issue . But I did look up what happened, and it' s -- it' s in
14 the record. Apparently in November 13th of 1984, when this
15 case was originally proposed to the Planning Commission, the
- 16 issue of coal minerals was addressed. And there was a
17 continuance to talk about the deposits, and said that it hasn' t
18 been resolved.
19 I mean, somebody could do an exact case analysis . It
20 looks like, then, after that the case -- the case was approved,
21 it was dropped from the resolution.
22 And then in 1984, there are excerpts from two
23 different resources that cite the issue and one was from
- 24 Leonard Rice, Consulting Water Engineers, and the other was
25 from McCartney Engineering Consulting. And they do talk about
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
74
1 economic feasibility, and economic development of these types
2 of deposits would be very unlikely, what one said. And there
3 was testimony given in another one .
4 So I don' t want to summarize these . I can just
5 distribute them and put them in the public record, but the
6 issue was resolved -- I mean, it was -- at least addressed.
7 Whether or not it was resolved, I'm not sure, but I
8 did want to bring that to your attention that it has been known
9 fact that there have been -- there is coal under the site. So
10 I can enter these on here.
11 MR. ROHN: And the oil wells? I mean, is there
12 anything -- what' s going on with those?
13 MS . SUMMERVILLE: I suppose these - - certainly the
14 owners of those -- of the oil wells can tell you how many
15 additional ones have been added in the area. But since the
16 onset of this project, oil and gas has been -- has been an
17 element on this site.
18 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Lots of them. Thank you, Molly.
19 Does anyone else want to speak? Please come up and give us
20 your name and address .
21 MS . FRASER: My name is Jana Bolander Fraser. I own
22 a farm which is the north half of Section 33 . My farmhouse is
23 located on the corner of Road 40 and Road 43, so my farm is
24 approximately a mile away from this Beebe Draw Farms area, as
25 the crow flies .
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
,r.
L"
75
1 I have an objection to your. passing this, to add all
2 of these homes in this area. I have -- and this is an
3 additional reason, too, after hearing this testimony. I have
4 eight oil and gas wells on my exactly 298 acres owned.
5 My great-grandfather bought the land from the Union
6 Pacific Railroad, so I get -- I get my access fees from
7 Anadarco.
8 And those eight oil and gas wells are monitored,
9 taken care of by Patina and Prima. They are very well
10 monitored. They are monitored daily; sometimes more than
11 once a day.
12 And I divided the density here. If I had a house
13 on every seven acres, and if I had 42 homes on my little
14 half section, I can guaranty you that there would be tremendous
15 conflict between the homeowners and the maintainers of these
16 oil and gas wells, because of the traffic. The houses would
17 have to be very carefully placed, and I can' t imagine packing
18 42 houses in that area among my eight oil and gas wells on my
19 land.
20 I object to the density of housing being put in here,
21 because the area of Beebe Draw Farms is surrounded by farms and
22 ranches . And many of us are trying to continue farming and
23 ranching as long as possible.
24 For the past five years, since my father died, and I
25 inherited the farm, I've kept our herd of registered Angus
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
A-
76
1 going, and farmed with -- by having an employee .
^ 2 In April, I sold my Angus herd, and I now have rented
3 my farm to a neighboring farmer, who is an excellent farmer,
4-
4 and would be doing some grazing on my land, also.
5 You have heard from previous testimony how traffic
6 makes farming impossible . The scenery has to be moved, there
7 is a certain amount of noise with planting, harvesting. My
8 land has grazing on it . There are animal noises . There can be
9 animal smells.
10 I think this Beebe Draw Farms location, and
11 considering the number of oil and gas wells on it, and being
12 surrounded by farming and ranching -- a farming and ranching
- 13 community, if they want to put houses in there, it would be
14 more suited to a mini-ranch setting, where there would be a
15 house per 35 acres . But I very much object to so many homes
16 being put in. I think it would be quite impossible for us to
17 carry out our farming and ranching in future years, if this
18 were allowed. Thank you.
19 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Thank you. Are there any questions
20 for Ms . Fraser? Thank you. Is there anyone else who would
21 like to speak? Please come forward. You've got to be faster
22 than that . I almost sold you.
23 MS . CORNELIUS: I was waiting for another neighbor.
- 24 My name is Kay Cornelius. I live at 18000 Weld County Road 43 .
25 My family ranch is adjacent to the Beebe Draw Subdivision on
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
i
77
1 County Road 38 .
2 We have also written a letter of objection to this
3 second phase of development, and the approval of it . And I
4 just want to cover a few points that are in the letter. I
5 think you have the letter with you, written by Jane Evans
6 Cornelius.
7 The septic systems are one of the items that are of
8 concern to us . This sand hills Land, we also graze on. Land
9 that is adjacent to the built-in reservoir, and it' s very
10 fragile .
11 And there is quite a bit of wetlands that flow down
12 from where they' re building, down into a gun club area, and
13 then also where our cattle graze. That wetland eco system we
14 have serious concerns as to the viability of that going forward
15 with that density of population right next to it and above it .
16 We also are concerned about the same thing as Janet
17 Fraser, that this is very much a viable farming community
18 surrounding it in all directions . The nearest town or
19 municipality is seven miles away, with all of the modern
20 services that provides.
21 There is a large dairy, I believe maybe even the
22 largest in the county, directly south of this subdivision.
23 Frankly, we can smell and hear the noises from that dairy, and
24 so I 'm sure that subdivision would be affected, also.
25 There' s feedlots all around. There' s vegetable
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
78
1 cropping, and quite a bit of hay farming, which we are actively
2 engaged in.
3 We are concerned that that collision between the
4 density of population that is in -- that is going to be put on
5 those sand hills , colliding with rural farming, both on the
6 roads, on the side roads, on all parts of it, would seriously
7 affect our ability to continue farming there.
8 We had an incident just this weekend where we caught
9 trespassers down in the sort-of unoccupied area, adjacent to
10 the -- this area right here. They told us to get off our land,
11 because they were on the Pelican Lake Subdivision.
12 And we had to kindly inform them -- I think they were
13 drinking a little bit -- that they were probably the ones
14 mistaken and had to leave our property.
15 And so those types of incidents -- although that one
16 was probably one of the more hilarious ones -- we have that at
17 least once a week, usually on the weekends. People migrating --
18 they see all that open land, and they drive down there to the
19 Milton Reservoir and onto Pelican Lakes, and also onto Coyote
20 Ridge Ranch, where we are.
21 We also have concerns about the horse lots there . We
22 sell a considerable amount of grass-hay, and would love to sell
23 the grass-hay to those people, but we also sell grass-hay to
24 the sort of "horse ghettos" down in the Denver area, and see
25 the erosion that can result from those small acreages, even
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
r
79
1 with horses and paddocks and in small pens.
r- 2 That land, as we -- we have gas wells and oil wells
3 on ours, too, that are serviced by these guys . And they have
4 a hard time putting in grass, and -- putting it back to the
r' 5 normal states .
6 So between oil wells and the horse paddocks, and
7 equestrian centers, and all of that, I would challenge anyone
.- 8 to say that on a windy day in Colorado, which is usually fall ,
9 winter and spring, predominantly, that we wouldn' t have a
10 Sahara-type cloud coming up from there .
11 So we are definitely -- feel that this is a --
-
12 something that you should consider strongly, and as a neighbor
13 and bordering neighbor, we hope that you consider not approving
14 this. Thank you very much.
15 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Thank you. Cathy -- hold on a
16 second.
17 MS . CLAMP: Wait, wait, wait . Don' t go anywhere.
18 You mentioned there was a dairy to the south of this
19 subdivision. Is it an adjacent parcel , or how far away from --
20 MS . CORNELIUS : I believe it' s one section removed to
21 the south.
22 MS. CLAMP: One section removed.
23 MS . CORNELIUS: Correct.
24 MS . CLAMP: Do you have any idea how many head?
25 MS . CORNELIUS : I want to say it' s like a --
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
80
1 MALE VOICE: Thirty-five hundred.
2 MS. CORNELIUS : Yes. I was going to say 3, 000 .
3 CHAIRMAN MILLER: You can.
4 MS . CORNELIUS : So that' s just a -- you know, quite
5 frankly, that dairy, besides the dust and the smell that we get
6 from it, you talk about pollution, that' s light pollution, too.
7 That thing can be seen for miles around. It looks like a small
8 city there, too.
9 And you know, it' s -- I can' t imagine that those
- 10 neighbors would be very pleased with just the sights and sounds
11 of typical agriculture produced by that dairy.
12 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Any other questions? Jim?
- 13 MR. ROHN: I' ll ask Monica, again. When was that
14 dairy put in? Was that put in after the PUD was started?
15 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: It seems --
16 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Four, five years ago?
17 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Monica Mika. It seems -- yeah,
18 about four years ago. It' s Miss Molly Dairy.
19 MR. ROHN: And do you have a recollection of how many
20 head were approved for that dairy?
- 21 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: I think it' s approximately 4 , 000 .
22 It was permitted as a used space special review in the ag zoned
23 district .
- 24 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Any other questions?
25 MS . CORNELIUS : Can I say one more thing that I --
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
81
1 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Sure.
2 MS. CORNELIUS : -- almost forgot? My husband and I
3 are also -- own 26 shares of Friko Water, that comes out of the
4 Milton Reservoir. And besides being a shareholder, our land
5 abuts that Milton Reservoir.
6 And I would challenge the marina aspect of that -- of
7 that reservoir, given the fact that -- that we see what the
8 water is that comes into it, and what the water is that comes
9 out of it .
10 And I -- I would seriously -- I don' t think I would
11 swim in it . I don' t think I would even dip my toe in it .
12 It plugged up our irrigation system so bad on a drip
13 line for some trees, with green algae growth that results from
14 all of the possible nitrates, and just -- just runoff in
15 general , that I really wonder if that' s truly an amenity to
16 this. And it kind of bugs me that it' s highlighted so well in
17 their literature .
18 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. Thank you. Anyone else
19 who'd like to speak? Come on up. Quit fighting over it now.
20 Somebody get up here and talk. Okay. Your time' s up.
- 21 MR. WARDELL: What was that?
22 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Your time' s up. Sit down. Thank
23 you.
- 24 MR. WARDELL: My time isn' t up. Roy Wardell, 18253
25 Weld County Road 32 , Platteville, Colorado. I border the --
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
82
1 I'm the largest border of the developer. I border two and a
2 half miles here and a mile here, so basically all the west
3 side, and on the south side of the --
4 This has been a real dilemma for me, because I feel
5 like all of us -- including the Planning Commission today, and
6 all of us that are here, and the people that live there and
7 developers all are victims of a bad decision in 1983 .
8 And I'm not sure how to -- and I haven' t figured out
9 a good way to resolve that . But I think it was -- I think a
10 bad -- probably on bad advice and probably -- probably some
11 misleading information at that point .
12 And I think the main thing that was really the big
- 13 mistake was for the expensiveness of this -- of this
14 development . I think it' s way too much for the area, for
15 many reasons .
- 16 Highways . That' s a very fragile environment . Those
17 are sand dunes - - literally, those are sand dunes that blew in
^ 18 there, and they' ll blow out . It' s very difficult .
19 And some of the people that are living there now --
20 and I've gotten to be friends to some of those people, and I --
21 and I want to be a good neighbor, and I intend to be a good
22 neighbor to people that live there, whether it' s 50 houses or
23 five hundred.
- 24 But I really think it should not be 500 . There' s
25 168 houses that have been approved, and I think that' s more
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
83
1 than enough.
2 And talking about the horse lots, where you have 100
3 foot by 100 foot, for example, lot with a pretty good size pen
4 for a horse, it would be absolutely pure sand within two months
5 or less, and it will blow out, and it will make the sand drifts
6 and make the sand dunes .
7 And it' s just -- the planning that went into this,
8 not only by what we've heard today, in terms of the gas and oil
9 and a number of things, the planning that went into this and
10 the way it was originally conceived was very, very faulty.
11 And how exactly to go about -- I don' t have a good
12 answer to that, because I know in some ways, those of you who
13 are on the government side are bound by an old decision.
14 But I 've even talked to some of the people that are
15 involved, and about -- how in the heck could we change this so
16 that you wouldn' t have to do so many houses and still afford
17 it? How could you afford the infrastructure? I don' t know,
18 but it' s too many. Thank you.
19 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Any questions for Roy? Thank you.
20 Just come forward and give us your name and your address .
21 MR. CARPENTER: Hello. I'm Chuck Carpenter. I'm an
22 oil and gas attorney from Denver appearing on behalf of the
23 developers. 1775 Sherman, Suite 2550, Denver, 80203 .
24 The reason I waited is, I wanted to give everybody a
25 chance to -- that had comments on it to comment on it . The
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
84
1 reason I 'm here is specifically to talk about the oil and gas
2 development .
3 First of all, Mr. Rohn, you may be a "newby" here,
4 but I think you've got your finger right on the pulse. And
5 that is that we've had extensive oil and gas development, and
6 most of it has occurred since the PUD has been developed.
7 Now, this is not a new issue at all . It has been
8 gone through extensively, and I ' d be happy to provide Monica --
9 there' s a 1990 resolution, that specifically found that there
10 was no commercial value to the coal and the hard-rock minerals .
11 They' re not contesting. They put their objection on the
12 record, and I don' t want to throw gasoline on the fire.
- 13 But you know, we absolutely could deal with that, and
14 I just point -- it' s been resolved, and I' d also point out that
15 there' s major problems having a coal mine, when you've got 80
- 16 wells with cement casing going through the coal zones, and
17 things like that .
18 But anyway, back to the oil and gas, I really -- what
19 you have to understand is that back in 1990, when all this was
20 done, there were agreements -- I mean, I 've got a whole
- 21 notebook full of agreements that have been done; surface
22 agreements with the oil and gas operators . Some of them
23 comprehensive, and some of them well by well, based on this .
- 24 And it was believed at the time that they had agreed
25 on the location of all these future wells . And there' s been a
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
85
1 lot of development going on, but it' s been orderly. And we
2 haven' t had major problems.
3 We've been able to reach agreements . And I think
4 that the people here -- you see, none of these companies were
5 around back in 1990, and indeed the developer has changed
6 entities as well , when all these were agreed. There are some
7 people here that were involved in that, but I won' t point them
8 out for obvious reasons.
9 But anyway, the point is that the development has
10 proceeded. And there are maps that I can pull out, and I don' t
11 want to go into that necessarily now, unless you want me to,
12 that have little circles where the wells were going to be
13 drilled. And we thought we had all those covered.
14 The commission -- Oil and Gas Commission did
15 promulgate new rules several years ago, that sort of opened the
16 door to multiple wells when previously there was restriction on
17 how many wells you could have for each lot .
18 And we understand and we have committed to these oil
19 and gas operators that we' ll go back in here. And we'd love to
20 have comprehensive agreements, rather than more or less a
21 patchwork that covers all the ground. But it' s the type of
22 thing we've agreed to in the past, and we don' t really
23 contemplate there being major problems .
24 The second issue that they raise is a question of
25 location of facilities. And we have done a good faith effort,
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
86
1 on several occasions that I 've been involved with, when
2 companies come in. We've asked them to try and locate their
3 things, but there' s never been the willingness, like there
4 appears to be today, to do it on a comprehensive fashion, get
5 it on a map.
6 I mean, Mr. Miller mentioned there' s problem with
7 flow lines . And we've had that same problem in the sense that
8 agreements are made, flow lines are in there, but they aren' t
9 always exactly where they' re supposed to be, or they weren' t
10 platted. We've got agreements that require plats to be
11 provided to us, you know, without getting into who's right
12 and who' s wrong. It is important to us, as well, to get this
13 sorted out .
14 The real question is, whether that' s going to involve
15 something that we need to come back here to you for, for
16 another planning hearing, and go through this whole process,
17 again. And we don' t think that that' s the case.
18 We think that this has to be resolved, and it will be
19 resolved, and there' s no reason to believe that it -- you know,
20 it' s been resolved 20 times over. Let' s put it that way. And
— 21 there' s no reason that we can' t resolve it, again.
22 And we understand that there' s new rules, and there' s
23 essentially new locations . But in this filing, they have
24 attempted to -- it has a lot less lots than what was there in
25 1990 that accommodated all of these things . And it is our
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
87
1 understanding that all throughout these open space areas, that
2 wells can be drilled.
3 Now, there are setback things, and we need to work
4 that out . But what you need to understand is, the primary
5 reason for those setbacks has to do with during the drilling
6 operations, making sure that something doesn' t tip over. And
7 so there is a lot of -- how do you say -- extra space allotted
8 in order to assure safe operations out there .
9 And then secondarily, we talked about access . And we
10 believe that if you look through here, there aren' t problems
11 where they' re trapped in a corner and they can' t get --
12 they' re getting access to all their wells, and we've provided
13 for that . And we'd like to get it more comprehensive.
14 The real question is, does that involve needing to
15 come back before you. We don' t think it does . We think that
16 to come to the county commissioner hearing, that we' re going to
17 have to have some of these things resolved.
18 Quite frankly, there may be some issues that can
19 still be resolved in terms of correcting the plat, because we
20 very much want to have correct plats.
21 And part of the confusion is that Beebe Draw has gone
22 out of their way to internally have a number of other different
23 maps that have been built over the years through this process
— 24 of working with whoever is the -- you know, the "operator du
25 jour, " because there is a tendency for people to trade
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
88
1 things off.
2 And I know that Chris says, "We've been here for ten
3 years . " But you know, Amoco has been here for ten years, and
4 then Elk was here for a couple of years, and then HS Resources
5 was here for six or eight years, and now Kerr-McGee came in
6 last summer.
r.
7 So yes, they've been there; there' s continuity. But
8 then again, you have change of personnel ; things like this that
9 have to be resolved. And what I'm saying is that we do think
10 that -- that we can get this resolved, and it' s not a question
11 of, you know, cramming anything down anybody' s throat, or
12 holding anybody' s feet to the fire.
13 If anybody' s feet' s to the fire, it' s ours, because
14 we want to get through this process, go to the county
15 commissioners, have our agreements, have our plats, and get it
16 done. So with that, if there are any questions -- I can talk
17 about the history, but I don' t think that does --
18 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Jim.
19 MR. CARPENTER: -- anybody any good.
20 MR. ROHN: Not knowing you -- are there more -- are
21 there probably more wells than that '89 plat shows?
22 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Oh, yeah. Many more.
23 MR. MORRISON: Many more.
24 MR. ROHN: Many more.
25 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: I guess the best way to do it is,
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
89
1 you can ask the operators if they've drilled any wells since
2 1989 . I mean, I don' t -- I haven' t really looked at the actual
3 numbers -- there are circles to compare with out there. So I
4 can' t answer that question.
5 MR. ROHN: And if pertinent, if any of these wells
6 have been abandoned?
7 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Very few.
8 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Is that --
9 CHAIRMAN MILLER: There' s been a lot of wells
10 drilled, and I bet very few of them have been abandoned.
_ 11 MR. ROHN: Okay.
12 CHAIRMAN MILLER: But I did have to -- I might take
13 issue with you about the reason for setbacks being protecting
14 against the rig falling over. That' s a new one to me, but I ' ll
15 put that in the file .
16 MR. CARPENTER: Well, no, I -- maybe I should
17 clarify. When we' re talking about the Oil and Gas Commission,
18 a primary reason for the distance -- there' s lot of reason for
19 setbacks. And don' t get me wrong about that .
20 What I'm saying is, that a primary reason -- why 150
21 versus 200 feet, in terms of the Oil and Gas Commission, and
22 what they require in terms of the location of -- and spacing,
23 has to do with something falling' over.
24 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. Any other questions? Cathy?
25 MS. CLAMP: Not necessarily for him, but a question
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
i
90
1 for Monica. Monica, this change of zone plat that you -- that
2 you passed around, I presume it was you --
3 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Yes .
4 MS. CLAMP: Okay. Do the requirements on the plats
5 hold for any subsequent development? On here it shows one of
6 the notes on the plat that all -- that setbacks around all oil
7 wells and everything would be 300 feet . Is that held to for
8 subsequent plats?
9 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: There have been modifications made
10 from the change of zone. And because it' s a PUD, they continue
11 to have their right to call out different types of uses on
12 there . It also addresses roadways on that plat, too.
- 13 And I think they' re -- subsequent to recording that,
14 additional agreements have been made with the county to address
15 those other issues, such as roadways, and so forth.
✓ 16 MS . CLAMP: So it can go less than -- I mean, they
17 can go with 150 feet on -- that they have proposed on this new
18 plat, without violating the change of zone plat?
19 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: I guess I can defer that to Lee.
20 Usually you can go more intense, and add additional -- at issue
- 21 is you can' t go less than what was originally approved.
22 MS . CLAMP: Lee.
23 MR. MORRISON: There' s got to be a consistency, but
- 24 it doesn' t have -- with the intent of the zone change, though.
25 And the intent was to provide a margin of safety between the
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
4..
91
1 wells and the other users . So it doesn' t -- those kinds of
2 things can be modified. They can' t be modified out of
3 existence, so there' s no setbacks, for instance .
4 It' s a matter -- you know, as the design gets firmed
5 up, then the evaluation is whether it' s consistent with the
6 intent .
7 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Thank you. Is there anyone else
8 who would like to speak? Come on up.
9 MR. KNUTSON: My name is Scott Knutson. I work with
- 10 Kerr-McGee Gathering, 1999 Broadway, Suite 3600, Denver,
11 Colorado.
12 My work with Kerr-McGee Gatherings, mainly with the
- 13 pipelines, as I stated earlier, some of the developers, that we
14 did work with them about a year ago, and provided them with --
15 we took their maps and put -- drew on them, pretty much, where
16 our pipelines were located.
17 No intent of showing exact locations, or anything.
18 Always were expecting to have those lines located or surveyed
19 in. A lot of the lines, we do have Metes and Bounds
20 Descriptions for them.
- 21 Some of the lines were laid under old gas purchase
22 contracts; were laid under lease rights, were not laid under a
23 right of way at all . There was nothing to go with that, other
24 than the gas lease. Those lines all definitely need to be
25 located and shown on there -- the plats, where they' re located
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
L
92
1 exactly. That' s my main concern here is just the pipelines are
2 located and shown on the plats.
3 There are some pipelines that I have indicated on
4 their plats that were not shown. Some of our resource
5 gathering, system pipelines, that' s another subsidiary of
6 Kerr-McGee.
7 And then, of course, the flow lines . We have very
8 few of the flow lines that are -- are shown on the plats .
9 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Any questions? Thank you. Anyone
10 else who' d like to speak? Gee, I thought everybody had,
11 already.
12 MR. JEBSON: Well , there are probably lots of people
13 yet . (Inaudible) It sounds like you couldn' t go out and --
14 CHAIRMAN MILLER: We need your name and address,
15 please .
16 MR. JEBSON: My name is Carl Jebson II . We reside at
17 20121 Road 42, LaSalle. We've got a property over here on the
18 east side of the proposed development . Kind of the low spot in
19 the area, with a bunch of ponds and wetlands, and we' re kind of
20 concerned about the septic tanks, also.
21 While we have no idea where 700, or 600 -- 594, I
22 guess now. I get confused with all the meetings we've attended
23 on this . Where' s all that going to drain to? All those
24 nutrients, the nitrogen, the phosphorous; some of that' s still
25 going to be leaching out in to the soils down to the -- into
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
93
1 the water table, and then flowing down to the low spots, and
2 lakes and streams and other things in the area.
3 We get extremely concerned about those issues,
4 because we can' t figure out what' s going to happen with all
5 that sandy soil, and the really high perclorate -- perc rates .
6 Okay. It' s a big problem.
7 It would seem to me that it would be a heck of a lot
8 better to have a sewage treatment system, instead of just
9 individual systems you can look at, once every year or once
- 10 every three years . At least you'd know if the sewage treatment
11 system might be working.
12 Of course, (unintelligible) cell found out that fuel
- 13 tanks for gas pumps don' t always work the way they' re supposed
14 to, so any system out there in that sand is going to be a big
15 problem.
16 I was concerned about the water quality on the Milton
17 Lake . We go to our ditch meetings every year, and they keep
18 telling us about the water quality issues that they' re facing
19 that come into the lake. A couple years ago they said that the
20 lake was getting 60 or 70 percent of its water with sewage
21 effluent from the metro areas. I don' t suppose that' s going
22 to change .
23 I'm not even sure that they' re going to get the lake
24 filled this year with much water at all . This year, they tell
25 us about all the meetings they go to about water quality issues
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
94
1 on the Platte and on the lakes . And apparently Barr Lake and
2 Milton Lake -- this lake is being declared an impaired waterway
3 or lake, with the high PH in the waters, I believe.
4 I think my brother' s got some information he wants to
5 present on that . But that doesn' t make any sense for having
6 kids or adults or anybody out there on the waters of the lake.
7 I don' t know how all of that is going to impact with what the
8 proposal is.
9 But I know they' re talking about PMDL proposals for
10 the Platte Basin that feed into Barr Lake and Milton Lake, and
11 how all these septic tanks will influence that, or what' s going
12 to happen with that, is another issue you need to address .
13 I don' t know where you' re going with this, but with
14 all these oil and gas lines they' re talking about, you can' t go
15 out to one lot -- it' s going to be locked in cement, or in
16 government bureaucracy or whatever, and say, well , there' s not
17 going to be a flow line here that I can see today. And that' s
18 one issue that I didn' t really think about until these
19 gentlemen brought it up.
20 I know we've got a lot of wells on some of our
21 properties, and flow lines, and gas lines, and one company
22 drilled wells in one area, and then he had to have his gas
23 company come in for him to sell his gas to.
24 And then another company came into another guy' s
25 farm, and pretty soon, you've got lines from this company and
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
95
1 that company running across, `cause none of them could sell to
2 the same gas pipeline company. And there' s a whole, like they
3 say, web of different companies out there with lines, and --
4 it' s hard to understand the whole mess .
5 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. Thank you. Any other people
6 who'd like to speak? Oh, Cathy?
7 MS . CLAMP: Okay. One quick question for Pam. Are
8 there, to your knowledge, based on the proposed septic interior
9 treatment systems, are there any nutrients, you know,
10 antibiotics, anything like that, that would come out of a
11 normal household that that would not filter?
12 MR. SMITH: Yes .
13 MS . CLAMP: Such as?
14 MR. SMITH: Viruses . Nitrates are filtered to a
15 point, and then it becomes a dilution factor --
- 16 MS . CLAMP: Would there be enough dilution --
17 MR. SMITH: (Inaudible - overspeak)
18 MS . CLAMP: -- for that high a density, directly next
19 to a lake?
20 MR. SMITH: The -- of course, the lots closest to the
21 lake and closest to the -- to the ditch there on the east side,
22 are going to have the highest chance to contaminate.
23 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Calm down.
24 MR. SMITH: I know. I 'm trying to -- I don' t know
25 exactly how to -- I know other counties who have septic systems
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
l
96
1 all in decomposing granite, who have -- who drill wells that
2 already exceed the nitrate standards, as far as drinking water.
3 Ten milligrams per liter. So it is a problem.
4 MS . CLAMP: Will monitoring wells that they are
5 proposing effectively screen that?
6 MR. SMITH: Well, right now, in any subdivision, or
7 in any situation, there are no monitoring -- well, there' s no
8 mechanism to monitor it to see if it' s becoming a problem.
9 In their management plan, they have a random toxicity
10 test that they' re going to perform in their application. And
11 what they submitted with this application, they didn' t identify
12 any parameters that they were going to test for.
13 There' s also no specific outline for what they' re
14 going to do should they find one -- should they find a problem
15 in an area, besides locating additional wells in that
16 particular area. You know, if you were to find a plume of some
17 source, they would put more wells in to further monitor that .
18 There isn' t anything in their plan as far as what
19 they' re going to do to mitigate that . So that part is open-
20 ended. What we have is a lot more than what anybody else has
21 ever done. So in that respect, we feel good about that .
22 There' s a lot of non-point sources, as well, because
23 there' s probably, in all the literature that I 've read, there' s
24 probably more contamination -- more nitrate contamination from
25 over application of lawn fertilizers, than there are from
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
97
1 septic systems .
2 So you have a -- you have multiple components that
3 can contribute to that . It isn' t necessarily all going to be
4 septic systems . They' re proposing to do random testing of
5 effluent in the tanks, when they do their inspections.
6 Those kinds of things will detect whether somebody
7 has poured antifreeze down the tank, you know, cleaned out
8 their garage, and they know their tank is scheduled to be
9 pumped, and so this is a good way to clean out the garage.
10 Those -- it happens. It happens. So you know --
11 `cause I know I worked with some pumpers, some septic tank
12 cleaners that do some random sampling of their own, just as a
13 precaution, so that they' re not liable when they take it to a
14 city wastewater treatment plant . So --
15 I guess we' re living with a decision that was made
16 back in the '80s from our department from a previous -- you
17 know, previous director, and we' re trying to make the best of
18 this . I guess any septic system has the potential for
19 contamination.
20 Most commonly when a septic system -- when you know a
21 septic system isn' t working is because it surfaces. It backs
22 up either over the tank, over the leach field, or into the
23 house. And you know there' s a problem.
24 And otherwise you may never know that there' s a
25 problem. You know, there can be some on East 18th Street that
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
98
1 are in gravelly, sandy soils that don' t ever surface, but you
2 wonder whether they' re doing what they' re supposed to do, based
3 on current standards . You know, these systems are old, and
4 they were put in prior to the things that we know now.
5 So the testing -- testing that' s coming out of the
6 tank, monitoring wells out of the subdivision, is a lot more
7 than most anyplace else that I know has . So I don' t know if
8 that' s a good answer, or --
9 MS . CLAMP: Well, it' s an answer. The other question
10 that I had is, what one thing that this gentleman brought up
11 is, if Milton Reservoir is determined to be an impaired
12 waterway, is that going to have any effect on the safety and
13 health of the citizens that may move into that?
14 MR. SMITH: Sure it will . It could potentially do
15 that . And that' s probably not an answer that I can give you
16 off the top of my head, as far as -- you know, what kind of
17 problems there' d be, and what kind of things we could do. I 'm
18 not prepared to make that kind of a statement tonight .
19 MR. MORRISON: Pam, aren' t there bathing regulations
20 that still apply?
21 MR. SMITH: There are for the swim beaches, if
22 there' s any swim beaches on here. I don' t remember that there
23 were swim beaches identified.
24 It was boating and a picnic lake, where you could
25 motor your boat up to, and dock it for a picnic area. But it' s
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
99
1 not expected to be a marina-type area, so yeah, there would be
2 bathing area -- bathing regulations that could apply, so --
3 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Is there anyone else who would like
4 to speak? Please come up and give us your address and your
5 name? Sure.
6 MS . HARR: My name is Donna Harr, and I live at
7 Pelican Lake Ranch. My address is 16489 Ledger Road South. My
8 question, I guess, would be for Pam.
9 In listening to all of this over the time, year and a
10 half plus that I 've been coming to the meetings and things, my
11 question would be -- if I can get this in a short form -- if
12 the development for 19 years has been approved -- and
13 originally it' s 800 whatever -- whatever -- and now there' s the
14 issue, it seems like, of the ground contamination, how in the
15 world, and especially in connection with the reservoir -- how
16 in the world could a dairy, with 4, 000 cows, which I feel
17 safely I could say will contaminate the ground, or threaten the
18 ground contamination more than people living in 800 homes, have
19 been approved?
20 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Ma' am, this is --
21 MR. MORRISON: I think that' s outside --
22 CHAIRMAN MILLER: We need to address the issue that' s
23 here. We' re not going to bring up the dairy and start
• 24 analyzing whether the dairy is okay or not? Does anyone else
25 have anything to say? Please step up and give us your name
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
100
1 and address.
2 MR. JEBSON: John Jebson. I live at 20121 Weld
3 County Road 42 . Before I start, I have some information from
4 Friko on the water quality, and some other articles from The
5 Denver Post about water. I also included one of their sales
6 brochures.
7 I find my notes of water quality in Milton Lake,
8 which is surrounding -- or adjoining this development, and Barr
9 Lake -- you' ll notice it has high PH, high nitrates and
- 10 phosphorous . And a very serious algae bloom during the summer.
11 Can you hear me? Yeah. I' ll have to --
12 I 'm concerned about that . And I was talking to the
- 13 gentleman from Friko that' s doing the water quality survey, Dr.
14 John Stednick a few years ago, and I was asking him about -- if
15 they' re testing for pathogens, and such as -- you know, what
16 they' re --
17 And he mentioned that when he sent his students out
- 18 there on the lake to test the water on Barr Lake, it' s upstream
19 of the Milton, but it' s actually connected by a series of
20 ditches. But the pathogen level the students find was off the
- 21 limit at the time they tested them, and the students told him,
22 "We' re not going back out on that lake to test it because of
23 the level of pathogens. "
- 24 And this is just urban runoff, and you know, whatever
25 you find out there in the streets and the gutters, the big
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
101
1 storm washes it in, the lakes pick it up, and that' s what
2 they' re recreating in.
3 And I have a problem that there was a discussion
4 between one of the commissioners last year, and the developer,
5 and they were saying that they are not advertising or selling
6 this area as a water recreation area. And they are promoting
7 it as Colorado' s only sailing community. You could learn to
8 sail out there.
9 And then they did make a statement, that they have in
10 their covenants, they don' t allow skin contact with the water.
11 So if they go out and fish, I don' t know how they could take
12 the fish off the hook, or what they do with it .
— 13 And I have concerns about the septic systems . The
14 gentleman said they put these new lots in clusters . There is a
15 concern about some of the small lots in the septic systems, but
16 now they' re clustering these buildings .
17 I think when they cluster them, there' s a possibility
- 18 that when they put the septic systems in, they' ll all be in a
19 little close cluster on the lower end of the lots. And they --
20 hopefully, you know, each leach field will be on the individual
- 21 lots, but they' ll be very close to each other.
22 I'm concerned that their new septic systems -- last
23 year, they said they were going to line the trench with
24 plastic, so if any of this effluent seeps over to this plastic,
25 it' s going to act as a conduit and just go right down the edge
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
102
1 to the ground without being treated.
2 And they say that this water, you know, just seeps
3 away. But there is some examples of some center pivot
4 sprinklers on the same soil type in the area where the
5 landowners actually have installed drain lines to drain the
6 wet spots.
7 So there is a state engineer or state geologists'
8 comment a few years ago that with the density back then, that
9 the effluent could actually seep on the ground surface or in
- 10 people' s basements .
11 But this last year with the short irrigation water,
12 and no rainfall to speak of, these drain lines are still
13 running. And that bothers me .
14 I 'm concerned about their testing with the Metro
- 15 District . Will they, sometime in the future, is there any
16 state law or county law that says they have to continue testing
17 it? Can they vote it out, or have they committed themselves to
- 18 test all these sewer systems for current years? `Cause they
19 have had a special election to, I think, exempt some of the
20 unsold lots from the Metropolitan District taxes .
21 And I'm concerned about the blowing sand. The
22 erosion on their horse trails. Beside my property there was an
23 old county road, and you could still see the erosion from the
24 vehicles that traveled back then, in the early 1900s, which was
25 just horses and buggies .
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
103
1 I'm concerned about the traffic on Road 39 that this
2 development will increase . The county engineer last year made
3 the statement that the external roadways do not have the
4 capacity to assimilate this additional traffic.
5 And with this development they' re planning major,
6 Olympic caliberry (sic) equestrian events, and there hasn' t
7 been said how much added traffic one of those events would
8 have -- or sailing events .
9 And I put in a few pictures of the oil and gas
- 10 density out there that I had. But I think that issue has been
11 addressed fully. So that' s it .
12 CHAIRMAN MILLER: (Speaking away from microphone . )
13 Thank you. Anyone else who would like to speak? Seeing none,
14 I close the public portion of the hearing. Mr. Clinger, would
15 you like to come back up? (Inaudible) things to be brought up.
16 MR. CLINGER: Yes, sir. Okay. I ' ll try and go
17 through them in order. I think Mr. Carpenter addressed most of
- 18 the issues raised by the oil and gas companies attorneys . And
19 so I' ll forego that personally.
20 One person -- I did not write her name down -- who
- 21 owns 298 acres, was talking about the traffic . We -- this has
22 gone through a very heavy scrutiny on the traffic systems and
23 service site. And in your package, you' ll see that we have
24 received a complete approval from your traffic engineering
25 department .
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
104
1 And we have, in these documents, agreed to mitigate
2 the road that serves the entry from the north and south. Those
3 are in your packet .
4 And we've also -- they have studied the traffic study
5 that our engineer prepared, and that the roads are adequate to
6 serve this development at full build out . So we have agreed to
7 mitigate these -- any of these issues that the county felt were
8 appropriate.
9 And that' s in your package, that the developer has
10 agreed to do all mitigations . So that has been approved by the
11 county and your traffic department .
12 Septic systems kept coming up. And wetlands were
13 brought up by one person, Kay Cornelius .
14 We -- this plan was developed with a series of
15 environmental overlays . And this project has gone through
16 scrutiny with over 35 professionals. And many of those
17 environmentalists, they had to do with wetlands . And we have
'- 18 avoided the wetlands on this layout . And we have full approval
19 from the Corps of Engineers for this layout, stating that we
20 have worked with them, and they have approved this, so that the
21 wetland issue has been fully addressed.
22 There' s a report that thick that was prepared a
23 number of years ago, that was updated with this plan, that
24 indicates that all those federal agencies, with respect to the
25 wetlands, are satisfied that this is an exemplary development,
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
105
1 and that we have done all we can to mitigate and work with them
2 on that issue .
3 When the person was trespassing out there -- right
4 now, people can drive in there and go over to the amenity area
5 on the east . And once this gate is installed, and we' ll have
6 security there, I think that will help to address that issue,
7 because any people allowed adjacent to her property will be
8 these residents .
9 With respect to these gas wells, I and my staff
10 worked for three months on these gas wells . Our engineers went
11 out to the site, worked with your people, located all these
12 wells . They flagged these service lines .
13 There' s a major series of transmission lines and it' s
14 run right up to the heart of this . And we left this area alone
15 so these main lines are in the open space . Any other main
16 lines are in the open space.
17 We -- the drawing that we worked with where we
18 plotted all these wells and these service lines, that drawing
19 is about half as big as this room. And we have these massive
20 light tables, and these lots and roads were all laid out after
21 an exhaustive survey by these gentlemen; twenty, thirty pages
22 of surveys.
23 And it' s impossible to locate all these service
24 lines . Some of them are fiberglass, and a locator can' t pick
25 up the location of these fiberglass lines . So these little
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
106
1 two-inch lines, we could survey these for two years, and not
2 find them all .
3 So our response to this is that prior to any building
4 permits issued, that we agree that all lines on lots will be
5 fully surv- -- located prior to any building permits being
6 issued to these new lots . And that way, we' ll be able to
7 adjust where the house will go.
8 As you recall, on my lot map, when we compare the
9 size of this house and the driveway, with the total of two and
10 a half acre lots, it' s only a very small portion of the lot .
11 So that house can be moved within here to miss any of these
12 little service lines.
13 And I have gone to great lengths to map the main
14 lines, and I 've located all the wells out there, and batteries .
15 So I think these people are here acting in good faith, and my
16 client has been, over the years, worked with you in good faith.
17 And I think that prior to the planning -- the county
18 commissioner hearing, that we can come to a resolution on these
19 issues .
20 With respect to the Milton Reservoir, we also are
21 concerned about the water quality out there . And so this past
22 summer, in conjunction with my studies, we hired a Dr.
23 MacGregor, who is an expert on water quality, who did a
24 complete report on this facility. So I think -- just take five
25 minutes for Dr. MacGregor just to discuss the water there, if
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
0
107
1 you would like him to.
2 But before he gets up, if you want him to, we have
3 prohibited swimming on this lake. The only thing permitted is
4 boating, fishing -- it' s basically an area -- observe the
5 wildlife, and there will be boating permitted, but this water
6 is used by farmers to irrigate their fields. Their hands are
7 in that water every day, working with these ditches .
8 The wildlife here, the bird life is phenomenal . So
9 by controlling the issue of no swimming -- we talk about skin
10 contact -- sure you' re going to touch a fish when you take him
11 off the line, and you may get a little bit on your hands when
12 you' re boating, but we' re not permitting any swimming in this
13 facility. Do you want Dr. MacGregor to discuss -- or is that
14 not an issue?
15 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Well, I don' t think it' s that big
16 an issue .
17 MR. CLINGER: Right .
18 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Do you -- do you guys? No, I
19 don' t believe so.
20 MR. MORRISON: Is his report in the record? Was that
21 included --
22 MR. CLINGER: No, it' s not in the record. It' s a
23 report that we have in our files.
24 CHAIRMAN MILLER: We'd like to have it in the record,
25 if we could.
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
108
1 MR. MORRISON: Is it available?
2 MR. CLINGER: Is that acceptable? We will make it
3 available to the county.
L-
4 MR. MORRISON: Thank you.
5 MR. CLINGER: People, you know, in these hearings
6 over thirty years, people that try to object to things, always
7 try and paint the worst picture. They' re objecting to it, and
8 they try and find ways to object . And they pull out all the
9 issues; school, overcrowding, traffic.
- 10 Now the septic business . Almost every speaking here
11 that' s not an oil or gas person, talks about the septic. I
12 think we've proven to you -- I hope you agree that we've done
- 13 everything possible to work within this system.
14 It' s important to note that 35 percent of all the
15 homes in America are on septic systems . And very few have ever
16 gone, or have been developed with this extensive a system as we
17 proposed here.
18 The -- my best friend has a big dairy in
19 Pennsylvania. And he has 4, 000 cows. And agriculture, if it' s
20 not done properly, will pollute far more than these homes with
21 these extensive systems.
22 People in standard subdivisions fertilizing their
23 lawns will cause far more pollution than we' re going to occur.
- 24 We' re only going to allow five percent of these lots to be
25 irrigated. The rest of it is going to be in its natural state,
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
109
1 and we' re going to be good stewards of that, to maintain this
2 natural prairie environment out there.
3 So the impacts of pollution from these septic
4 systems, and the small irrigation, I think, is minimal compared
5 to all the agriculture pollution and others that you see in a
6 standard subdivision.
7 When the gentleman talked about clustering, I would
8 like to restate that phrase, because I shouldn' t have used it .
9 I tried to group these lots into areas, rather than just spread
10 them all out equally. But again, each lot is two and a half
11 acres, and that meets all your Weld County Codes .
12 So I think -- I 've tried to answer, as best I can,
13 the objectors, and if it' s -- if you' re willing, Mr. Chairman,
14 I'd like to go through the other issues and the staff report
15 and conclude.
16 CHAIRMAN MILLER: All in good time.
17 MR. CLINGER: All right .
18 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Cathy.
19 MS. CLAMP: At the beginning of the public testimony,
20 we were handed two resolutions from the Board of County
21 Commissioners. One was the action regarding the substantial
22 change, and one was the action of the denial of the previous
23 plan in September of 2000 .
24 And one issue that was raised, that I was not aware
25 of, that perhaps you can address, is that the county
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
110
1 commissioners felt that adequate raw water source had not been
2 obtained, even though there was a three million gallon tank;
3 that you did not have sufficient shares to provide that water
4 would be available -- that you had actually signed agreements
5 and had the water in hand to provide for these lots to be
6 developed.
7 MR. CLINGER: There is an agreement with this
8 developer and the district with respect to all the water. It' s
9 a very thorough and complete agreement, with the water
10 provider.
11 MS . CLAMP: But I read that agreement, and it
12 provides that you will provide to the water developer the raw
13 water shares necessary for treatment and delivery.
14 MR. CLINGER: That' s correct .
15 MS . CLAMP: Have you obtained the raw water?
16 MR. CLINGER: It' s economically impossible to obtain
17 all the taps in finality with 500 lots . You do it in phases,
18 and you buy the taps, as you develop in phases, according to
19 the market . You go to the marketplace and buy your taps . And
20 that' s how we've done this from day one, and that' s how this
21 would continue.
22 This is how subdivisions are developed all over the
23 five-county area. As you develop in phases, then you go out
24 and buy the taps . Then prior to that phase going ahead, you
25 secure those taps.
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
111
1 But to go out and buy taps for 500 homes in advance,
2 there' s no -- there' s no economic way any developer in any of
3 these counties could ever afford to pay for that many taps out
4 ahead of the development .
5 MS . CLAMP: Well, the reason I ask is, the
6 subdivision where I live in Aristocrat, we have been attempting
7 to purchase additional shares of CBT water, and they are not
8 presently available on the market . There aren' t any to buy
9 right now.
- 10 MR. CLINGER: Right .
11 MS . CLAMP: And that' s why I wondered --
12 MR. CLINGER: Yes .
- 13 MS . CLAMP: -- if you had secured a number of raw
14 water sources to start this next phase?
15 MR. CLINGER: We, as you know, are going through a
16 very -- a drought cycle. And if there' s a -- if this drought
17 cycle continues, and they cannot in that particular year buy
18 those taps, they' ll have to hold off asking for new permits
19 till they have those taps .
20 So these cycles cycle up and down. And over this
21 ten, twelve year period, that will occur. And this developer
22 will secure those taps prior to developing the homes in that
23 phase, prior to any building permits.
24 MS . CLAMP: Okay.
25 MR. CLINGER: That' s standard practice.
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
112
1 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Jim.
2 MR. ROHN: According to your testimony, right now
3 there are no taps to buy, because we' re in a drought cycle .
L
4 What makes you think you' re going to be able to get them in
5 good years, when you are still going to go back through these
6 droughts?
7 MR. CLINGER: We do have -- we do have taps right now
8 ahead of the development . We've purchased $800, 000 in taps .
9 We now have those taps.
10 The Metro District here works very closely with the
11 water providers . And they have a contract -- actually a
12 contract with them, stating from them, that they will provide
13 the taps for these number of lots. There' s a contract with
14 them.
15 MS . CLAMP: But I'm not talking about the taps, and
16 I 'm not positive that Jim is either. I 'm talking about the raw
17 water that you have to transfer to the district . Is the raw
'- 18 water available?
19 MR. CLINGER: Jim Fell?
20 MR. FELL: (Inaudible) -- the water --
21 CHAIRMAN MILLER: You have to step to the microphone,
22 sir.
23 MR. FELL: We have purchased all the water necessary
24 for Filing 1 . And we did that in -- ahead of doing it by
25 phase, simply because of the market at the time . We watched
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
,— 113
1 the water market -- we watch the water market like anybody else
2 does any other market . That' s something that they need.
3 And right now we have -- I don' t remember the number.
4 MALE VOICE: 188 .
5 MR. FELL: 188 . We have 188 water taps that we've
6 purchased. Now, some have been used on these homes, but we
7 purchased 188 water taps ahead of time -- or acre feet of water
8 for translate -- CBT units . How' s that? I finally got it .
9 MR. CLINGER: That was Mr. Fell testifying for the
10 record.
11 MS. MACKLIN: Oh, I know him.
12 MR. CLINGER: Okay.
13 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Any other questions? Thank you.
14 MR. CLINGER: Yes, sir. Thank you.
15 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Now, before you go anywhere --
16 MR. CLINGER: Okay.
17 CHAIRMAN MILLER: -- have you read the conditions of
18 approval and are --
- 19 MR. CLINGER: Finally, I get to --
20 CHAIRMAN MILLER: -- you in agreement with them?
21 MR. CLINGER: Yes, we are, Mr. Chairman.
22 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. That' s all I need to hear.
23 MR. CLINGER: Except for -- okay, on page three and
24 four, we are -- and we talked about on page five, we talked
25 about it . And on page six, on Number I , we need to change the
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
114
1 spelling here.
2 "The plats have been modified to reflect a minimum
3 of 50-foot radius from the edge of pavement . . . " instead of
4 payment. It' s just a minor technicality there.
5 On page 7, the final --
6 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Hold on a second. Which one are
7 you on?
8 MR. CLINGER: That was on page 6 . It says " . . .edge
9 of payment . . . " on Number I . It should say -- "payment" should
10 say "pavement . "
11 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. That' s the toughest one
12 you've got .
13 MR. CLINGER: That' s the toughest one . On page 7, on
14 the PUD Final Plan, Development Standards, number 2 , we would
15 ask that that be changed. That a map will be displayed inside
16 the entry house, because we find that these maps, if they' re
17 sitting out there in the open, get vandalized.
18 So that entry house is going to be very important
.. 19 to -- as the subdivision develops. And it' s secure inside, and
20 it will be quite large and be quite evident inside that entry
21 house.
22 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Will people have access --
23 MR. CLINGER: Yes.
24 CHAIRMAN MILLER: -- to the inside of the entry
25 house, then?
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
115
1 MR. CLINGER: Yes. We' ll have people there to show
2 them that . We' ll also have all the direction maps at the sales
3 office in the community center.
4 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay.
5 MR. CLINGER: Number 5 and 6, we met with the
6 sheriff, and he has indicated that these 5 and 6 items should
7 be removed. And we have a letter to that effect . We talked
8 about sidewalks . This is not a suburban subdivision; there are
9 no sidewalks.
10 And it talked about properties bordering the lake be
11 fenced. We do not -- I didn' t mention that, but we will not be
12 permitting any lot line fences within this entire subdivision.
- 13 We want this to be open to the wildlife, and set this open
14 prairie environment .
15 He has also indicated that he didn' t -- he said he
.- 16 would agree that could be removed.
17 CHAIRMAN MILLER: And what about the traffic calming
18 measures? Speed bumps?
19 MR. CLINGER: We have no problem with that . On page
20 8, we agree with all those items, and on page 9, we agree with
21 all those items .
22 CHAIRMAN MILLER: So we' re looking at page 5, number
23 4 . Page 6, 5 ; Page 7, number 2 ; and page 7, 5 and 6 .
- 24 MR. CLINGER: That' s correct, sir.
25 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Jim.
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
L
116
1 MR. ROHN: You say the sheriff has given you a
2 letter --
3 MR. CLINGER: Yes.
4 MR. ROHN: -- saying that?
5 MR. CLINGER: To delete those --
6 MR. ROHN: I hate to be, this late in the evening,
7 but I would feel more comfortable seeing that type of an
8 evidence before we remove it .
9 CHAIRMAN MILLER: We' ll review it before we get done .
10 Thank you.
11 MR. CLINGER: I appreciate all of your time tonight .
12 I'm sorry it' s taken so long, but I really appreciate it, and
13 thank you very much for your attention.
14 CHAIRMAN MILLER: You' ll get a bill for the overtime.
15 Okay. Page 5, the request is plat note number --
16 where am I? "V. " The clubhouse and dock master, septic system
17 and envelopes were listed on the previous plat . Can that be
18 deleted, Monica?
19 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Monica Mika. I 'd recommend that
20 you just include that under your site plan development
21 standards, which are at the very end. You could include it .
22 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Where would you like it?
23 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Actually, I' d like it on item
24 number 20 . You can include it there.
25 CHAIRMAN MILLER: On page 8?
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
t-
117
1 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: 20 . My numbering is a little bit
2 different than yours, but --
3 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Does it start with "maintenance of
4 the open space?"
5 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: Somewhere . 6,MV would be the
6 last . You' re under Site Plan Review Development Standards?
7 Page 9 .
8 CHAIRMAN MILLER: I 'm on -- So you would move "V" to
9 page 9, number 30?
10 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Yes. Twenty. It would be twenty.
11 CHAIRMAN MILLER: I've already got 29 of them.
12 MALE VOICE: (Inaudible)
13 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: I 'm on the Site Plan Development
14 Standards . Not the Development Standards for the subdivision.
15 And that' s just what' s adding the confusion is that there' s two
16 sets of development standards .
17 CHAIRMAN MILLER: That' s a (inaudible) --
18 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Sorry. And I put that at the very
19 end.
20 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. So this is page 11, number
21 20 .
22 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: Your page 11 . My page is just one
23 ahead of yours.
24 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. I 'm sure we can handle
25 changing "payment, " to "pavement, " page 7 .
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
118
1 MR. ROHN: What about the (inaudible) --
2 CHAIRMAN MILLER: That one we were going to leave
3 alone. We were going to leave that alone, because they agreed
4 that plans should be development . Page 7 .
5 MALE VOICE: (Speaking away from microphone. )
6 (Inaudible) -- payment to pavement and we' ll --
- 7 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Yeah, we' ll get that .
8 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: We' ll get that .
9 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Page 7, number 2 . Permanent sign
10 shall be placed inside the entry house .
11 FEMALE VOICE: My paperwork is --
12 CHAIRMAN MILLER: The next one, take 5 and 6 . I
13 believe we can delete most of 5, except for the traffic calming
14 measures . Sheriff requests that traffic calming measures be
15 implemented, such as bike paths and speed bumps to slow traffic
16 in the residential areas. So delete "sidewalks be provided,
17 and other. . . "
— 18 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Monica Mika. I do have a question
19 on this . I 'm not sure that there has been something from the
20 sheriff' s office requesting that this be deleted.
21 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Sidewalks?
22 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: That either 5 or 6 had been
— 23 deleted. These were taken directly from their original
24 comments, and I was informed by the applicants that the
25 sheriff' s office was proposing to eliminate these, but I
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
119
1 haven' t seen any evidence in the case up to this point that in
2 fact it happened. So --
3 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. Well, I would be comfortable
4 in 5 deleting "sidewalks be provided. " Wouldn' t you? And
5 leave the rest for the long group.
6 MR. SCHELTINGA: Drew Scheltinga, Public -- Public
7 Works. I would recommend that speed bumps not be installed.
8 They are not effective . They don' t work. All they are is a
9 problem and an annoyance to people who obey them. They are a
- 10 tremendous hazard for snow plowing. They don' t function well .
11 It' s not our recommendation. I haven' t discussed this with the
12 Sheriff' s Department, but I would recommend that they not be
13 included.
14 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Do you feel that any traffic
15 calming measures are necessary?
16 MR. SCHELTINGA: In this rural setting -- traffic
17 calming measures have been included in very high density
- 18 developments for speed --
19 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Standing next to the road with a
20 shotgun is depressing --
- 21 MR. SCHELTINGA: That' s the only one that works . I
22 mean, there was an awful lot of money spent in Boulder, with a
23 lot of traffic calming devices put in, that are now being
24 pulled out, because they are annoying citizens. People who
25 are commonly speeders don' t obey them anyhow. It doesn' t
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
120
1 effect them.
2 CHAIRMAN MILLER: So you'd be comfortable deleting
3 all of 5, then?
4 MR. ROHN: What about bike paths?
5 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Those are -- will be outlined on
6 the map, on the plat, if there are any. Monica, are there any
7 bike paths on this map?
8 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: There aren' t any --
9 CHAIRMAN MILLER: I haven' t seen any reference to
- 10 bike paths .
11 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: No. There' s "recreational
12 trails, " identified, but it doesn' t specify "bike . "
13 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. Then we can leave 6 in and
14 just delete 5? Okay. Anybody care to tackle that monster as a
15 group?
16 MR. GIMLIN: Do it all in one shot?
17 CHAIRMAN MILLER: You bet .
18 MR. GIMLIN: Yeah.
19 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Go for it (inaudible)
20 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Mr. Gimlin, prior to doing that,
- 21 staff does have some additional comments we'd like you to
22 consider, and I don' t know if you want to incorporate it all
23 into one mega motion, or just --
- 24 CHAIRMAN MILLER: (Inaudible) have to do with oil and
25 gas?
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
r^
121
1 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: No, they do not .
2 MR. GIMLIN: While we' re doing this -- I mean, we
3 can talk about having staff draft some language that covers
4 some of these oil and gas problems, that they be -- that
5 agreements be in place prior to the board meeting with the
6 county commissioners?
7 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Yeah. We' ll need to discuss that
8 an length, I think. We' re going to have some issues there .
9 MR. GIMLIN: I just thought while we were doing this,
-- 10 they could do some language.
11 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Yeah. Let' s take care of the
12 motions, or the amendments that we've got on the table,
13 otherwise we' re going to have 40 of them.
14 MR. GIMLIN: Mr. Chair, I would move that we move 1-B
15 on page 5 to development standards for the site plan, on page
16 11, and make them number 20;
17 That on page 6, number "I , " correct the word
18 "payment" to "pavement; "
19 On page 7, we page number 2 to read, "the map would
20 be located in the entry house . " It currently reads, "The
21 permanent sign should be placed at the entrances, " and we' ll
22 change that to "A map will be located inside the entry house; "
23 And that we delete number 5 on page 7 in its
24 entirety.
25 MR. MOKRAY: Second.
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
122
1 CHAIRMAN MILLER: It' s been moved by Bryant and
2 seconded by Stephen to move on page 5-V to page 11, number 20;
3 change the spelling on page 6-I , where it currently says
4 "payments, " to "pavement . "
5 On page 7, number 2 , amend it to read "There will be
6 a map in the entry house . " And on page 7, number 5 will be
7 deleted in its entirety. All in favor say "Aye. "
8 VOICES: Aye.
9 MR. ROHN: What about number 6?
- 10 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Six, we' re leaving.
11 MR. ROHN: Oh, all right .
12 CHAIRMAN MILLER: All in favor say "Aye . "
- 13 VOICES : Aye .
14 CHAIRMAN MILLER: All opposed? Motion carries. Now,
15 we need to discuss the -- oh, Monica, you've got some language
16 you wanted to toss in there, if you' re ready. If you' re not,
17 we've got other things to discuss.
- 18 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: (Inaudible) Monica Mika. Some
19 of these were added in conjunction from the Health Department
20 on there .
21 But I will start with page 3, number G, and this
22 number G starts with "prior to recording that plat, section 16,
23 as indicated, shall either be vacated by the board or an
24 application `cause it stands on the property. "
25 CHAIRMAN MILLER: It' s on page 4 on (inaudible) --
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
123
1 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: It' s on your page 4 .
2 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. What did you want to do on
3 that?
4 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: My suggestion is that we need to
5 add some language in there that also addresses the peninsula,
6 in Section 15, which was covered as part of the change of zone.
7 And I'm taking this directly out of their
8 application, and what it says is, "No development associated
9 with Beebe Draw or their District will occur in Section 15 .
- 10 The peninsula in Section 15 will be designated a wildlife
11 refuge with appropriate signage and limited access. "
12 And the peninsula is located on the map up there, and
13 it' s actually not green. It' s the area that' s just adjoining
14 the Pelican Lake. Would you like me to show you specifically?
15 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Please . Is it showing Outlot A,
16 though?
17 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: No, it' s not . I ' ll show you.
- 18 (Walking away from microphone) Section 16, this is Section 6
19 here . There is the peninsula.
20 CHAIRMAN MILLER: I'm glad you showed me . I was
- 21 looking at the wrong section.
22 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: And there was some discussion on
23 what was the proposed use of that, and that' s -- and this is
24 taken directly from their application, and I think it' s
25 necessary to include that, so that it does tie that use to
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
124
1 the subdivision. Additionally --
2 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Do you have specific language for
3 that?
4 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: I do have specific language.
5 Would you like me to read it into the record?
6 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Please.
7 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: And this is taken exactly from
8 their -- "No development associated with Beebe Draw or the
9 district will occur in Section 15 . The peninsula in Section 15
10 will be designated a wildlife refuge with appropriate signage
11 and limited access .
12 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay.
13 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: And then somewhere -- anywhere
14 prior to recording the plat, at the very end, I'm proposing
15 that evidence shall be submitted from the Fire District showing
16 that the Fire District has approved the locations of the fire
17 hydrant located within the subdivision, and these locations
- 18 shall be located on the plat .
19 CHAIRMAN MILLER: And that will go under "Prior to
20 recording the plat . "
- 21 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: "Prior to recording the plat, " and
22 that would be on your page 6 . And we are starting double
23 letters, so it could be AA.
—
24 MALE VOICE: Well, we've got a --
25 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Yeah, we've got a wrong. We've got
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
125
1 a "Q" on page 6 . But that' s not under "Prior to recording the
2 plat, " either.
_. 3 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Right . I 'm under -- I'm under
4 "Prior to recording the plat . "
5 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Page -- after BB? Is that what
6 you' re looking at?
7 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: Yes, it would be the next one.
8 CHAIRMAN MILLER: BB --
9 FEMALE VOICE: (Inaudible)
10 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: They have the wrong number.
11 CHAIRMAN MILLER: BB on page 5 .
12 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Okay. And in addition to that,
13 Pam has (inaudible) wrote, additional comments -- I believe
14 these would be her fourth comments, dated November 19th, 2002 ,
15 and she' s proposing to include three additional items, as prior
- 16 to recording the plat . And you guys received these handouts
17 earlier today. And these would be DD, EE, and FF; prior to
18 recording the plat .
- 19 And the only additional comments we have that' s not
20 related to oil and gas is to include, on Pam' s comments, a note
21 that the Beebe Draw Metropolitan District shall be retroactive
22 to include all lots in Filing 1 . And so she has some comments
23 on that one.
- 24 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. Repeat that one . I've --
25 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: It' s the last one on your
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
r
1�
126
1 memorandum that she gave you today, that' s addressing the
-� 2 retroactivity of the maintenance for the septic systems to
3 include --
4 CHAIRMAN MILLER: All unbuilt lots?
5 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: -- all unbuilt lots in both
6 Filings 1 and 2?
7 MR. SMITH: Do you want me to read the language that
8 I wrote?
9 CHAIRMAN MILLER: As long as you can do it in 30
10 seconds, yes .
11 MR. SMITH: Yes, sir. It would be number 21, on the
12 PUD' s final plan development standards . It' s my page 8 .
- 13 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: What is it?
14 MR. SMITH: I think it' s your set, page 7 .
15 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay.
16 MR. SMITH: Right now it states the Metropolitan
17 District shall be responsible for the continuing maintenance
18 for septic systems serving the residential and public
19 facilities within all areas associated --
20 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Mine doesn' t say that . I'm sorry.
21 Number A.
22 MR. SMITH: Number 21?
23 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Did you just grab a number?
- 24 MR. SMITH: No. I know it' s number 21 .
25 CHAIRMAN MILLER: On final plan, right?
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
127
1 MR. SMITH: Yes .
2 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. On our 21 . So it' s a
3 "continuous maintenance for septic systems serving residential
4 public facilities within the district shall become a condition
5 of approval for Filing 2 . "
6 MR. SMITH: Okay. Well, this is the way it should
7 read.
8 CHAIRMAN MILLER: So we' re replacing 21 .
9 MR. SMITH: Right . "The Metropolitan District shall
10 be responsible for the continuing maintenance for the septic
11 systems, serving the residential and public facilities within
12 all areas associated in Filing 2, and all lots in Filing 1,
13 that are not sold, and those lots sold but not improved, as of
14 the date of this hearing. "
15 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. You' re making my job tough.
16 MR. SMITH: Sorry. There was a page change.
17 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Are you done? Is that everything?
18 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: That' s all we have . I don' t know
19 if Public Works has any additional comments, or not .
20 MR. SCHELTINGA: Public Works has no additional
21 comments.
22 CHAIRMAN MILLER: You' re the man, Drew. Okay.
23 MR. ROHN: I shall move that we amend these as they
24 all have read into record.
25 MS . CLAMP: Second.
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
1-
128
1 CHAIRMAN MILLER: It' s been moved by Jim and seconded
2 by Cathy to make the amendments to page 4-G -- actually all the
3 amendments as previously read into the record by staff. All in
4 favor say "Aye. "
5 VOICES : Aye.
6 CHAIRMAN MILLER: All opposed? Motion carries . Now
7 we get to the stickler. What are we going to do about oil --
8 MS . CLAMP : (Inaudible) lines real quick, before we
9 do that?
- 10 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Can you what?
11 MS . CLAMP: Can I answer something before you get
12 into the oil and gas thing, so I don' t forget .
13 I am still concerned, as the county commissioner' s
14 were, about the availability of water, and -- or if it' s even--
- 15 [Change of cassette . No overlap. ]
16 . . .but I would like to see something in there that
17 prior to obtaining building permits, that the applicant
18 demonstrate that they have one share of CBT water, or whatever
19 is required by the district, to fund the raw water for that
20 lot .
- 21 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Monica. We always require water up
22 front for subdivisions . What' s the deal here? What can we
23 do here?
- 24 MR. MORRISON: Well, I think it can be addressed in
25 the phasing, as long as the water is available for each phase.
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
i
129
1 We don' t require raw water available for all lots, in all
2 subdivisions. We require an agreement and a way of doing that,
3 and improvements which are in place. The water tank and the
4 main line to the site. So we don' t require water be in place.
5 CHAIRMAN MILLER: So they can do it --
6 MR. MORRISON: By phasing.
- 7 CHAIRMAN MILLER: If they don' t have the water, they
8 can' t get a building permit anyway.
9 MR. MORRISON: And I think that as addressed in the
10 phasing plan they' ll need to show water before they go to the
11 next phase, just like they will need to show that improvements
12 have been made, or an improvement agreement reached for the
13 public type improvements within that phase.
14 CHAIRMAN MILLER: And that' s already in the plan.
15 MS . CLAMP: Well, they have -- they have a tap
16 agreement, but the tap agreement specifies that the water taps
17 are only available upon transfer of the CBT shares to the
18 District .
19 MR. MORRISON: I know that . And what I said was that
20 we could require water -- the raw water be available and the
21 taps acquired by phase.
22 CHAIRMAN MILLER: That' s not currently addressed?
23 MR. MORRISON: We talked about a phasing -- that they
24 have a phasing plan. I don' t think it' s entirely clear, but I
25 think it could be included. Right?
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
130
1 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: Monica Mika. I certainly agree we
2 can just make some modifications . Under "Prior to recording
3 the plat, " on your page 2, under D, it references a phase
4 schedule as identified by applicant, shall be delineated on the
5 plat . Prior to release of building permit, a plat shall be
6 recorded for each filing, identifying the block and lot of each
7 phase corresponding to the Phase 2 Final Plat.
8 You can certainly add language on there to show at
9 the time of phasing all appropriate taps have been obtained, or
10 something like that to show that' s been addressed.
11 MR. MORRISON: Right . That taps have been made
- 12 available and agreements for improvements are in place before
13 the phase being released.
14 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. Monica is (inaudible) to
- 15 write language .
16 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: We can -- we can work on how the
17 sentences flow together, but I 'm just proposing to also include
18 "agreements from improvements have been accepted, and that all
19 water taps have been provided. "
., 20 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Well, we need water -- raw water
21 commitment . The taps are there --
22 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Okay.
- 23 CHAIRMAN MILLER: -- so we need the raw water
24 commitment .
25 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: All right .
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
p—
131
1 MR. MORRISON: No. Well, they can' t actually -- I
2 think they have to dedicate the water at the time of tap
3 purchase, so what they -- they own the tap, they will have also
4 had to provide the water to own the tap.
5 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. Read that one more time,
6 Monica, and we' ll get a motion.
7 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: I changed that, `cause Lee was
8 talking in the middle. "Agreements from improvements have been
9 accepted and all water taps have been purchased. "
- 10 CHAIRMAN MILLER: You' re adding that to 3-D, right?
11 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: To --
12 CHAIRMAN MILLER: To page 3-D?
- 13 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: Yes.
14 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. Is there a motion to that
15 effect?
16 MS . CLAMP: I would so move.
17 MR. MOKRAY: Second.
-' 18 CHAIRMAN MILLER: It' s been moved by Cathy, seconded
19 by Stephen to amend 1-D on page 3 of "prior to recording the
20 plat, " to include the language read into the record by Monica.
— 21 All in favor say "Aye. "
22 VOICES: Aye.
23 CHAIRMAN MILLER: All opposed? Motion carries. Now
- 24 can we address the oil and gas issues? All right .
25 Okay. This is a sticky wicket . I personally am not
1 L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
132
1 comfortable for scheduling a date for assigning -- or the
2 county commissioners hearing without having these lines
3 mapped out .
4 I think that, currently speaking, I know how these
5 things work, and I think 45 to 60 days would be a very
6 conservative estimate to finalize -- get a map put together,
7 get it all charted out and transferred on to the -- where the
8 lots are, and make sure everything works .
9 I hesitate to schedule a meeting, and then have to
10 cancel it or rearrange it down the road, `cause I ' ll tell you
11 right now, if we schedule it for four weeks from now, it won' t
12 make it .
13 MS. CLAMP: However --
14 MR. GIMLIN: Well, we've done that before with oil
15 and gas people, and advocates, that we've said prior to
16 scheduling the board meeting, and sometimes we've negotiated
17 the time frame . But they've had the evidence of agreements in
18 place as a condition of --
19 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Prior to scheduling the meeting,
20 might be a way to do that .
21 MR. GIMLIN: Yes . And I think we can do that . I
22 think we can just put it in as prior to scheduling the meeting,
23 that they show evidence that agreements with the oil and gas
24 and mineral holders are in place.
25 MS. CLAMP: Yeah. The only times we've --
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
133
1 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Specifically contracts and surface
2 agreements --
3 MR. GIMLIN: Right .
L
4 CHAIRMAN MILLER: -- and a flow line and pipeline
5 charts .
6 MS . CLAMP: Yeah. The only times that we have kind
7 of gone outside that is when the oil and gas companies haven' t
8 made any -- you know, haven' t entered into the matter, and you
9 know, they haven' t had any meaningful conversations. In this
10 case, I think that both parties are more than willing to go
11 forward with it .
12 It sounds like the applicant has tried very -- very
13 diligently to assure that all the major lines have been
14 accounted for in the open space, but there still is a question
15 on the location of some of the wells that might not be located.
16 So I don' t think that --
17 CHAIRMAN MILLER: And it' s complicated. We've got
18 four or five oil companies, and they've all got their own
19 gathering lines, and it does need to be addressed before it
20 goes any farther.
21 MS. CLAMP: Yeah, before it goes any farther.
22 MR. MORRISON: You think 60 days is unrealistic?
23 CHAIRMAN MILLER: I think we should just make it
24 "prior to recording. . . " or "prior to scheduling the county
25 commissioners hearing" --
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
134
1 MS . CLAMP: Is there a time limit, Lee, that we' re
2 adhere -- we have to adhere to?
3 MR. MORRISON: Well , I 'm going to suggest that you
4 add an outside limit that' s more than 60 days, because the
5 concern I have is, if they reach an impasse, then it' s stuck,
6 and you've basically handed the oil and gas and mineral
7 interests veto power. So I would say --
8 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Not to exceed --
9 MR. MORRISON: -- not to exceed 90 days, or something
10 like that . And that puts the -- puts the burden on both sides
11 to get it done.
12 And if it can' t be resolved privately, then I think
13 the board will have to make a determination whether there' s
14 been a reasonable accommodation by the developer of the mineral
15 interests .
16 CHAIRMAN MILLER: So prior to scheduling the county
17 commissioners meeting, but not to exceed a time period of 90
18 days, the applicant shall show --
19 MS. CLAMP: Evidence.
20 CHAIRMAN MILLER: -- evidence of a -- of an agreement
21 to supply a comprehensive surface use agreement, and
22 coordination of all their flow lines and --
23 MR. GIMLIN: Be shown on the map?
24 MS . CLAMP: Well , in the past, we've also added in,
25 "or substantial attempts to mitigate. "
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
L
135
1 MR. MORRISON: Sorry.
2 MS . CLAMP: I know.
3 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Are you scurrying to do language on
4 that one, too, Monica, or is that my job?
5 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: No, I 'm writing that . But also I
6 do have some -- a proposal from one of the oil and gas
7 companies, and it specifically delineates future and existing
8 well-site locations, locations for associated oil and gas
9 production and equipment and pipelines and easements . And then
10 it goes -- and then I added, "access roadways . "
11 So I mean, I just -- as far as what is a
12 comprehensive surface agreement --
13 CHAIRMAN MILLER: (Inaudible - overspeak) surface
14 agreement, and --
- 15 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Is that all included in that? Is
16 that your intent?
17 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Yes.
18 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: That includes all of this? Okay.
19 MS. CLAMP: They want to read it, again?
20 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: It' ll be written like that . It
21 will say something like "Prior to scheduling a hearing before
22 the Board of County Commissioners . . . "
23 MS. CLAMP: But not to exceed --
24 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: " . . .but not to exceed 90 days, a
25 comprehensive surface agreement, including flow lines,
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
i
136
1 pipelines, and all applicable oil and gas uses, including
2 future and existing well site locations, locations for
3 associated oil and gas production equipment, all pipeline
4 easements, and define access roads, shall be. . . "
5 MS . CLAMP: Obtained?
6 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: " . . .obtained. "
7 CHAIRMAN MILLER: I love to see an artist at work.
8 MS . DANIELS-MIKA: Yeah. " . . .shall be identified and
9 located on a plat for review by the Board of County
^ 10 Commissioners. "
11 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Hey, I like that .
12 MR. GIMLIN: That was very good.
13 MR. ROHN: I' ll move that language be added.
14 CHAIRMAN MILLER: You have to repeat it .
15 MR. ROHN: Yeah, right .
16 CHAIRMAN MILLER: It' s been moved by Jim, and
17 seconded by Stephen to add the language right into the record
18 by Monica, and where will that go?
19 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: It' s actually a new -- it' s a new
20 section, so it will -- it can go anywhere. My proposal would
^ 21 be that you put that under your " . . .recommendation is
22 conditioned upon the following. . . " and make that number 1 .
23 MR. ROHN: On page 2?
24 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: On page 2 . Make it -- well, you
25 want to get -- you want this to be before -- prior to recording
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
L
137
1 a plat, because this is -- this happens before that, so that' s
2 where you'd want it to go, prior to scheduling.
3 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Number 2 would become "recording as
4 to prior recording of the plat, " and this would be number 1?
5 MS. DANIELS-MIKA: That' s correct . And then
6 everything would be renumbered following there.
7 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Do you understand half of that,
8 Voneen?
9 MR. MACKLIN: Oh, I will .
10 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. The motion has been made.
11 All in favor say "Aye. "
- 12 VOICES : Aye .
13 CHAIRMAN MILLER: All opposed? Motion carried.
14 (Inaudible) -- spoken.
- 15 Now, we need to decide whether it' s (inaudible) along
16 with our recommendation for approval or denial . Any discussion
17 on the matter, or a motion?
18 MR. GIMLIN: Point of discussion, I guess . I think
19 it' s interesting, and Cathy brought up part of this a little
20 while ago on the resolution of why the Board of Commissioners
21 denied this application last time.
22 And I understand, you know, that we've gone through
23 the process, and this is a different proposal . But some of
24 those issues really haven' t gone away, because, you know, they
25 include the water quality of Milton Reservoir. That issue
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
I-
138
1 hasn' t gone away.
2 But it' s there, whether there' s a development there
3 or not . I mean, the development is not there, yet, and they've
4 got a water quality issue, so I'm not sure that they can blame
5 that on the development .
6 But if you look through that handout that was given
7 to us, there are some of those issues that may be as relevant
8 today as they were back then. I don' t know. I guess any one
9 of us individually probably ought to scan that and think about
10 it a little, though.
11 CHAIRMAN MILLER: I still agree, and the last time
12 that this came through, I felt that the density was too high,
13 as it states here in section -- does not conform to the
14 performance standards, of Section 35 . 3 of the Weld County
15 Zoning Ordinance . The density and design of the proposal is
16 not compatible with the uses, size, density, traffic, harmony,
17 character, landscape .
18 Some of those issues have been addressed. The
19 landscape, I think, is much improved. Traffic issues -- I
20 don' t know what you ever do about that . I still don' t think
21 it' s compatible with the surrounding land uses, and I think the
22 density is too high.
23 MS . CLAMP: On the other hand, I kind of look at it
24 from the applicants view, that they have spent, you know,
25 several million dollars trying to adhere to constantly changing
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
139
1 guidelines and measurements that, you know, we -- that are far
2 beyond what was originally proposed.
3 And we have to kind of keep in mind that, you know,
4 notwithstanding the fact, that possibly the original proposal
5 was flawed, it' s here, and we can' t just say, "Oh, well, never
6 mind. Good try. "
7 CHAIRMAN MILLER: On the other hand, if they would
8 have built the whole thing in 1985, those rules would have
9 applied. `Cause we' re looking at 18 years later -- we' re
10 revisiting a proposal that was brought in 18 years ago, and
11 lots of things have changed in 18 years . We can' t ignore that,
12 I don' t think.
13 MR. MOKRAY: I think they've made some significant
14 changes . One of the big issues we had last time was the septic
15 system.
16 CHAIRMAN MILLER: True.
17 MR. MOKRAY: And pollution.
18 CHAIRMAN MILLER: And I think that' s been addressed
19 well .
20 MR. MOKRAY: I think so, too.
21 CHAIRMAN MILLER: I just can' t get away from the 500-
22 and-however many houses out in the middle of nowhere . It
23 doesn' t seem compatible to me. Jim.
24 MR. ROHN: I'm going to probably take off the wall, I
25 guess, but I would think if you want to have this many houses
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
L
140
1 in an area -- I noted they have a Metropolitan District, but
2 why not turn that into a small town? I mean, that' s the size
3 that we've got . It' s a small town with lots of back yard.
4 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Well, that' s something that could
5 happen.
6 MR. ROHN: And they could easily then -- and then the
7 property around the Milton Reservoir, they still wouldn' t have
8 to own it .
9 MR. MOKRAY: Well, how' s that change the issue?
10 MR. ROHN: Pardon?
11 MR. MOKRAY: What does that do for us?
12 MR. ROHN: That I can' t answer.
13 MR. MOKRAY: I don' t see any change in making it a
14 small town, or a metropolitan district .
15 CHAIRMAN MILLER: No, it' s still a --
16 MR. ROHN: Well , it would be the town' s
17 responsibility and not the county.
18 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Well, does anybody have a motion or
19 is there any further discussion?
20 MS. CLAMP: Well (inaudible) --
— 21 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Well, we can' t just let it lay
22 there. We've got to do something.
23 MR. MOKRAY: Mr. Chair.
24 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Steve.
25 MR. MOKRAY: I would make a motion that we forward
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
141
1 PF-1021, along with the conditions of approval in the modified
2 development standards to the commissioners with our approval .
3 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Do I have a second? Give Bryant a
4 second to read his.
5 MR. GIMLIN: Yeah, you know, if you can give me just
6 a minute, `cause this one is kind of complex, and it' s hard to
7 get into the right mindset, because you have to understand that
8 we' re under some different rules in this case, than we would be
9 on a current case that' s held up here.
10 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Well, I guess the question I have
11 for Monica is, are we -- can we consider current guidelines? I
12 mean, to me compatibility is an issue whether its then or
13 whether it was now, and compatibility is still the issue. I'm
14 sure in 1983 compatibility was to be considered in any Langes
r 15 decision. Lee?
16 MR. MORRISON: Right . But you have to consider it in
17 the context of the zone change that' s already occurred. So
18 that has happened. You' re talking about the compatibility of
19 the design, basically, rather than the change of zone. That --
20 that already exists . So you've got to take one step forward
21 before you make your decision. `Cause that -- that step is
22 already taken.
23 CHAIRMAN MILLER: That step was already taken, I
24 guess this is just the final design they' re asking for approval
25 on that, as opposed to --
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
1
f.
142
1 MR. MORRISON: Yes. I mean, you certainly could find
2 a design to be incompatible, but you've got to -- you've got to
3 recognize that there is -- there was a decision made, and
4 you've inherited that .
r
5 You've got to go to Step 2 , and base your decision
r 6 really on the design; not on whether it should be out -- in
7 general, it should be out in this location.
r
8 MR. GIMLIN: And I agree with that . And I think the
r 9 developer has gone a long ways towards trying to make that
10 design compatible with what exists out there .
11 I mean, he' s got open space around oil and gas; he' s
12 made the lots bigger to accommodate septic systems . I don' t
13 know -- anyway, I 'm going to second the motion.
r 14 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Okay. It' s been moved by Stephen,
15 and seconded by Bryant to send -- what is this -- PF-1021 to
r
16 the county commissioners with our recommendation for approval,
r 17 together with the amended development standards and conditions
18 of approval . Please poll the board.
r
19 MS. MACKLIN: Clamp. -
r 20 MR. CLINGER: Naturally, I get to go first . I'm
21 going to say yes with comment .
r
i 22 I have a serious concern about this development, but
23 as Bryant stated, we kind of inherited the situation that may
24 not necessarily be compatible. But I think the applicant has
25 tried, you know, above and beyond the call of what anybody else
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
r
143
1 that has come before us would do, to try to make it fit the
2 neighborhood.
3 I think the fact that it' s probably going to be
4 developed over, you know, a decade if not longer, goes a long
5 way towards making it more compatible, `cause the area around
6 it is very likely to grow in the next decade. So it may well
7 become compatible in the near future . So I ' ll say yes.
8 MS . MACKLIN: Rohn.
9 MR. ROHN: No, based on compatibility.
10 MS . MACKLIN: Folsom.
11 MR. FOLSOM: Before I give my decision, I 've been
12 going over the reasons that the commission has turned this
13 down. Some have been addressed, and some haven' t been
14 addressed.
15 They were concerned about quality of water in the
16 Milton Reservoir.
17 The increased traffic, apparently that' s okay as far
18 as Public Works in concerned.
19 The septic tanks they were concerned about, well,
20 that seems to have been addressed.
21 And the non- -- having not secured rural water was
22 the last one the commissioners apparently were concerned about .
23 But despite the items that the -- that still exist,
24 the commissioners would -- are concerned about, I will vote
25 yes, and let the commissioners deal with it .
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
144
1 MS . MACKLIN: That was a yes?
2 MR. FOLSOM: Yes.
3 MS. MACKLIN: Mokray?
4 MR. MOKRAY: Yes .
5 MS . MACKLIN: Gimlin?
6 MR. GIMLIN: Yes.
7 MS. MACKLIN: Miller?
8 CHAIRMAN MILLER: No. I'm still looking at the
9 county commissioners previous decision on -- the denial .
10 They stated that the significant increase in traffic
11 would negatively affect the agriculture traffic in the area.
12 The demand for fire and law enforcement protections
13 already increased without the additional lots, and those
14 services cannot be adequately provided to the additional
15 residences .
16 The schools have compatibility issues . Those issues
17 are still there, and I agree with them.
▪ 18 The motion carries . Thank you. We' ll take a brief
19 recess .
20 [End of discussion/action on PF-1021 . ]
▪ 21
22
23
24
25
L-MAC R & P 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
145
CERTIFICATE
STATE OF COLORADO )
1^ ) SS :
COUNTY OF ARAPAHOE )
I, Laura M. Machen, an independent transcriber and
notary public within and for the State of Colorado, certify
the foregoing transcription of a taped or CD recorded
proceedings, In Re: Weld County Planning Commission Meeting,
discussion/action on PF-1021, November 19, 2002 and as further
set forth on page one. The transcription, dependent upon
recording clarity, is true and accurate with special
exception(s) of any or all precise identification of speakers,
and/or correct spelling of any given or spoken proper name or
acronym.
Dated this 1st day of December, 2003 .
LAURA M. MACHEN
My Commission expires May 23, 2004 .
I ORIGINAL
t4 CERTIFIED COPY
L-MAC R & T 303.798.0380 Weld County Planning Commission 11/19/02
Hello