HomeMy WebLinkAbout20012133 HEARING CERTIFICATION
DOCKET NO. 2001-57
RE: SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT#1306
FOR MINERAL RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT FACILITIES INCLUDING A CONCRETE,
ASPHALT, AND PRE-CAST BATCH PLANT AND GRAVEL MINING IN THE
A(AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT - PLATTE SAND AND GRAVEL, LLC
A public hearing was conducted on August 22, 2001, at 10:00 a.m., with the following present:
Commissioner M. J. Geile, Chair
Commissioner Glenn Vaad, Pro-Tem
Commissioner William Jerke
Commissioner David Long
Commissioner Robert Masden
Also present:
Acting Clerk to the Board, Esther Gesick
Assistant County Attorney, Lee Morrison
Planning Department representative, Kim Ogle
Health Department representative, Charlotte Davis
Public Works representative, Don Carroll
Public Works representative, Drew Scheltinga
The following business was transacted:
I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated August 3, 2001, and duly published August 8, 2001,
in the Tri-Town Farmer and Miner,a public hearing was conducted to consider the request of Platte
Sand and Gravel, LLC for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit
#1306 for Mineral Resource Development Facilities including a Concrete, Asphalt, and Pre-cast
Batch Plant and Gravel Mining in the A(Agricultural)Zone District. Lee Morrison,Assistant County
Attorney, made this a matter of record. Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services, gave a brief
description of the location of the site, stated the site consists of irrigated and non-irrigated river
bottom lands,with marginal pasture, and a majority of the site is located within the 100 Year Flood
Plain of the St. Vrain and South Platte Rivers. Mr. Ogle stated the site improvements consist of
several residences owned by the applicant and a working ranch facility located west of Weld
County Road 23. He gave a brief description of the surrounding uses, and stated the area to be
mined is not located in an Urban Growth Boundary. He further stated Fort St. Vrain is surrounded
by the proposal; however, it is in an area that will not be mined. Mr. Ogle stated the total permit
area is 1,620.41 acres, 831.11 of which will be mined, and 15 acres which may be used for a rail
yard. He explained 774.3 acres will not be disturbed, most of which are adjacent to the South
Platte River, or consist of terrace areas, oil and gas protection areas, and the ranch facility. Mr.
Ogle stated the site will use a private access extending north from the intersection of Weld County
Roads 23 and 36, along the eastern property line. He gave a brief description of the haul route,
and added there will also be an access on the northern boundary to deliver the product to that area;
however, it will be used sparingly. Mr. Ogle stated 18 referral agencies offered comments, and
seven did not respond. He further stated a response was received from the school district,which
was not sent a referral with the application, and staff also received 54 letters from surrounding
property owners prior to the Planning Commission hearing indicating concerns regarding increased
2001-2133
pi; /2 #1 //D PL1545
HEARING CERTIFICATION - PLATTE SAND AND GRAVEL, LLC (USR #1306)
PAGE 2
traffic, negative impacts to area wildlife, noise, dust, road conditions, safety for the residents,
quality of life, decreased property values, and impacts to wells and aquifer.
Mr. Ogle entered the unfavorable recommendation of the Planning Commission into the record as
written. He stated prior to the Board's hearing, the applicant's representative submitted a revised
application, as well as additional information intended to address the concerns expressed at the
Planning Commission hearing. Mr. Ogle stated the documents indicate a reduction in the area to
be mined from 831.11 acres to 180 acres,with the mining to be completed in 20 years rather than
110 years. He stated the referral agencies have not had an opportunity to review the proposed
changes. Mr. Ogle recommended the case be referred back to the Department of Planning
Services for public referral comment and a hearing before the Planning Commission. He explained
all parties should have the opportunity to review the new proposal, and staff also recommends the
case be considered as an entirely new application with the appropriate fees assessed.
In response to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Ogle reviewed the proposed changes and stated he has
not had adequate time to be certain whether or not other changes are being proposed. He
explained rather than mining in nine separate phases,the applicant will complete the mining in one
phase. He further stated the surrounding property owners have selected a representative to give
one formal presentation. Responding to Chair Geile, Mr. Ogle stated rather than creating seven
lakes, there will only be one lake called Sharkey Lake, which will take 20 years to mine. He further
stated the number of employees will be reduced from 200 to 40 working in two shifts. In response
to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Ogle indicated all of the correspondence received since the Planning
Commission hearing has been included in the file as Exhibits E through Y. Chair Geile referred to
an E-mail which was received from Joe Pinner, dated August 20, 2001, indicating the mining will
destroy a very historical area in Weld County. Responding to Chair Geile, Mr. Ogle stated he
contacted the Colorado Historical Society,which did not indicate any concern with the items listed
in Mr. Pinner's E-mail. He further stated a similar letter was submitted to Senator Ben Nighthorse
Campbell, who indicated the State had no further information. He stated he is not aware of the
applicant conducting any other studies. In response to Commissioner Jerke, Mr. Morrison stated
in the past, with cases that are proposing a reduction, he has recommended the Board proceed
unless the Board determines the Planning Commission's recommendation is not valid due to the
changes. He stated the entire area received notification, the notice has been published, and the
applicant is proposing to constrict the mining area, not change the location or type of operation.
He stated following review,the Board can request further input from referrals if deemed necessary,
or send the matter back to the Planning Commission. He further stated it does not appear that
there is precedence to require the applicant to start over. Mr. Morrison explained State statute
requires the Board to receive an adequate recommendation from the Planning Commission. He
stated the Planning Commission recommendation may still be valid because it encompasses the
entire area, rather than the reduced proposal resulting in a conservative recommendation. He
stated the Board needs to decide whether the Planning Commission's recommendation is still
useful. Commissioner Vaad stated there is a 78 percent reduction in acreage and a reduced time
period to complete the mining. He explained the Planning Commission relies on the referrals
received in making a recommendation to the Board of Commissioners,although they do not always
do what the referral agencies request. He stated the Planning Commission's recommendation is
based on referrals regarding the original proposal, as well as 54 letters received from surrounding
property owners. Commission Vaad commented substantial changes have been proposed.
Commissioner Long concurred,and added the changes may result in a different impact to the area
which may alter the comments submitted by the neighbors. Commissioner Long stated he is
2001-2133
PL1545
HEARING CERTIFICATION - PLATTE SAND AND GRAVEL, LLC (USR#1306)
PAGE 3
uncertain whether he could make a decision based on comments from the referral agencies and
the public when they are speaking to a different proposal. He indicated it may not be necessary
to start over;however,the current comments and recommendations do not appear to be applicable
to what is being proposed to the Board today. Mr. Morrison stated a presentation from the
applicant may clarify the changes for the Board and the public in attendance. Commissioner
Masden expressed concern with the applicant submitting a revised application with substantial
changes at this point in the process. He stated he is not comfortable with making a decision based
on the information he has been provided, and indicated a new application should be submitted and
the process should start from the beginning. Chair Geile stated various permits and agreements
have been created or obtained under the current application. In response to Chair Geile, Mr. Ogle
stated the agreements submitted by the applicant were requested prior to scheduling this hearing.
He stated most of the agreements were done under the old application. Mr. Morrison stated staff
recommended approval of the original application and proposed Conditions of Approval to the
Planning Commission. He stated the applicant complied with those items, although the proposal
was recommended unfavorably by the Planning Commission.
Thomas Haren, AgPro Environmental Services, LLC, represented the applicant and clarified only
two revisions have been made to the application at the recommendation of Planning staff and the
Planning Commission. He stated the mining resource exists, it will be mined someday, and they
simply reduced the size and scope of the application. Mr. Haren indicated the Planning
Commission recommended denial based on compatibility issues due to the large size and length
of the permit. He stated the application size and mining period has been reduced; therefore, the
referral comments are very conservative, yet still relevant. He stated the agreements are based
on the original 811 acres which were proposed; however, he does not feel that has any bearing on
the recommendation from the Planning Commission or requiring another review by the Department
of Planning Services. He stated the agreements were completed prior to scheduling this hearing,
and reiterated the mining area will be reduced to 180 acres to be mined in 20 years.
Commissioner Vaad commented he would prefer to make a decision once he has received a new
response from the referral agencies based on the revised application materials. He stated the
hearing may proceed today; however, that may not result in a positive outcome. Commissioner
Long concurred with Commissioner Vaad's comments,and stated there will be a change in impacts
based on the reduction in size. He stated there will be a significant change in the scope of the
project and he is not comfortable with making assumptions. He further stated an important part
of the process is allowing input from his constituents and referral agencies based on any proposed
changes and their potential impacts. Commissioner Jerke commented without review by the
referral agencies, the process for reviewing this application is tainted and may result in an appeal
by either side depending on the outcome. He suggested the applicant submit a new application,
with the understanding that staff work with the applicant to prevent the duplication of the work that
has already been done. He further stated the revised materials need to be reviewed by the referral
agencies and Planning Commission, with minimum cost or difficulties. Commissioner Masden
stated he feels this is a substantial change that needs to go back through the process, and he is
not comfortable with making a decision at this point in time. He further stated it is important they
receive relevant referral response from the various agencies and their constituents. Responding
to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Morrison stated the board has the option of continuing this hearing to
a date that will allow adequate time for the referral agencies to review and respond. The second
option would be to refer the case back to the Planning Commission, for review of new referral
responses. Mr. Morrison stated he does not feel that making the applicant start over is consistent
2001-2133
PL1545
HEARING CERTIFICATION - PLATTE SAND AND GRAVEL, LLC (USR#1306)
PAGE 4
with the actions of prior boards on the basis that the application has been reduced. He stated there
may be some additional costs to staff as a result of this amended or modified application; however,
he does not recommend the applicant be required to start over. In response to Commission Vaad,
Mr. Morrison stated if required to start over, the Planning Commission will receive a new
recommendation from staff, rather than just receiving new referrals based on the revised
application. Chair Geile commented he would like to proceed with this matter. He stated the
impact to the surrounding property owners will remain regardless of whether the operation is
reduced. He stated there is a large number in attendance and through discussion and review,
everyone can be made aware of what the new proposal involves and make their comments based
on the new information. Chair Geile stated the applicant has taken a significant risk in proposing
changes at this point and he is prepared to review the changes and make a decision. Mr. Morrison
stated if the Board proceeds with the hearing and concludes there is still not enough information,
then the matter can be continued to allow adequate time for referral responses based on the new
application. Commissioner Jerke suggested the Board continue the matter to allow for review of
the revised application by the referral agencies. Responding to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Morrison
stated the Board will need to set a specific date for the continuance to keep the matter on the
docket. He stated the referrals agencies are allowed 21 days for review of the new materials. Mr.
Ogle stated often referral responses are not received within the 21 days and the Board may want
to allow some additional time. Chair Geile stated he has reviewed the referral comments and he
does not foresee any significant change in the position of the referral agencies, regardless of the
proposed changes. He stated a large number of the public has taken time to be here, and he is
concerned with starting a trend of amending applications following consideration by the Planning
Commission. He further stated that if the application must go back, he would prefer the matter only
go back to the Planning Commission, not start over. Chair Geile called a five minute recess.
Upon reconvening, Mr. Haren stated he has discussed this matter with the applicant, they would
like to have the matter referred back to the Planning Commission without having to submit a new
application. He further requested that staff expedite the referral and review response before the
Planning Commission. Commissioner Vaad commented he appreciates the applicant's willingness
in allowing the Board to receive the proper comments from the referral agencies. He recognized
that although there will be a significant cost, going back to the beginning of the process is not
appropriate. He would appreciate if the matter were reconsidered by the Planning Commission
based on the new comments received from referral agencies regarding the revised application
materials.
Commissioner Vaad moved to refer the revised or supplemental application request of Platte Sand
and Gravel, LLC for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit#1306
for Mineral Resource Development Facilities including a Concrete, Asphalt, and Pre-cast Batch
Plant and Gravel Mining in the A(Agricultural)Zone District, back to the Planning Commission to
be reconsidered by September 26, 2001, after new referrals have been sent out. Commissioner
Masden seconded the motion. Mr. Ogle stated a hearing before the Planning Commission on
October 2, 2001, would allow adequate time to send and receive new referral responses.
Commissions Vaad and Masden amended the motion to refer the matter back to the Planning
Commission, with a hearing to be held on October 2, 2001, for consideration of the amended
application and referral comments. Upon a call for the vote, the motion carried unanimously.
2001-2133
PL1545
HEARING CERTIFICATION - PLATTE SAND AND GRAVEL, LLC (USR #1306)
PAGE 5
Commissioner Vaad commented that although the public has taken time to attend this hearing,and
the applicant has invested in having expert testimony present, he feels it is important that everyone
hear the new proposal and then make relevant comments. Chair Geile commented that the action
taken today also gives the message that land use applications with significant changes need to be
dealt with in the correct manner. It is not appropriate to propose those changes to the Board
without prior review. He indicated the revised information will be made public and notices of future
hearings will be mailed and published.
This Certification was approved on the 27th day of August 2001.
APPROVED:
BOARD OF C NTY COMMISSIONERS
//� WELD COU Y, COLORADO
ATTEST: '�;.:C' IE IL f%% 221air�J . Ile, Chair
Weld County Clerk to the Isar •
/, ,_
U861 1861 (,t
y lenn Vaad, Pro-T
BY: t' .-7/40.-, . L` t y,'' ' — /
Deputy Clerk to the Bo �:� $# Ll / 5 ' A- r"`
William H. Jerke
TAPE #2001-353:1)01/44,1) (C, 1.. r
vi E. Lo
DOCKET #2001-57
Robert D. Masden
2001-2133
PL1545
ATTENDANCE RECORD
HEARINGS ARE AS FOLLOWS ON THIS 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2001:
DOCKET#2001-57 - PLATTE SAND AND GRAVEL, LLC
PLEASE legibly write or print your name and complete address and the DOCKET#
(as listed above) or the name of the applicant of the hearing you are attending.
NAME AND ADDRESS
� a(Please incl de City and Zipp Code)DDOCKET#OF HEARING ATTENDING
I � 9 ( �J t.1 2.• • Y.AC Vur
:
714 ✓/ t ti 2065/
p -m att ,,, gr Lc / 4-a °DI-5 7
MicL ieA Fi-Asv,;l_ (71 -tv; (le ?,0e ,s- 1 act - c7
Z tvlr
c)ANDs ' gliCEI1-1 TiA-PIA di �(X 7_0ot -`,c;_
5ovcw Y,,,„ �Z.6 S / �aa / - '7 aiti79 ,,u.«:�. ?de.-0 4-1a�, - -,7
h et 'e�ut/ SO(o5/ 2boi -.S7
,_,-col- `1
xg4-25,,.,
c Cr (� Ut �� �J� -C7( ? c )( �
v x Pitt nFii-li/ fSU6Sl
7 L ✓I .QI ?Pa a,ct & Des ) '2c701 - s`7
(,0Q.ss Ieb ac -a- �Plcure.v,ite_ -pb,) aohs i Ds7at -5 -
d /ye q 3osyz• i,
I J�-e,(L u/i (te-ThN P/et , 6 S / it
do Barb 1 e- e ec mnci GI(crest - (.elcl .R.C--.1 86&)
ATTENDANCE RECORD
HEARINGS ARE AS FOLLOWS ON THIS 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2001:
DOCKET#2001-57 - PLATTE SAND AND GRAVEL, LLC
PLEASE legibly write or print your name and complete address and the DOCKET#
(as listed above) or the name of the applicant of the hearing you are attending.
NAME AND ADDRESS(Please include City and Zip Code)DOCKET#OF HEARING ATTENDING
relic Ocdc niJaul-i — ilb6a uic,e 3b -121014o) /L. 7i cioo/- s
a.,ra I 0cip.nbaa* //b@/> Loe7e d - ✓J7aifeui Ite - 1 0760/- C7
t\A2 i Y BIoat1 I - 232'{ Pocti. Stkoec L, vu eoLzcat - S7
`cid/41 /44 rc.t i_r\ /l,2.Sv tvC E .SPict, (leer •iG 5/
2.c.A,0, i etA,2 ,/ ,(:),, ,,- 1,a) 3 2 .i °I�7/117v;/_/e cCo
(7{ � / 'cc'4.4 7/its-- jJ-sf'Jac)4 /Aepe,i/ (I ye s7
._„, '?11,265/. Hay4b ✓ S > Cc) 5106 S/
" �.J o j 2/ q /L7@ f' '3 /1 ?_: ;),71.1_,,,:(16 (`'� ?0 s 4y
% ,I,L.O74 i (t /02i cd eto O7� ai sc063-/
' ? 6T t
/ ,n.,,�,..�pi/14A_ � l A/C�6 9 rrI,``f1,l,^�R 3n �p�/>./�LCe�rt� CoIL t l 4 `*zc o73 1 k(-4 a /6_ C or/
)ti 1 .e l 291 //i c a2'.&3 -PQ- .4 l& LLB . ?L0��/
"ex sl d mr itte Abili� 2,7A, ,a I--eYs--f
chrtAy £• OPk31. F?4cMiI 1/700 tuc/231- a9/a /i<-‘,//c G. 2063 /
,Hi,t /, r-1 19g41S wfl� a .2-. Pia_I-Futl4,--.
f,,
e/rr/1/i (Lgz52pDai 5-Oi "e/P7//E 1 12I 4( . ?-dO Sr al
�}c -d s c .�
fff '27cprim,443co8'06 Si
emu,,•- /.(57/ wcR 32 17L 24'7 I_EV/«E R'Cypc/
c-c tip� ivs \1/4,c1A-1UJQI2a a 1,6c. RZ I
L,, i&Piu.l llru,4i WIN IN 11)C i2 3(e i xt e 6 S0GLSI
z - y�qz ct 3' I , (-_) Co gel
cu-Q-- f e, A Ioct97 WCg 3C 2LJ rreviLLe CO 80651
ATTENDANCE RECORD
HEARINGS ARE AS FOLLOWS ON THIS 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2001:
DOCKET#2001-57 - PLATTE SAND AND GRAVEL, LLC
PLEASE legibly write or print your name and complete address and the DOCKET#
(as listed above) or the name of the applicant of the hearing you are attending.
NAME AND ADDRESS(Please include City and Zip Code)DOCKET#OF HEARING ATTENDING
Iii, Rt� , I I�i9 We P. 3Fa �� �, Cry sr, ZGD;�.-`7
Lin ?csle/- ;.=-)
P , Fa e ( 20/6)&7 r. 'C 7 f�l,lli 7cr�co-y-4-3 2ewi -z�
n �, //awe t/(1/0751-
/7 G�: irra' 4;4- A%%— 37z007-JL7�ylShe VUa Yu5 SuN - dIyo -co $G2s7 30O1-57
A...enskjitaatt /l,S'y co 1130 4 z Cc/c ??D(c si ,'Z o 0/^.$s7 Sezek-
MEMORANDUM
fTO: Board of County Commissioners August 30, 2001
WIIVCFROM: Carol Harding, Office Manager
COLORADO SUBJECT: Fees - Platte Sand and Gravel, LLC
The application of Platte Sand and Gravel, LLC was referred to the Planning Commission for
rehearing on October 2, 2001, after receipt of new referral responses. Monica and Lee disagree
about whether you intended the applicant to resubmit an application from the beginning with new
fees attached, or return the revised or supplemental application back to the Planning Commission
with the applicant paying additional costs such as postage and publication costs.
In reviewing the record, the majority of the Board either did not give an opinion or said it was not
appropriate to start over (which would necessitate new fees). I have highlighted the appropriate
comments in the attached hearing certification. The motion specified the Board "refer the revised
or supplemental application. . . back to the Planning Commission to be reconsidered September
26, 2001, after new referrals have been sent out." The motion was then amended to have the
Planning Commission hearing held on October 2, 2001. If the Board wishes the applicant to again
pay the entire fee (approximately $1,100), the matter should be placed on the agenda for official
determination of that choice. Please indicate below what action should be taken:
Process as Amended Process as New Reconsider
Application (Pay only Application (Pay at Regular
Additional Fees) All Fees) Board Meeting
Mike ee
Bill --'
Gl
enn 7
Rob —
Dave
�G'Y7Qe32i- 46
09—/p— ;2(1O1
Hello