HomeMy WebLinkAbout20012154.tiff SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, July 17, 2001
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held Tuesday, July 17, 2001, in the Weld
County Public Health/Planning Building,(Room 210), 1555 N. 17th Avenue,Greeley, Colorado. The meeting _
was called to order by Chair, Cristie Nicklas, at 10:00 a.m.
ROLL CALL i i �p
Cristie Nicklas Present
Fred Walker Present
John Folsom Present
Jack Epple Present
Michael Miller Present (PM)
Stephan Mokray Absent
Arlan Marrs Present
Bryant Gimlin Present
Cathy Clamp Absent
Also Present: Monica Daniels-Mika, Director,Julie Chester, Planner, Sheri Lockman, Planner, Lauren Light,
Planner,Robert Anderson,Planner,Chris Gathman,Planner,Department of Planning Services;Bruce Barker,
County Attorney; Lee Morrison, Assistant County Attorney; Char Davis, Pam Smith, Department of Public
Health/Environment; Don Carroll, Diane Houghtaling, Department of Public Works;Wendi Inloes, Recording
Secretary.
The summary of the last regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission held on June 19, 2001,
was approved as read.
_ CASE NUMBER: USR-1339
APPLICANT: Rocky Mountain Energy Center, LLC (Calpine)
PLANNER: Julie Chester
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a Use by Right, an
accessory Use or a Use by Special Review in the Commercial or Industrial Zone Districts
(Power Generation Facility, including a one hundred seven (107) acre Wellfield Site, an
approximately eight (8) mile long Gas Pipeline and an approximately twenty-two (22) mile
Water Pipeline) in the Agricultural Zone District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Power Generation Facility: Section 31, T2N, R64W and Wellfield Site:
Section 7, T5N, R64W, of the 6th P.M.Weld County, Colorado and Various
Parcels along the Gas Pipeline and Water Pipeline
LOCATION: Power Generation Facility: East of and adjacent to WCR 49,one mile north of State Highway
52 just East of 1-76; Wellfield Site, North of WCR 58, West of WCR 51.
Julie Chester, Department of Planning Services, is requesting an indefinite continuance for Site Specific
Development Plan and Special Review Permit USR-1339, at the request of the applicant. A letter was
received from the applicant on June 28,2001 requesting the continuance based on issues concerning traffic,
landscaping and water,which the applicant would like to address further, prior to having a hearing with the
Planning Commission.
An indefinite continuance will require re-notification of all surrounding property owners within 500', a sign
will be re-posted and a re-publishing of the legal notice in the newspaper will all be required,a minimum of
ten days proceeding any new hearing date. For these reasons, the Department of Planning Services
recommends for the continuance as requested by the applicant.
Bob Pomeroy, representative of the application, is asking for a continuance as they are still gathering
encouraging comments from both referral agencies and members of the public. They would like to continue
this dialogue as it is going so well,and is why they are seeking a continuance. They would like to take time
to integrate the comments before presenting the case. They would like to bring the project back before
Planning Commission by the end of October, as they feel this will give them enough time. With their
2001-2154
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 17, 2001
Page 2
contractual commitment with Excel Energy,Excel is projecting the project to come on line in 2004,and begin
construction in the spring of 2002. They want to be expidious, but also want to be careful and thoughtful
enough to take comments into consideration.
Cristie Nicklas asked if they are getting more public and referral input than expected,and did they think this
was going to be a quicker process. Mr. Pomeroy said he did not believe they are getting more input than
they thought, but have found they are getting more substantial suggestions that they want to consider,such
as alternative water plans.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against the continuance.
Jodi Marks,representative for the Hudson community,stated their concern with the continuance as they are
glad that Calpine is getting public input, but also feel that Calpine has done these projects before, and do
not want this to drag out too long, as it has already been a year of dealing with the project.
Rick Yeager,asked if the continuance is based on pursuing another site,as Calpine has said they are trying
to find another water plant.
Mr. Pomeroy explained that the continuance is not based on finding an alternative site, but that they are
considering alternatives for the water plan. They do have a water plan in place, but are taking into
consideration comments from others. As to Ms. Marks concerns, they want to assure anyone interested in
the project, that they want to continue dialogue with public, and will give fair notice and will not drag the
project out.
Cristie Nicklas asked Julie Chester about the continuance date and not wanting to set a definate date. Ms.
Chester explained that the applicant has asked for the indefinite continuance,and that if a certain date was
set,there would be no renotification to surrounding property owners,and no new legal notice. A sign would
be posted,as one was not done for today's hearing. Ms. Nicklas said she would prefer indefinite so that the
public would be renotified.
John Folsom moved that Case USR-1339, be continued indefinitely. Bryant Gimlin seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom,yes; Arlan Marrs, excused; Jack Epple, abstained; Bryant Gimlin,yes; Gristle Nicklas, yes; Fred
Walker, yes. Motion carried.
— CASE NUMBER: USR-1342
APPLICANT: Excel Energy, Public Service Company
PLANNER: Lauren Light
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a Major Facility of a Public
Utility(230/345kV Overhead Transmission Line).
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: TIN, R64 and 65W; T2N, R64 and 65W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
LOCATION: Six Proposed alternative routes.
Lauren Light, Department of Planning, presented case USR-1342. The Department of Planning along with
Xcel Energy, Public Service Company are requesting a continuance for USR-1342,to the October 2,2001,
hearing date. The transmission lines are associated with USR-1339, Rocky Mountain Energy Center
Calpine Power Plant, which is also requesting a continuance. As these two projects are directly related
planning staff would prefer the transmission lines are continued to a specific hearing date as recommended
by the County Attorneys Office due to the State Statue requirements which are outlined in the letter from
Xcel dated July 16, 2001.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 17, 2001
Page 3
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this continuance.
No one wished to speak.
Bryant Gimlin asked how this case and case USR-1339, Calpine, are related, and are continuing Calpine
indefinitely and this case date specific.
Lee Morrison explained that the Excel portion of the project as statutory prevision regarding the timing that
limits the length of time the County has to consider the case. Calpine is a standard Use by Special Review
Permit and not a public utility in the legal sense. Excel is willing to waive the time frame, but only until
October. Mr. Morrison added that is the continuance is granted, that the Chair will need to authorize Ms.
Light's memo that creates a waiver of the time frame.
Bryant Gimlin moved that Case USR-1342, be continued to the October 2, 2001, hearing date, with the
authority for the Chair sign the authorization. John Folsom seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom,yes; Arlan Marrs, excused; Jack Epple,abstained; Bryant Gimlin,yes; Cristie Nicklas,yes; Fred
Walker, yes. Motion carried.
— CASE NUMBER: Z-543
APPLICANT: Daryl and Carol Propp (Long's Peak Estates)
PLANNER: Julie Chester
REQUEST: Planned Unit Development Change of Zone for thirteen(13)Residential Lots and 3.3 acres
of Common Open Space.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the NW4 and part of the NE4 of Section 9, Ti N, R68W of the 6th
P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to WCR 12, between WCR's 5 and 7.
Julie Chester, Department of Planning Services, is recommending a continuance of the Change of Zone
application for Daryll and Carol Propp, Z-543, for the following reasons:
1. The original application was filed with the Department of Planning Services on March 10, 2000.
Originally the case was scheduled in front of the Weld County Planning Commission on May 16,
2000. It was continued to July 6, 2000,September 16,2000 and finally at the September 16,2000
hearing was continued indefinitely to resolve issues regarding geological hazards,percolation rates,
compatibility with surrounding land uses, road issues, overall site layout and fire district concerns.
During the nine month period there were numerous meetings and telephone communications with
the applicant's representative, John Rinko regarding the above issues. Mr. Rinko has attempted
to address all of the issues, however, it has taken a very lengthy amount of time to do so.
2. At a meeting on May 9, 2001, Mr. Rinko and staff discussed a time frame for submittal of new
information, regarding the Change of Zone application. Mr. Rinko originally requested a June 19,
2001 Planning Commission hearing date,which new information was required to be submitted no
later than May 18, 2001. The new information was not submitted to this office until June 21, 2001.
It is imperative that Celia Greenburg,with the Colorado Geological Survey and Pam Smith,with the
Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment review this new information. Both of
them have indicated, through e-mail that they would require at least two weeks to review the
material and subsequently submit a written response to this office. The Department of Planning
Services relies on these experts, in their fields,to review this new information, so that an adequate
recommendation can be made to the Planning Commission.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 17, 2001
Page 4
3. Due to the enormous Planning Commission case load on August 7, 2001, and to give the referral
agencies adequate time to review the new information, the Department of Planning Services is
requesting a continuance of this case until August 21, 2001.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against the continuance.
No one wished to speak.
Fred Walker moved that Case Z-543, be continued to the August 21, 2001, hearing date. John Folsom
seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom,yes; Arlan Marrs,yes; Jack Epple,yes; Bryant Gimlin,yes; Cristie Nicklas,yes; Fred Walker,yes.
Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1340
APPLICANT: Raymond, Debra, and Lupe Carpio/Horizon-Vue Dairy, do AgPro Services.
PLANNER: Lauren Light
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for an Agricultural
Service Establishment primarily engaged in performing agricultural, animal husbandry, or
horticultural services on a fee or contract basis, including Livestock Confinement
Operations (the expansion of an existing dairy and animal confinement operation for a
2,000 head dairy) in the Agricultural Zone District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: E2SE4 of Section 22,T6N, R64W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: West of and adjacent to WCR 57; north of and adjacent to WCR 66.
Lauren Light, Department of Planning Services, presented Case USR-1340, reading the recommendation
and comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services is recommending approval of the
application, along with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards.
Ray Carpio, applicant, stated that the dairy has been in the family for 40 years, and they are just wanting
to maintain their future and expand a little to keep up with the growing times of the dairy industry.
Bryant Gimlin asked how many head of milking cows and total head on the property. Mr. Carpio said they
are milking 200 and have about 300-350 heifers.
John Folsom asked if he had any additional employees besides the family that live on the site. Mr. Carpio
said they only have the one family that live on the site, and a total of eight employees.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
Tom Haren,representative,stated that he is in agreement with the Conditions of Approval and Development
Standards, with the exception of 2.B., and requested changing of the word approval to review.
Char Davis, Department of Public Health, said she was in agreement with the change.
Fred Walker asked Mr.Haren about Condition 2.A.(7),and if Mr.Haren had any problems with this condition.
Mr. Haren said he did not foresee any problems with this condition.
Arlan Marrs moved that Case USR-1340, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with
the amendments to the Conditions of Approval and the Development Standards with the Planning
Commissions recommendation of approval. Bryant Gimlin seconded the motion.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 17, 2001
Page 5
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom,yes; Arlan Marrs,yes; Jack Epple,yes; Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cristie Nicklas,yes; Fred Walker,yes.
Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: 2'AMUSR-488
APPLICANT: Mobile Premix Concrete, Inc.
PLANNER: Sheri Lockman
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a Mineral Resource
Development Facility (Open Pit Mining and Materials Processing along with an Asphalt
Mixing Plant) in the A (Agricultural)Zone District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part S2 Section 16 and the N2 Section 21, T2N, R68W of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: West of WCR 7 and south of and adjacent to WCR 20 /2.
Sheri Lockman, Department of Planning Services, presented Case 2' AmUSR-488, reading the
recommendation and comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services is recommending
approval of the application along with the amendments to the Conditions of Approval and Development
Standards.
Julie Goettemoeller, representative,added that the site has been permitted as a gravel site since the early
1980's,and they are here today due to substantial changes occurring on the site. Ms.Goettemoeller stated
that most of the Conditions and Standards they are agreeable to, with exception of the time frame set on
some of the conditions,as they would like to get their scale house in as soon as possible. Their main issue
is with the traffic study being required by Public Works. They are willing to put accel/decel lanes in right
now, but to do a new traffic study would be an additional six to eight weeks. The requirement on the study
for the preble jumping mouse, a study has been done by their consultants, but have heard that there could
be problems getting a report back from the Fish and Wildlife services, as it is not a high priority issue.
John Folsom asked about the letter of concern they received regarding the WCR 5 haul route, and what is
the permitted haul routes. Ms. Goettemoeller explained that this letter refers to an asphalt plant located on
a separate parcel and different special use permit. The issues are that the trucks for this site are supposed
to go right onto WCR 5 instead of left, and that they are contracted trucks. They are aware of this problem
and are addressing the issue, but have not had a resolution as of today.
John Folsom asked Mr. Morrison what the operators responsibility is for independent contractors. Mr.
Morrison explained that they are responsible for the contractors to meet the terms of the permit, and by
agreement they do not have to let someone use the haul route is they do not abide by the rules. The result
is that the company bears the brunt of the violation. The County does have the remedy to pull the permit.
Cristie Nicklas asked what the life of the pit it. Ms. Goettemoeller said 10-15 years, depending on the
market.
John Folsom asked when it will be determined where the asphalt plant is located. Ms. Goettemoeller said
it should be in the next three years. Mr. Morrison said if the plant is approved through this permit,there will
be no additional hearings, otherwise they will need to go through an amendment.
Don Carroll, Public Works, commented on the haul routes and the traffic study, and would like to get Ms.
Goettemoeller in touch with Diane Houghtaling, Traffic Engineer for Public Works, to discuss the traffic
study. Mr. Carroll said he knows that traffic studies are taking time right now, and they will do their best to
speed up the process. They are asking for accel/decel lanes at WCR 20-1/2,since this is a new access for
the haul route.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 17, 2001
Page 6
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
Cristie Nickles commented that she understands LaFarge wants to get started as soon as possible, but the
citizen's of Weld County have to be protected by the traffic study, and other than talking with Diane
Houghtaling, she is not sure about changing this requirement.
Julie Goettemoeller stated that they are not against the traffic study, but the concern is waiting for the traffic
study before they schedule a Board hearing. Ms.Goettemoeller asked that they go ahead and schedule the
hearing prior to the traffic study being done.
Sheri Lockman explained that the Board is not accepting requests for early board hearings because of the
mass amount of cases. Ms. Lockman also explained that any conditions required prior to scheduling the
board hearing must be met before a date is set.
Lee Morrison added that the timing of the traffic study can be addressed, but the Board has tax appeals to
hear for the next six weeks, and this is going to set all landuse hearings back.
Duane Bolick,representative,asked if they committed to putting in accel/decel lanes today on WCR 20-1/2,
could they move ahead with a hearing date,and if the traffic study determines more improvements,they can
talk about this later. Don Carroll said he cannot speak for Ms. Houghtaling,and would rather they meet with
her first.
Mr. Bolick also addressed the traffic in the area and the problems and concerns, and that they have had a
neighborhood meeting and are committing on making changes.
Arlan Marrs said that with their agreement to put in accel/decel lanes immediately, and willingness to work
through a traffic study, he does not see any problems with changing this condition.
Sheri Lockman said they could change the wording to say prior to the Board of County Commissioners
hearing instead of prior to scheduling. However, if they get to the Board hearing and have still not done the
study, the case can be continued, but this way they can at least schedule a hearing date.
Arlan Marrs said he still does not see why the Board cannot hear the case without the traffic study, because
the responsibility is still on them, and that the permit can be pulled if they do not complete the study.
Lee Morrison stated his concern with this is that the traffic study is going to determine the specifications of
the accel/decel lanes, so saying you will do them does not determine length and design specifications.
Without a study, it is going to be difficult for Public Works to make comments.
Julie Goettemoeller asked that they get the building permit for the scale house now, and can wait on the
other building permits. Sheri Lockman said this would not be a problem.
Arlan Marrs suggested placing a condition that an agreement regarding the traffic study would need to be
made within six months of approval or the permit will be withdrawn. Lee Morrison expressed his concern
with this is that Public Works cannot make a formal agreement,the Board of County Commissioners needed
to do this, and the only way it could work is to defer some of the issues to the Improvements Agreement
contract. It may be better to ask for the information prior to the Board hearing, and let the Board decide if
there is enough information.
Bryant Gimlin asked how long it takes to do a traffic study. Julie Goettemoeller said she has spoke with two
consultants, one says 4-6 weeks and the other says 6-8 weeks. Mr. Gimlin said that since is sounds like
it will be about this time frame before they get a Board hearing, by taking out prior to scheduling,would the
applicant's be acceptable to this. Monica Mika added that the timing would work since the Board is currently
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 17, 2001
Page 7
6-8 weeks out scheduling hearings. Cristie Nicklas added that this is probably all they can do at this time.
Mr. Bolik said his concern is the hold up of building permits that are going to hold up production.
Julie Goettemoeller asked Don Carroll why a traffic study was being asked for when the access was on the
original USR. Don Carroll explained that since they are proposing the asphalt plant and scale house to use
this access point, several things need to be taken into consideration, such as the different haul routes and
the affect on different intersections with additional traffic.
Julie Goettemoeller asked if they could at least get the building permit for the scale house released. Sheri
Lockman said that they could go ahead and release the building permit only for the scale house.
Per the request of the applicants the following changes were made: Development Standard #10 was
requested to be changed to say at the working face instead of for the working force and Development
Standard#17 to say off-street public parking. Also, Condition of Approval #2 was changed to say Prior to
the Board of County Commissioners hearing, per Planning Commission.
Bryant Gimlin moved that Case 2"'AmUSR-288,be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along
with the amendments to the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning
Commissions recommendation of approval. John Folsom seconded the motion.
Cristie Nicklas commented to the applicants to continue to work diligently with keeping the haul routes as
designated and work with the neighbors.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom,yes; Arlan Marrs,yes; Jack Epple,yes; Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cristie Nicklas,yes; Fred Walker,yes.
Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: 1041 Regulations (Matter of State Interest)
PLANNER: Monica Daniels-Mika/Bruce Barker
REQUEST: The site selection and construction of those major facilities of a public utility
consisting of transmission lines,power plants,and substations of electrical utilities.
Monica Daniels-Mika, Director of Planning, and Bruce Barker, County Attorney, presented the 1041
regulations. Monica explained that these changes will determine the process of looking at Major Facility of
Public Utilities differently. Bruce Barker,County Attorney,explained that the 1041 is to designate the matter
state interests for site selection and construction of electrical facilities. Also covered is whether they are
regulated by the Public Utilities Commission, as not all are regulated, and this procedure will cover these
facilities.
Bruce Barker then read into the record the regulations, and the changes both Board's may see.
Arlan Marrs asked about the addition of the County asking for a consultant to pay for any portion of an
application that requires more information, and does not feel this is fair to add onto an applicant.
Bruce Baker asked if there was a limit or a cap the number of consultants or the amount, would this be
acceptable. Mr. Marrs said if there is someway to justify that a consultant was needed, and the information
was not provided at the time of submittal, than it may be appropriate. Cristie Nicklas agreed that there
should be a cap. Mr. Barker said they will look into this and that the County would need to prove the need
for a consultant.
Bryant Gimlin asked about natural gas pipelines and this will be covered also. Bruce Barker said that if the
pipeline cuts through the County, it would be covered as the code is written.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 17, 2001
Page 8
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
Jack Epple asked how much of a burden the new regulations put on the applicant, as they do not need to
put more burden on the applicant. Bruce Barker said that the process is not substantially different as it is
a similar process, with the exception of it now being a recommendation to the Board of County
Commissioners.
Arlan Marrs moved that the 1041 Regulations be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along
with recommendation of acceptance. Jack Epple seconded the motion.
Arlan Marrs commented that the need for the consultant needs to be looked at further. Cristie Nicklas
agreed with the Mr. Marrs.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Arlan Marrs, yes; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Cristie Nicklas,
yes. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1332
APPLICANT: Phillip and Bonnie Johnson
PLANNER: Robert Anderson
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a business permitted as a
Use by Right in the Industrial Zone District (Parking of vehicles and equipment) in the
Agricultural Zone District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B of RE-1949, being part of the SE4 of Section 2, Ti N, R66W of the
6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to WCR 12; west of and adjacent to WCR 35.
Robert Anderson, Department of Planning Services, presented Case USR-1332, reading the
recommendation and comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services is recommending
approval of this application along with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards.
John Folsom asked if it is necessary for hours of operation to be included. Mr.Anderson said this was left
out and would like to add Development Standard #20 to say: The hours of operation shall be Monday
through Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
John Folsom asked if there are any other approvals required for the two semi-trailers currently being used
for storage. Robert Anderson said that the USR permit covers these trailers.
Fred Walker asked about the limited number of six tractor/trailers, and how are these considered. Robert
Anderson explained that a tractor/trailer is considered a single unit, and the applicant is now asking for this
number to be ten.
Char Davis, Department of Environmental Health,asked about Development Standard#3,and wasn't sure
where this came from. Robert Anderson explained that this could be removed with renumbering. Ms.Davis
also asked about Development Standard#11, and asked for clarification on this standard regarding septic,
as it is covered in Condition#2B. Mr.Anderson said he would refer this to the applicant.
Don Carroll, Public Works,asked that Condition#H1 referring to WCR 34, would like to change this to refer
to WCR 35.
Michael Miller asked about the number of units on site and are the existing two going to be considered a part
of the total units. Robert Anderson stated that they would be considered part of the total units.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 17, 2001
Page 9
Bryant Gimlin asked what type of floor drain is being proposed that would require a UIC Class 5 injection
permit. Char Davis explained that this is not a requirement, but would need to contact the EPA if required,
and should say if applicable.
Phil Johnson,applicant,said he would like a total of 10 trucks on site. Cristie Nicklas asked about the septic
system and if there was going to be an additional need for bathroom facilities. Mr. Johnson explained that
there is a restroom in the basement in the home the employees currently use,and that they may want to add
one in the shop in the future if they expand. Char Davis asked if the shop is within 200 feet of residence,
that using the existing bathroom is acceptable as long as they get an evaluation. Michael Miller suggested
leaving Development Standard#11 in for any future expansion. Ms. Davis agreed to this.
Michael Miller asked what type of trucks are being used and how many are currently running. Mr.Johnson
said they are flat bed and heavy equipment, and are running five trucks currently. Mr. Johnson added that
he has removed one of the storage trailers.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
The Chair asked Mr. Johnson if he was in agreement with Conditions of Approval and Development
Standards. Phil Johnson said he was in agreement.
Fred Walker suggested changing the first sentence to Development Standard#11. Char Davis suggested
changing the language to say future proposed shop/restroom. Mr. Johnson was in agreement with the
change.
Michael Miller moved to approve the changes to Development Standards #11, the addition of#20, with
subsequent renumbering, #21 regarding hours of operation, and the correction to Condition of Approval
#2.H.1., and the renumbering of the Development Standards. Bryant Gimlin seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Arlan Marrs, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller,yes; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant
Gimlin,yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Michael Miller moved that Case USR-1332,be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with
the amendments to the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions
recommendation of approval. Bryant Gimlin seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Arlan Marrs, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller,yes; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant
Gimlin,yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1338
APPLICANT: Molly A. Elliott
PLANNER: Robert Anderson
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a Agricultural Service
Establishment(Farm equipment sales,repair,and installation facility,Grain and feed sales)
in the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the SE4 SW4 Section 31, T2N, R68W of the 6th P.M., Weld
County, Colorado.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to State Highway 52 and % Mile East of Weld County Road.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 17, 2001
Page 10
Robert Anderson, Department of Planning Services, presented Case USR-1338, reading the
recommendation and comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services is recommending
approval of the application, along with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards.
John Folsom asked about the CDOT referral and if they are asking for additional right-of-way. Robert
Anderson said that CDOT is not asking for additional right-of-way, but that the applicant would need to
obtain a new access permit if traffic were to increase.
Molly Elliott and Michael Quinn, applicants, said they are before the Commission to come into compliance
with a current violation,and explained the nature of the business. Cristie Nicklas asked about the grain and
feed sales. Mr. Quinn explained that this proposal does not currently exist, but that they will be doing this
down the road and are including it into the permit now.
John Folsom asked if they will be displaying any of the equipment sales. Mr. Quinn said they will not be
displaying the equipment and there is not room to do so. Mr.Quinn also explained that he currently has no
employees coming to the site, and that he does not foresee semi trucks coming to the site more that three
times a year.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
The Chair asked the applicants if they were in agreement with the Conditions of Approval and Development
Standards. Mr.Quinn asked about the septic system requirement,and if they could put the shop within 200
feet of the existing septic and utilize it. Char Davis, Department of Environmental Health, said they could
do this but would need an engineer to evaluate the system to make sure it is adequate for the proposed use.
Mr.Quinn asked about Condition#2A regarding the water,and if this was necessary. Char Davis said this
would also need to be evaluated prior to making this determination. Mr. Quinn said that they have filed an
exemption with the State Division of Water Resources to change the well use to two domestic well. Mr.
Quinn also asked to change the hours of operations. Robert Anderson said he had no objection to the
change as stated previously.
Bryant Gimlin moved that Case USR-1338, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with
the Conditions of Approval and change to #13 of the Development Standards with the Planning
Commissions recommendation of approval. Michael Miller seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Arlan Marrs, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Cristie Nicklas,
yes; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1341
APPLICANT: Varra Companies, Inc.
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
REQUEST: Special Use Permit Application for an Asphalt and Concrete Batch Plant/Asphalt and/or
Concrete Recycling/ Sand & Gravel Processing/ Materials & Equipment Storage/
Commercial Office.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of S2 NW4 of Section 25, Ti N, R68W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
LOCATION: West of and adjacent to WCR 11, 1/4 mile south of WCR 6.
Chris Gathman,Department of Planning Services,presented Case USR-1341,reading the recommendation
and comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services is recommending approval of this
application, along with the amendments to the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 17, 2001
Page 11
John Folsom said he understood that there would be no mining at this site and that everything will be
brought in. Chris Gathman said this was correct. Mr. Folsom also understands there will be a Road Impact
Fee assessed along with a Road Improvements Agreement. Mr. Gathman said this was also correct. Mr.
Folsom did not know where the use would fit into a category of Road Impact Fee Ordinance. Lee Morrison
said there are ways to determine the fees so that they are assessed fairly.
Arlan Marrs asked about the proposed commercial offices, and what the size and scope of these are, and
also what the proposed water use is. Mr. Gathman explained that there is a well permit on the site and that
the offices will be related to the activities to be located on the site.
John Folsom asked for clarification on WCR 11 and WCR 6, and which are paved. Mr. Gathman said that
WCR 6 is paved and WCR 11 is not paved. Don Carroll, Public Works, said that they have met with the
applicant and they are providing a traffic study, and he understands they will be accessing onto WCR 11
to WCR 6.
Brad James, representative, gave a brief overview of the application and explained the operation, stating
that they provide the product for the construction in the area. Varra Companies have several operations
throughout Weld County. Mr.James showed an overall map of the area and what will be in on the site. Mr.
James said that within two years of obtaining a water tap the operation will evolve with the amount of growth.
Mr.James said they would like to have rail delivery in next 2-5 years. Mr.James talked about the proposed
route, and feels that it is best to go WCR 11 to WCR 6, and that they have committed to a traffic study.
Fred Walker asked about the material being transported to the site and is it going to be pit run or material
ready to be mixed into the concrete. Mr.James explained that the vast majority will be doing dry operations.
Mr. Walker said he concern was with the limitation of 10,000 gallons of water for the site. Mr. James said
that they are limiting their operations because of the water until the infrastructure gets caught up.
John Folsom asked if most of the material will be crushed, washed and screened at other sites prior to
coming to this site. Mr. James said this was correct.
Char Davis, Department of Environmental Health, asked about the water situation in regards to the septic
system and the hand washing facilities. Mr. James apologized to Ms. Davis for not providing information
to her, and that the well is a commercial exempt well.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Larry Frank, surrounding property owner, expressed his concerns for himself and neighbors. With new
growth heading their way, most of the area is agricultural with large farms. The turkey farms in the area
have not been used for at least 8 years. The truck traffic from 1-25, WCR 2 and WCR 6, is very heavy.
Traffic lights have been put in on 1-25, but the intersection of the frontage road and Washington is becoming
a great concern. Going north to WCR 8 is also a concern. The railroad crossing has no gates and is also
a rough crossing. Mr. Frank addressed the water issue and stated that he does not have enough water for
his crops. Mr. Frank feels that safety is a big concern.
John Folsom commented that the interchange of 1-25 and WCR 8 is in the works to be reconstructed.
Dan Casper, representative for RME Petroleum, stated his concerns of the mineral and gas rights on the
site, and is objecting to the proposal, and is asking for an agreement to be reached with Varra.
Bryant Gimlin asked if any negotiations have been made with Varra. Mr. Casper said they are hoping to
come to an agreement and information had been sent to Mr. James.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 17, 2001
Page 12
Marcella Trostel,surrounding property owners,has concerns with the amount of water wells in area that are
in bad shape,and that no taps are being allowed from the water company. Ms.Trostel also was concerned
with a housing development going on WCR 7, and traffic is going to be a mess.
Chris Greno, representative for HS Resources, said they have concerns with the mineral lease hold on the
site,and that there is a natural gas well producing on the site, and they have no current agreement with the
applicant. Mr. Greno is requesting an agreement be reached as a condition to the permit.
Rhonda Mitchell,surrounding property owner,has concerns with the agricultural community being changed,
the noise and safety. Ms. Mitchell feels they are being forced to relocate due to these types of applications.
Steve Morazic, owns a RV company next to the site, and is in favor to the application the exception to the
retention pond being located so close to his home. Mr. Morazic wanted fencing adjacent to his property to
screen the operation.
Bernice Kirkmeyer, surrounding property owner, stated her concerns with Varra moving in and the dust
problems and the environmental and health impact it will have. Ms. Kirkmeyer said that roads currently are
not being taken care of and will get worse with the additional traffic. The area is zoned agricultural, and
would rather see light rail go in rather that a asphalt plant. Ms. Kirkmeyer then read a letter from a neighbor
expressing her concern with the roads and the amount of dust from the traffic and health concerns
associated with the dust.
Carrie Gildner, surrounding property owner, stated her concern with traffic and dust.
John Goble, surrounding property owner stated his concerns with dust and traffic, and that the application
does not fit into the surrounding area.
Brad James addressed the concerns of surrounding property owners. Mr. James said they have
accommodated a request for a chain-link fence and are doing traffic studies on the impact of the roads. Mr.
James said that they will mitigate dust as much as possible, and with the new developments,they will also
be adding to the dust problems,and this plant is needed for the growth in the area. Mr.James also said that
as far as the mineral interest, Varra will comply with any laws and get the appropriate agreements.
Cristie Nicklas asked about the request to operate 24 hours a day. Mr.James explained that there is a need
for this at times when they are doing federal or governmental type projects, and due to the most of these
projects being at night,they will need this at times. Chris Gathman said that the standard hours of operation
are daylight hours. Lee Morrison said that Varra would need to contact the Planning Department with this
request.
Cristie Nicklas also asked that language be added to Condition #2.A. an agreement with the gas pipeline
also.
Fred Walker stated he has concern with the application regarding the water issue, and would like to add a
condition to restrict them to 10,000 gallons per day until there is an adequate water supply.
Bryant Gimlin asked about the dust abatement plan, and also has concerns with this and the water issue.
Brad James said there are several components to mitigating dust. Equipment itself will suck the dust in, a
vegetative buffer, and with the property being at a lower grade, the winds will sweep over property. Mr.
James added that agricultural operations also produce dust along with development, and reducing speed
limits may help. Paving WCR 11 would also help,and that the Varra company would look into this if it was
a requirement from the traffic study.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 17, 2001
Page 13
Jack Epple asked if there are current road counts. Don Carroll said the last count for WCR 11 was on June
17, 1996, and was at 180 per day. On July 20, 1999 WCR 6 was at about 1000 per day. Mr. Carroll then
explained who had responsibility on what roads. WCR 11 between WCR 2 and WCR 4, has been annexed
by Northglenn, on Section 11 between WCR 4 and WCR 8 has been annexed by Broomfield and the
remaining section between WCR 8 and Hwy 52 has been annexed by Dacono. Weld County has no
jurisdiction from WCR 11 and Hwy 52,the only section is the intersection of WCR 6 and WCR 11 if you go
east. The County also has on WCR 2, 1 mile responsibility between WCR 15 and WCR 17, and pick up
again at 1-76.
Cristie Nicklas asked if they could ask for improvement agreements between Varra and the various
communities that have annexed. Lee Morrison said this could be asked for. John Folsom added that this
was in the conditions.
Chris Gathman added to Condition 2.A., that the applicant shall either submit to the Weld County
Department of Planning Services a copy of an agreement with the properties mineral owners stipulating that
the oil and gas activities and existing gas pipelines have been adequately incorporated. Condition #3G
regarding flood plain can be deleted, and Development Standard #14 to add hand washing facilities.
Fred Walker added a Development Standard#3 to say:The facility will be restricted to no more than 10,000
gallons of water brought to the site per day for the asphalt and concrete batch plant until a permanent water
supply is obtained. No future expansion of the asphalt shall occur until this time.
Fred Walker moved to add Development Standard#3. Bryant Gimlin seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Arlan Marrs, yes; Michael Miller, excused; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Cristie
Nicklas, yes; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Bryant Gimlin moved that Case USR-1341,be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with
the changes to the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions
recommendation of approval. Arlan Marrs seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom,yes; Arlan Marrs,yes; Michael Miller,excused;Jack Epple,no; Bryant Gimlin,yes; Cristie Nicklas,
yes; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1343
APPLICANT: Owens Brothers Concrete Company
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
REQUEST: Special use Permit for Sand and Gravel Mining/Aggregate Processing /Concrete Batch
Plant.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: S2SW4, W2SE4, and NE4 of Section 28, T3N, R67W of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to WCR 28, approximately 1/4 mile west of WCR 19.
Chris Gathman,Department of Planning Services,presented Case USR-1343,reading the recommendation
and comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services is recommending approval of this
application along with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards. Mr. Gathman said that the
applicants are at this time withdrawing the concrete batch plant, and will amend the permit in the future if
they choose to do this.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 17, 2001
Page 14
Michael Miller asked Diane Houghtaling about the traffic study and if she has reviewed it. Ms. Houghtaling
said that she has reviewed it. Mr. Miller asked about the projection for 2005, and the intersection of WCR
19 and Hwy 66, operating at a level A. Mr. Miller understood that Hwy 66 is going to be at 130 to 140%
capacity. Ms. Houghtaling explained that people moving east and west on Hwy 66 will be able to work
through the intersection so well, that the other intersections will not be effected, bringing it to an A level.
John Folsom added that this is a dangerous intersection, and without accel/decel lanes, it will be disaster
with all the trucks turning onto Hwy 66. Chris Gathman said that CDOT does not have any concerns at this
point, but that the applicant will need to make improvements. Diane Houghtaling added that she had talked
to CDOT, and that the entire Hwy 66 corridor need left turn lanes, but at this time there is not money or a
plan or right-of-way to put them in.
Bill Owens, applicant, said that they are a third generation business, and the primary reason they are
applying on this site is that they are seeking aggregates,as this has become a nature of the business. They
are unique as they do not own aggregates and are a family owned operation. They have a vested interest
in Colorado and are concerned with concerns of the neighbors. Ms. Owens thanked the neighbors for
coming and the input they have given,and stated that they have five other locations and have worked with
neighbors with other sites, and have learned that in order for their business to run,they must work with the
neighbors.
Alex Schatz, representative, gave a presentation of the site and an illustration of the phase plan. The first
five years will be extraction, and will phase this so that entire site will not be exposed at one time. In five
to ten years reclamation will begin, and at the final phase reclamation will be complete on the west end.
Reclamation will then continue to the east while extraction continues. At no point will there be more than
40-45 acres exposed and dewatered. Mr.Schatz explained that the processing plant has been moved from
southeast corner of the site to the northwest, and the traffic entrance has been moved to WCR 19, and at
this point are still working with neighbors, CDOT, and Public Works for the best route. They have made
these changes to mitigate property owner concerns,and have also removed the concrete batch plant. Mr.
Schatz added that the Owens want to do this right, and are willing to work with neighbors.
John Folsom asked about the phases over 18-22 years,and is the land being turned back to agricultural or
residential uses. Alex Schatz said they have no plans for residential plans.
Michael Miller asked if they are planning on mining the land across the way. Alex Schatz said there is a
substantial gravel deposit on this site,but they have no plans at this time. Mr.Miller asked about retail sales.
Mr. Owens said they would only sell parts they could no longer use, and smaller aggregates, but have no
other plans for sales. Mr.Miller said they may want to take this into consideration when doing a traffic study.
Mr. Owens said they will take this into consideration when working with the different entities.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Bruce Wilson,representative for 35 land owners,said the Owen's have been talking with the applicants and
appreciate their willingness to work with them. There are concerns with property values. As to the traffic
issues, they do agree with the movement of the access off WCR 19, but would like to see Hwy 66 used.
They would like to see the haul route specified and limited to paved roads because of dust. They are
concerned with traffic between the gravel mines, and would like to limit traffic between routes.
Forrest Leaf,addressed water concerns,with a visual presentation. Mr.Leaf stated that there are numerous
wells in the area that are active domestic or irrigation wells. Mr. Leaf is concerned with the impact on the
aquifer. Consideration needs to be made toward the impact of the wells in the area if there is no
discharging, and that this can be mitigated.
Michael Miller asked Mr. Leaf how he would mitigate the problem. Mr. Leaf said with a slurry wall, wet
mining, dewatering recharge, and just the timing of using the water. Mr. Miller asked about the adjacent
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 17, 2001
Page 15
Varra site, and if any study has been done on this site as they are dewatering. Mr. Leaf said he has not
evaluated this area.
Fred Walker asked about the wells and asked if they are tributary. Mr. Leaf said that they were.
Roberta Wilson, addressed the impact of wells from the Varra pit, and she is aware of one that has been
affected.As far as the water issues,they are asking for a hydraulic study and agreements to each affected
party,and for the applicant to maintain the water table. Ms. Wilson said they would like to see buffering as
much as possible, and to still move the batch plant closer to the access road to the north. They would like
the hours of operation to change,and would like to see the government contracts go away.They would like
know about the lighting location and want to see a noise study to be completed. Mr.Wilson said they would
like to shorten the time of permit, and want fencing.
Lila Meyer,addressed the application and the inconsistences in the reclamation plan,and would like to see
agricultural, open body of water, rangeland and not residential use.
Lisa Haley, addressed concerns of property values over the next 20 years. Ms. Haley said they would like
to see a landscaping plan.
Jane Ann Johnson, addressed concerns with contradictions and inadequacies of the application. Ms.
Johnson said that agreements need to be made, regarding all the land owners with man made structures
within 200 feet,and well owners within 600 feet,a discharge, noise agreement,written permission from the
ditch company,and a fugitive dust permit. Ms.Johnson said she feels the applicants have worked very well
with them and feel they will continue to do so.
Andy Jones, addressed concerns from the Mayer family farm and a particular well to the south of the
proposal, and the effect as result of the proposal it will have on this well. Mr. Jones used visual maps for
his presentation. Mr.Jones is asking for an agreement to mitigate the impacts and maintain the water level
with the Mayer family as a condition.
Jack Epple asked Mr. Jones if he has met with Owens Brothers concerning this issue. Mr. Jones said he
had not. Mr. Epple believed that the State protects wells within 600 feet of open pit mining. Mr.Jones said
that this is correct, but does have a concern for his clients and would like to mitigate the problem early on.
Lee Morrison said the issue is a delegation issue, and best worked out between the two effected private
parties, and not to leave out the option to go back before the Board for final resolution. Water and Oil rights
are beyond the scope of the Board.
Michael Miller said that the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards cover the concern regarding
the well issue, and by asking for veto power is not reasonable. The Owen's are working on the issue, and
they are putting more requirements on the applicants, and have protection from the State. Mr. Jones said
problem is that specific wells are not addressed. Mr. Miller feels they are asking for what is beyond scope
of reasonable.
Fred Walker expanded on Mike Miller's comments regarding the Owen's maintaining the water level in the
area, and that this is asking for too much. Conditions change over time and the Owens may be forced to
mitigate problems they did not cause. Mr. Jones said they just want to make sure the concerns of the
Mayer's are addressed,and that he agreed that asking an applicant to maintain the water level is too much.
Mr. Walker said he did not hear Mr. Jones say this, but members of the group have said this.
Michael Miller added that a letter from Banks and Gesso,that refers to the fact that the Owen's have already
began monitoring water levels and committed to hydraulic study and does not know how much more can
be asked for.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 17, 2001
Page 16
Cynthia Parker, addressed concerns with the close proximity of the site to her farm. Ms. Parker would like
to see the wetlands on her property protected as the State cannot protect them, and wants the County's
help. Ms. Parker has concerns with the trees on her property,water rights and wells. Ms. Parker would like
to see a condition to protect the wetlands.
John Gerstle, representing Cynthia Parker, addressed the concerns on the water issues and the wetlands.
Mr. Gerstle gave a presentation on the analysis of what could happen from the dewatering of the mining
activities.
Michael Miller said he was just involved in a project in the area where they were drilling in an aggregate
exploration with ground water at three to four feet, and would this affect Mr. Gerstles cone of depression.
Mr. Gerstle said this is consistent with their understanding of the area.
David Pudgett, representative for Patina Oil and Gas along with Duke Energy, said he has met with an
engineering group and the Owens to address two wells located in the area, and working on agreement to
relocate the flow lines. They are asking for an agreement as a condition prior to reaching this agreement.
The Owen's have worked with them and Mr. Pudgett feels they will reach an agreement.
Robert Sarchet, lives south of the site, and surface water flows south and west. Mr. Sarchet likes the idea
of a slurry wall and said that this would solve a lot of issues and then would not have to worry about the
wetlands,wells or irrigation. Mr. Sarchet said that the Owens have the right to mine and should mine.
Michael Miller asked if slurry wall was put in, who would be affected to north. Mr. Sarchet said it shouldn't
affect any of the people present today.
Alex Schatz addressed the concerns. Mr.Schatz said that they are working with the neighbors and do not
want to get experts involved and want to come to an agreement. The property comes with plenty of water
to allocate the different needs. A slurry wall would not be a good idea as the land uphill would become much
more wet,and this would also leave a hole in the ground once the mining was complete. They want to work
out a plan for recharge and stay limited to dry mining as proposed. They will be doing a landscape plan,and
are willing to work on other issues and concerns.
John Folsom asked about the haul route,and are they going to specify a route if they access onto WCR 19.
Mr. Schatz said that this is a condition and will occur, but at this point do not want to stipulate any particular
route as there are issues on the ability to make improvements on Hwy 66 and WCR 19.
John Folsom asked about the concern with the traffic between pits. Mr. Schatz said there is no permit and
these sites will be run independently. Bill Owens said that have no plans at this time to do anything with the
other property, so this shouldn't be an issue.
John Folsom then asked about the request of moving the processing plant further north. Alex Schatz said
that this is problematic due to the person farming it would rather it be in crops. Mr. Folsom asked about the
request for fencing, and if this was agreeable. Mr. Schatz said they will be working with County staff on a
landscaping plan.
Michael Miller asked about dewatering discharge and where this will go . Mr. Schatz said they have not
been determined at this point, but will come to an agreement. Mr. Miller asked about using electric pumps
instead of diesel for dewatering. Mr. Owens said they are not currently aware of the electric power ability
at this time.
Char Davis asked to add a Development Standard to say: In the event that the facility utilizes the residence
on the property for commercial purposes, the septic system shall be reviewed by a Colorado Registered
Professional Engineer. The review shall consist of observation of the system and a technical review
describing the systems ability to handle the proposed hydraulic load. The review shall be submitted to the
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 17, 2001
Page 17
Environmental Health Services Division of the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment.
If the system is found to be inadequately sized or constructed,the system must be brought into compliance
with current regulations.
Ms. Davis also added Development Standard to say: In accordance with the above ground storage tank
regulations, 7-CCR-1101-14, a retention berm shall be constructed around the tank battery. The volume
retained by the spillage berm shall be greater than the volume of the largest tank inside the berm. Alternate
protective measures may be allowed provided that they comply with the above storage tank regulations.
Mr. Davis asked for Development Standard #12 to add adequate hand washing and toilet facilities. Ms.
Davis read changes to Development Standard#14,and Michael Miller stated since this does not apply it can
be deleted. Ms. Davis agreed.
Alex Schatz addressed his changes. Condition #2.B. regarding an adequate water supply, Mr. Schatz is
asking for more time for this as it is going to take time to obtain a new well permit. Mr. Schatz is asking for
the language to change to the wording to apply for prior to the plat. Char Davis had no problems with this
change. Condition #2.C. and 2.D., refer to Fish and Wildlife requirements, also be moved to prior to
recording the plat as again it is a timing issue.
Michael Miller moved to accept the additions of Development Standard as read into the record by Char
Davis. Bryant Gimlin seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
Michael Miller moved to add to Development Standard #12 to include hand washing, and to delete
Development Standard#14,and change the language in Condition of Approval#2.B.to state apply for and
not obtain, and to move Condition of Approval #2.B., 2.C. and 2.D. to prior to recording the plat, and
renumber accordingly. Arlan Marrs seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
Alex Schatz suggested deleting Condition of Approval#3.H.as it does not apply,and asked about Condition
of Approval 3.M., as this is a duplication to#3.N.
Don Carroll asked to add to Development Standard#3 an additional 300 feet of paving from WCR 19 west.
Michael Miller moved to delete#3.H. and#3.M. and to add an additional 300 feet of paving from WCR 19
west to Development Standard #3. Bryant Gimlin seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
Don Carroll added that Owens do have an improvements agreement with Public Works to haul from their
pit on WCR 15 south to WCR 24, so there is not verbiage where they can legally haul between pits. As to
discharge points, Mr. Carroll did not believe they were agreeable to let anyone discharge into the County
barrow ditches.
John Folsom asked about the governmental contracts and the 24 hour operation. Lee Morrison explained
that the what reads is that all sand and gravel operations shall be conducted during the hours of daylight
except in the case of public or private emergency or to make necessary repair to equipment, and goes on
to say restriction does not apply to the operation of administration and executive offices or repair facilities
located on the property. Mr. Folsom said it does not include government contracts. Mr. Morrison said that
it does provide for emergencies, and the language was written prior to the wide spread practice of doing
public projects on highways at night, and this is now the standard as opposed to the exception. Mr. Folsom
asked if it is acceptable to add government contracts. Mr. Morrison said it would be up the Commission
since they are the ones making the recommendation.
Michael Miller added that the industry standard is that public and private emergencies allowed you to work
after hours, and if you were acquired a contract that required you to haul after hours, you would need to
approach the Commissioners and get approval. Lee Morrison added that they as stated before,they would
need to contact the County as if this is a substantial change or not.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 17, 2001
Page 18
Michael Miller asked to add a Development Standard to say: All dewatering pumps shall be powered by
electric motors, and no diesel powered dewatering pumps shall be allowed, including diesel generators to
power electric. Fred Walker seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
Jack Epple moved that Case USR-1343, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with
the amendments to the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions
recommendation of approval. Michael Miller seconded the motion.
Arlan Marrs commented that the Owens Brothers have demonstrated a willingness to work with the
neighbors and hope to continue to do so with the water issues.
Michael Miller commented that he has known and worked with the Owens Brothers for years and they have
always been very forthright and have always done what they said they are going to do,and is confident they
will work with all the land owners to address their concerns. Of all the gravel operators and concrete
producers they have a good group to work with.
John Folsom commented that he wished some of the things in the applications could be resolved prior to
hearings to have facts before them.
Bryant Gimlin commented that this case was refreshing to see the applicant and neighbors working so well
together, and they all showed a willingness to work together.
Fred Walker commented that his goal as a Planning Commissioners it to be effective, and when most
people come in they play on emotions and their presentations are not factual, but today they did have facts,
and he appreciates that.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Arlan Marrs, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Cristie Nicklas,
yes; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m.
Respectfully pe sub • ted
[Cad
Wendi Inloes
Secretary
Hello