HomeMy WebLinkAbout20013324 SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, November 6, 2001
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held Tuesday, November 6, 2001, in the
Weld County Training Center, 1104 H Street, Greeley, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by Chair,
Michael Miller at 1:35 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Michael Miller
Bryant Gimlin
Cristie Nicklas �.
Fred Walker
John Folsom Absent
Stephan Mokray
Cathy Clamp
Luis Llerena
Bruce Fitzgerald
Also Present:
The summary of the last regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission held on Tuesday,October
18, 2001, was approved as read.
1. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED FEES AND 2002 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING DATES
Monica presented a brief narrative on the hearing dates for the 2002 year with the meetings being held on
the first and third Tuesday of every month with a modification January. The proposal is to eliminate the first
meeting in January or hold in on the first Thursday. The January meeting does not have many cases on the
docket therefor you can leave it a staff discretion as to whether that meeting must be held.
Motion made by Cristie Nicklas to approve dates as scheduled and leave the first meeting in January at staff
discression as the whether it is needed or not. Stephan Mokray seconded. Motion carried
The second element is to consider proposed changes to the 2002 budget. Two sections are effected. The
first is the Uniform Building Code section for a mobile manufactured home. The present fee is for$187.50
and the request is to change to$220. The reason for the change is to purchase stickers that is now required
to be placed on the structures. The first section change is to the Use by Special Review for a Mining
Operation from $1,100 to a base line of$2000 plus extend the fee so there are no limitations. The second
change is to change modify the fee for Minor Subdivisions verses Major Subdivisions. This will be a
decrease from $1,150 to $500. The staff tries to make sure that the time is adequately balanced with the
fees. The PUD process will be changed as well. The Substantial Change Hearing is proposed to change
from$200 to$500. The reason for this is to cover costs. The final two items are for the ability to charge for
staff consulting and the final is a$700 increase to cover the cost of a mixed use development. There is not
present cost and we believe that this comes very close to the County cost for covering those cases.
Michael Miller asked about the hourly rate with regards to the consulting. Mrs. Mika stated that everyone in
the Department of Planning Services will establish the rate depending on where the staff is and what their
position is. The recognized fee will typically be the County Rate.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one from the public wished to speak.
Motion made by Cristie Nicklas to send the fee schedule to the Board of County Commissioners with a
recommendation of approval. Stephan Mokray seconded. Motion carried.
e°v'zy't 2001-3324
/.2- 03-02001
2. CASE NUMBER: SCH-20
APPLICANT: Jim Fell/Beebe Draw Farms
PLANNER: Monica Daniels-Mika
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Sections 3,4,5,8,9,10,15,16 and 17, T3N, R65W of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Substantial Change Hearing to a previously denied 2nd Filing PUD
Final Plat for 536 lots.
LOCATION: Approximately 6 miles east from the Town of Platteville; east of
WCR 39; and south of WCR 38.
Monica Daniels Mika, Director of Planning Services presented Case SCH-20,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.
Jim Fell, provided a brief description on the changes in the project. Mr. Fell stated that there was going to
be changes to the phasing of the project. The phased will consist of 50 homes at a time. The new plan will
have fewer, larger lots and more open space. There will also be the development of the Beebe Draw
Metropolitan District that will routinely inspect the septic systems and the leech fields.
David Clinger, Environmental Land Planner, provided further clarification on the project. Mr.Clinger stated
that this new plan had decreased the amount of lots(563-419)while increasing the size of those lots. The
idea of them being a cluster would make the amount of open space increase dramatically a total of 1021
acres. The density is one home for every six acres. The Weld County health Department will have ruling
over the septic systems. Minimum lot has been increased to 2.5 acres. Traffic reduced by 1000 trips per
day. The land has been dedicated to school district and fire department by the developer.
David Shupp, Engineer, provided further clarification with regards to the septic system in the project. The
project will be using subsurface sand filtration system to treat prior to dispersal into the subsurface. There
will be joint supervision of these systems by the Weld County Health Department and the Beebe Draw
Metropolitan District. This supervision will cover all the filings in Beebe Draw. The District will provide
ongoing maintenance including pumping of the tanks, ground water monitoring and field testing. They will
also provide the information to the Weld County Health Department. The cost will be absorbed by the
individual homeowner. These plans proposed are in compliance with the Health Department and County
Code requirements. Mr.Schupp gave some back ground on the service and maintenance of the individual
sewage systems.
Jackie Johnson, attorney, provided some initial background on the project from its inception in 1984. The
developer was indeed true to his word with the requirements. This project will take time to be built out and
those impacts will also be drawn out.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Steve Paranto, stated that he believes that the developer has provided adequate information for a major
change. The residents agree with this change because it is cost prohibitive to those residences. The home
owners believed that they were buying into an environmentally safe area.
Carl Jebson, believes that there is no substantial change with regards to the septic tanks. The septic are still
draining into the same system. There is no treatment for the systems. The project as a whole is based
around the lake and that it is a problem right now.
John Jebson, stated that there is conflicting stories as to the monetary loss.
The chair closed the public portion.
Cristie Nicklas moved that Case SCH-20,be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of
approval. Stephan Mokray seconded the finding of a substantial change
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Stephan
Mokray,yes;Michael Miller,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes;Cristie Nicklas,yes; Fred Walker,yes;
Luis Llerena, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
3. CASE: USR-1339
APPLICANT: Rocky Mountain Energy Center, LLC (Calpine)
PLANNER: Monica Daniels-Mika
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
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.
LOCATION: Power Generation Facility: East of and adjacent to WCR 49, one
mile north of State Highway 52 just East of I-76; Wellfield Site,
North of WCR 58, West of WCR 51
Monica Daniels Mika, Director of Planning Services presented Case USR-1339, 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.
Bryant Gimlin asked why does the county want to change the boundaries of the proposed USR. Mrs. Mika
stated in order to make the referred buffer substantial it needs to be address within the boundaries of the
proposed site.
Monica Daniels Mika stated that the issue concerning the oil and gas notification. Mr. Barker provided
clarification with regards to making notification to those who have mineral right interest in the property. There
is no objections to the notice provided but draw attention as to whether the House Bill 2001-1088 does apply.
Steve Bain7 spoke as a representative for the RME Land Corporation, which owns the oil and gas under the
proposed site. There is an agreement with the applicant for drilling and production that is in the process and
should be finalized in the near future. He requested that there be a condition of approval that would include
the finalization of this agreement before the project proceeds, if it is approved. He also stated that RME has
no objection to proceeding based upon the notice to mineral owners.
Bob Palmeroy, provided clarification and further information on the project. Mr. Palmeroy began with the
need for the project and the projection of the electricity in the future. The state expects to have one million
new residents. This project will be both clean and energy efficient. There will recycling of the hear exhaust
from the turbines to use in the third. The system is gas fired and more efficient than the older coal systems.
There will be the same output as Fort St. Vrain but the size of the facility will be dramatically smaller. This
project will have 10 year lease to use remaining acres for agricultural purposes with the option on the farmers
part to renew this for another ten years. The plant will benefit Weld County by improving electric reliability as
well as provide 25 permanent employment positions. There is a thirty year life minimum for the plant. Tax
benefits are approximately 84 million. Some of the beneficiaries will be Keenesburg School District, Weld
County Library District, Aims,Central Colorado Water Conservancy District and Central Colorado Water Sub-
District. Calpine has conducted several outreach venues in order to gain public input. They have also
attempted to gain information from local groups as well as the individual public.
Dave Perkins, gave the reasons for the selection of this site. Mr. Perkins stated the compatibility of the
adjacent land use along with the Railroad tracks and the proximity to the existing utility corridors. The water
source and delivery of that water is being addressed. There is an agreement with Aurora to allow delivery for
the next ten years. The delivery will be to the South Platte River. The water will then be withdrawn from the
wells adjacent to the river then transferred to the plant through a new proposed pipeline. The selection
process started with the Request for Proposal process from the Public Service Company RFP process. Public
Service suggested certain projection points. The location needed to be verified as to where the need was and
with reasonable transmission time of the utility. The compatibility was found in this area because of the
existing industrial area adjacent to Hwy 76 and the Burlington Northern Railroad line. The area has been in
transition towards the industrial district. This project is close to transportation corridor as well as the natural
gas interconnection. Calpine has made attempts to involve each of the affected land owners and offer those
owners the opportunity for mitigation measures with regards to landscape visual barrier on their property.
Michael Miller asked about the importance of the Railroad spur. Mr. Perkins stated that a number of goods
are received by rail. There is also a possibility for a temporary rail spur for construction into the site. This
would limit the impact on Weld County roads. Mr. Miller asked about the ponds, and what evaluations have
been done with regards to fog and the effects off of those ponds. Mr. Perkins stated that they do not
anticipate fog but referred the technical aspects to his associate.
Gary Aaron, Plant Manager, stated there is not a large amount of discharge(app. 200 AF) that will combine
with the pond which is at ambient temperature in order to make the fog.
Stephan Mokray asked about the uses of the water. Mr.Aaron stated that 95%will eventually evaporate while
the remaining 5%will be used in the process to cool the plant. They will de-mineralize that water.The water
will be recycled and reused several times in the process.
Bruce Croker, provided clarification with regards to the water supply plan and usage in the proposed project.
The water is primarily used for water cooling purposes approximately 3000 acre feet per year. There is a
water lease agreement with the City of Aurora with a possible extension if both parties agree to extend. The
method of delivery will be to the South Platte and pumped from wells that are adjacent to the river and
transferred through the proposed water pipeline. This project is located within the Box Elder Creek Drainage
which has limited surface water rights. Mr. Croker has looked into the possibilities of alternative routes for
the water. The plan is based on the reuse of treated wastewater and the plan will not injure existing water
rights. There is also an agreement with Central Colorado Water Conservancy, in principle, for longer term
water supply beyond the ten year period. Mr. Miller asked why the City of Aurora could not enter into an
agreement longer than ten years. Mr. Croker could only speculate as to the answer,which was that the City
of Aurora would not want to be locked into the same price for water for a period longer that ten years.
Cristie Nicklas asked if the wells have the water court and state approval. Mr. Croker stated that they have
not been received yet and will look at several alternatives if they are not approved. Mrs. Nicklas asked how
they could prove that the wells in the area would not be harmed by this. Mr. Croker stated that the primary
wells will be adjacent to the river to minimize the effect of pumping on the primary water table and the back
up well will be further away from the river. There have been models to determine that there will not be an
effect off site. The water court will require them to operate in a manner that does not effect surrounding water
sites.
Fred Walker asked why not pumping directly from the river and not at the aquifer level. This cause the need
for a augmentation plan for the wells. Mr. Croker stated that the well will be close to the river while the state
engineer says if you're within 100 feet of the river it is a direct diversion and thus there is no need for an
augmentation plan. The control will be easier if pumped directly from the ground adverse to putting in a
diversion facility. Mr. Walker asked about the augmentation plan that they are discussing with Central and
if it is separate from the irrigators. Mr. Croker stated that Central and the applicant have not come to an
agreement with regards to the preferred way to do the plan. Calpine will pay an amount of money so that
Central can buy additional water to cover Calpine as well as the existing users.
Cathy Clamp asked why the option of the plant being air cooled was not considered. Mr. Perkins stated that
the dry cooling method was considered but they are contractually obligated to provide a ceratin number of
megawatts at a certain heat rate. Dry cooling impacts the output and the heat rate. Mrs. Clamp asked for
clarification on the steam turbines. Mr. Perkins stated that there will be two combustion turbines fired by
natural gas with the waste heat from those turbines getting turned into steam which will run through the third
steam turbine. This process is 40% more efficient than the older coal systems. Mrs. Clamp asked the
amount of steam output and the dangers of the ice buildup on the roads and if they would you consider a Road
Impact Agreement. Mr. Perkins stated that they have looked at the possibility but the steam plume is directed
upwards. The location of the towers are located approximately 3-4 thousand feet from the interstate which
allows the steam to dissipate before it reaches the interstate. They are also at a higher elevation from the
interstate. Mrs. Clamp also asked about the effects of blow outs and how often during start up and is there
mitigation. Mr. Aaron stated that it will occur in the last two months before commercial operation during
construction. Silencers are installed on the steam blow lines to mitigate the sound. Blow outs will occur during
normal operations and those can be done during daylight hours.
Fred Walker asked about the City of Aurora's water being fully consumable. Mr. Croker stated that once the
water that is"trans basin" is transferred in to a new basin it is fully consumable.
Mr. Palmeroy, provided final summary for the presentation and the topics that were not covered with the
questions by the board. Air Quality was determined to be less than the state standards while landscaping will
include a buffer of trees around the actual site. Calpine has offered to landscape on homeowners site if they
would like. There will be some light at night primarily for safety which will be down directional along with
motion sensors or switched lighting. Traffic will be minimum after construction with the best route being off
1-76 down Frontage Road to Weld County Road 51. Calpine has been asked by Weld County Department
of Public Works to pave Weld County Road 51, which will be accommodated, and improve the Railroad
Crossing at County Road 51.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Randy Yeaker, spokesman for Concerned Citizens of Weld County, discussed several topics concerning a
better site preferred by the citizens, along with an unfinished site analysis. The group has done extensive
research for a better site north of Keenesburg which it not in prime agricultural land and few residences,along
with the fact that there is an existing advantage being near a waste management and Coors Flyash Disposal
plants. Mr. Yeaker presented a site comparison of the two sites with the advantage mostly being for the
Keenesburg site.
Jackie Nunam, had concerns with the water impact and the augmentation from Aurora. There are some
concerns with the excess capacity and exactly how much they will actually use. The Wellfield site ground
water is not specific with regards to the number of wells. There is no mention of specific ditches that could
be affected mentioned in the application. There is no Hydrological Study that has been completed, specific
route determined for the gas and water lines. The Concerned Citizens feel that there should be a limit on the
capacity that directly relates to the water issues. The waste water will result in a Brine. This Brine has a
combination of chemicals and Calpine does not indicate what those are nor does it give any information with
regards to the evaporation pond. There has been no decision as to whether a septic or sewage treatment
plant will be constructed. Another concern is the impact on air quality specifically the psd pollutants. There
are health hazards and crop problems with those air pollutants. There should be a critical habitat studies
done. The Banner Lake Bird Reserve should be included into the studies. There are also traffic concerns
with regards to trips per day from workforce,deliveries and the significant low calculation of those trips. The
plant lighting is a concern.
Bryant Gimlin asked about the negativity of both sites. Mr. Yeaker stated that Calpine has yet to prove that
this is a better site in comparison with the Keenesburg site. The studies and complete information need to
be provided regardless of which site is chosen.
Cristie Nicklas asked about Banner Lake and where it is located and what is the source of the water. Mrs.
Nunam stated it was approximately 1/2 mile east of proposed site and it ties into the Box elder Creek system.
Bruce Fitzgerald asked about the Keenesburg site. Mr.Yeaker was told by Calpine that the Keenesburg site
was not viable and the time table of it would be upset. Mr. Fitzgerald asked when was Calpine spoken to with
regards to this. Mr. Yeaker stated it was approximately 6 months.
Julie Blakely, stated that she was against the plant because she feels that Calpine went on a fact finding
mission to use information against the citizens. The biggest concern is with the Hudson Annexation and the
fact that it was dropped as a considered site.
Sharon Parker, stated she was against this project. Her main concerns were of terrorist activity. Power
generated would not be consumed into this area it would be sent to Denver area.
Mike Lane,stated the major concern would be the steam and the fog over the road and the contract with Excel
is for only ten years. Everything seems to be a contingency contract.
Bob Grand, stated he supports the plant due to the economic nature. Benefits from Calpine towards the
community and the school district. Calpine made a major commitment into the community.
Leonard Roskop, President of the Hudson Chamber of Commerce, supports the building of the power plant
and submitted a letter of approval.
John Cortes, Mayor of Keenesburg, stated that there was no conflicts with Keenesburg. The town supports
the Power Plant and the benefits that is would have on all the surrounding areas. The water line was the only
issue that needed to be addressed.
Fred Walker asked hypothetically about the site being located in Keenesburg and how would the Town feel
about it. Mr. Cortes stated that he would think it would be better for the commercial/industrial to be closer to
the interstate while the residential areas are not.If the industrial areas are closer to the transportation corridors
then there is not a need for the trucks to go through residential areas.
Luis Llerena asked about the proposed site having a lack of surrounding houses and if he was opposed to
the alternative site. Mr. Cortes stated that the Town would be amicable for the alternative site.
Bruce Barker interjected that it is the responsibility of the Planning Commission to only take into consideration
the site that was before them today. There was not an application for the alternative site. The criteria must
be applied to the current site and if the applicants wish to investigate an alternate site it would then need to
come back through the process with that site.
Mark Coffman, stated that he was in favor of the power plant.
Craig Pralle, member of the Southeast County Fair Board, stated that he was in favor of the plant.
Boyd Arnold;stated that he was in does not want more traffic going down the road. He would support it next
to the area.
Carrie Kuntz;stated she was in favor of the power plant. She believes that the school district will benefit from
this.
Alex Swank,—stated that he was in opposition of the site because the future of the area was in question. He
wondered what would be next. The different proposed location is not in prime farm ground and the proposed
site near Hudson is.
Brian Perry-stated that he was in opposition of the project. He does not want the power plant because of the
new transmission lines added on his property.
Mark Richards,—stated some of the positive aspects consisting of the large tax base, increase in jobs during
construction and the traffic will be minimal once construction is done. Along with the fact that the vapor issue
is virtually non existent.
Michael Miller asked about the vapor and ground effect. Mr. Richards stated that the effects were virtually
no effect on the roadways.
Marvin Wade, Superintendent of Weld RE-3J School District, stated that he is in favor of the plant both
personally and professionally. Mr.Wade stated that the school district will be a benefit and Calpine has made
every attempt and given every answer that was requested of them. A resolution was submitted into the
records.
Bryant Gimlin asked about the bus routes that would be effected with the vapor. Mr. Richards stated that the
vapor was not a significant issue to not vote for it.
Jody Marx;stated that she is in opposition and wants to know about the compensation for the land owners.
The tax benefits will be great for either site. The decision will impact several homes.
Joe Roper;stated he was in favor of the plan. He lives in close proximity to a plant and feels that the fog
banks come from the Fort Lupton Plant being built to close to the road.
Ed Rossie, Mayor pro-tern Hudson,stated they are in support of the plant because of the benefits that it would
bring to the community of Hudson. Mr. Rossie further stated that responsible growth needs to be done but
growth cannot be stopped.
J. Phillip Brewer, stated he has concerns with the planning that would abort future problems. Mr. Brewer
would like to see the buffer designated in the future. There would never be a change of zone.
Judy McGill,—stated she is in support of the project.
Pamela Simpson;stated she is in support of the project.
Jim Magnatee;has three statements. 1. What happens to land value when a plant is built next door? The
value went up by 600%. 2. What happens to land value when high tension lines are built next door? The
value goes up 15%. 3. What happens to land value under high power transmission line. The value goes up
in value over 200%.
Ron Klaphake-stated he was in support of this project. He reiterated the benefits that the plant will give to
the neighboring community.
Lloyd Land, representing adjacent land owners, stated that both owners represented were in favor as well as
himself, a land owner, in favor of the project. Mr. Land is the farmer that maintains the 10 year lease for the
purpose of agriculture.
John Hofffmiller—stated he was in favor of the plant.
Jim Lambert,—stated he was in favor of the plant and the benefits would be great.
The chair closes the public portion of the meeting.
Mr. Palmeroy-provided additional information with regards to the issues that were brought up during public
comment. Specifically with regards to the site before the Planning Commission.
Mark Podrez, Air Quality Consultant, provided clarification on the vapors with regards to the Hwy 76 to the
north. The proximity of the site to the roadways bear a large factor in the issue along with the usage of dry
turbines where there is no water injections. The Calpine towers use a high efficient mist eliminators which
prevents the water exiting to be 10 times lower that the older designs. Mr. Podrez stated that the location of
the plant along with the meteorological issues or conditions can be conducive to the ice and fogging.
Computer models were used to evaluate the possibility and area effected. These models were done with a
very conservative analysis. The results indicated that the cooling tower plume could be visible by the Highway
3/4 of 1% in a year. By the time that you are at an area of 3/4 of a mile away there will be virtually no effect
from the icing or vapor concentration. Mr. Podrez addressed the issue of icing on Hwy 52 by stating that the
wind blows 40%+ of the time from the south southeast direction.
Michael Miller asked about the emission and if there was a better possibility. Mr. Podez stated that they
already have the best possible options and there could be nothing done.
Mr.Miller asked the final height of the cooling tower and the dimensions of the plant. Mr.Palmeroy stated that
the height would be 65 feet of the cooling tower. Mr. Aaron stated that the dimensions with the generator
would be 90 feet high above grade and approximately 150-200 ft in length with a exhaust stacks 175 feet
above grade and 18.5 feet in diameter. The width is approximately 40 feet.
Michael Miller asked about the effects on the irrigation ditches and the brine, does it have a hazardous
material? Mr. Aaron stated that there would be no effluent from the pond to the creek and the evaporation
pond is the final destination. There will be nothing released off site. The brine becomes a sludge bed and
it may need to be emptied and trucked off to a landfill and designated as a non-hazardous material. Mr. Miller
asked about the activity going on 24/7. Mr.Aaron stated that this would be during construction and during the
final phase of commissioning. Proposed is a 12 hour shift construction.
Bruce Croker-stated that there will continue to be water used by the leased land to farm. Mr. Miller asked
about the projection and the water being 3000 or 5000 acre feet. Mr. Aaron stated that the 3000 feet is an
annual level. There will be times when the draw is higher as well as lower.
Steve Mokray asked where the gas line is coming from. Mr. Aaron that they will be interconnected with
Colorado Interstate Gas main feeder line.
Cathy Clamp asked about the environmental studies with regards to Banner Lakes. Mrs. Mitchell,
Environmental Planner, the studies have been limited to the properties that are within the site. Calpine has
had discussion with Department of Wildlife(DOW)and conclusion of the studies were that there was no effect
within this area. The studies that were done were for the site as well as the areas along the pipeline and the
conclusion was that there was no effect on any wildlife species. There was a site specific study along Box
Elder Creek area and found there was no effect. Mr. Miller asked about the risk to wildlife with regards to the
ponds. Mrs.Mitchell discussed with DOW and determined that the ponds might be of a benefit. Mr.Palmeroy
added that the DOW issues have been address.
Mr. Palmeroy addressed the following issues with the development standards and the conditions of approval.
The issues will be item 2A and the water issue and providing a water agreement prior to scheduling the Board
of County Commissioners (BOCC) and having the agreements for the full thirty years of water supply. Ms.
Mika stated that the change should and is in effect with the code requirements. There could be some
language changes but there needs to be something that guarantees the water supply for the life of the plant.
Mr. Palmeroy stated that it was their hope that the ten years would carry them for now and they are asking
for the time to work through the problems. The amount of time will take possibly a couple of years with the
Water Court.
Bruce Barker provided clarification with regards to the adequacy of the water supply amount and where the
water supply is coming from.
Michael Miller stated his concern with the fact that there was no time period included that would enable the
County to begin process of revoking the permit. Mr. Miller suggested that language be in place stating that
2 years prior to the expiration of this water lease(City of Aurora)or any applicable extension of the lease the
applicant has to provide written confirmation of the next lease. This would force the applicant to provide the
information to maintain the permit.
Monica Daniels Mika stated her concerns with the ability for the Planning Staff to do the follow up. She
suggested that the responsibility be placed on the applicant to provide the information to staff.
Mr. Palmeroy, wants to change Condition of Approval 1 from 60 days to 120 days. Bruce Barker stated that
the 60 days is there to prove that they are doing something that shows they are working on it. Condition of
Approval item 2B the survey is not being done through the Colorado Historic Preservation Office and that this
be done prior to having the BOCC hearing and not prior to the scheduling of the hearing. Monica Mika stated
that the applicant stated in the application that this study was being done and the Department of Planning
Services needs to obtain that information to be able to make a request. It is a good idea that a third party
does the study and it can be done prior to the BOCC hearing. Mrs. Mika would like to have that study in the
Department of Planning Services office ten days prior to the hearing. Mr. Palmeroy stated that a third party
is doing the survey. This survey is done on the Wellfield site. Next,is Condition of Approval item 2C and what
is Contingency Plan and if it can be done prior to the recording of the plat not the BOCC hearing. Mrs. Mika
stated that the applicant was the one who proposed the Contingency Plan. The one thing is that the Plan be
reviewed by Emergency Management. Mrs. Mitchell provided clarification with regards to what they think the
Contingency Plan is with regards to closure plan, temporary and permanent. Mrs. Mika stated that the Plan
can be submitted with the plat. This can be moved to prior to recording the plat. Mr. Palmeroy had issues
with Condition of Approval item 3.A.(3), specifically, problems with the buffer area and realigning the
boundaries. There is are some legal problems with realigning the boundaries with regards to notice. Bryant
Gimlins stated he would like to see it stay agriculture. Bruce Barker stated that a Conservation Easement may
be appropriate. Mr. Palmeroy asked to modify item 3.A.(1)to remove the language with regards to the DOW
and can live with the plan being approved by the Weld County Department of Planning Services Staff.
Luis Llerena has issues with expanding the site and not maintaining it as an agricultural use. Mr.Miller agreed
that the conservation easement sounded to be the one thing that would benefit both parties.
Mr. Palmeroy stated that they are working on a conservation easement. The one problem is that they are
not directed to do the easement that it is ordered. Mr. Barker provided some clarification with regard to a the
conservation easement. Mrs. Mika provided some language with regards to siting language from the
application. This language can be made a condition stating from information in the application"only 14%of
the property will be occupied by the RMEC within the USR boundaries and will conserve a significant amount
of existing farmland in environmental sensitive areas for a total of 545 acres. The majority of the remainder
of the 633 acre property will be maintained for Ag purposes to remain as a buffer to the existing residences
in the vicinity of the power plant." This still gives the applicant the ability to do the conservation easement but
does not direct them to do so. Mr. Palmeroy stated siting those pads of the application is true. Mr. Palmeroy
wants the record to reflect that it was Calpine's initiative to begin the process for the conservation easement.
They do not want any part of the extension of the USR boundaries.
Mr. Palmeroy had further issues with 2.B.were grammatical changes as well as the submitting evidence of
approval, but submitting evidence of application. This would enable Planning Services to know that they are
in the process, knowing that it takes time to complete and process. Char Davis stated that there was not
much problem because they are going to have to go through the State for the process but had problems with
wording with regards to construction. She suggested the Commission include the words"for construction and
operation"and "construction of gas and water line."
Mr. Palmeroy questioned item 2.C.with regards to the timing and the issuance of the permit(UIC), if needed,
would be a pre-operation permit. He would like to change the time line to reflect"prior to operation"not"prior
to recording the plat." Char Davis stated that she has issues with this in regards to following up on the
application. Ms. Mika stated to strike the language prior to commencing commercial operation and it can be
added to the building permit application and this enable the ability to enforce. The language would be
changed to"Prior to the issuance of a CO " This would be a new category consisting of"Prior to the
issuance of CO." This new category would include 3.H. and I. Mr. Palmeroy stated that his next issue was
with 2.D.with regards to the residential premises. This concern relates to the residences at the Wellfield and
Power Plant Site. Char Davis stated that the septic systems,whether commercial or residential, is still septic
system. Mr. Palmeroy had issues with Item J. and what was being required. Calpine has a letter stating all
of the requirements and they have agreed to them. There will be deletion of 3.K, L, M, N and renumbered to
L, M, N, O stating 3.L. to be"the applicant shall adhere to the Improvements and Maintenance activities for
WCR 51,as specified in the November 5,2001,memo from Weld County Department of Public Works." 3.M.
shall state that"the applicant shall provide approval from CDOT regarding improvements for 1-76 Frontage
Road and the I-7/WCR 49 interchange and construction activities. 3.N. shall read"the applicant shall install
signals and gates at the Railroad crossing on WCR 51 and WCR 16 if needed. 3.O.shall state"the applicant
shall receive approval for use of right of way in accordance with the County Utility Permit Process. The
standard for installation on any gravel roads shall be to return the road to the width of 24 feet with 3:1 for
slopes and a minimum of 4 inches of compacted Class 6 gravel or the existing width and depth whichever is
greater. The standard paved roads shall be the width of the existing roadway." Item 3.J.will be deleted. Mr.
Palmeroy stated the he would like to change language in Item 3.K. from "evidence of approval/compliance"
to"the report." Mr. Hempen does not have a problem with the request. Next was Item N and the applicant
would like to have this within 30 days of water Court approval. Ms. Mika stated the language is fine with the
addition of"if needed". The final issues is with the Development Standard #4 with regards to the Emission
Permit. There is no emission and the applicant would like to have that removed.
Finally back to the issue of the buffer zone. Mrs. Mitchell provided the following language with reference to
3A(3)in the Developmental Standard 3. The language is as follows: "In accordance with the application,the
RMEC design will preserve a significant amount of farmland and environmentally sensitive area of the
Property for the term of the USR Permit."
Mr. Palmery stated that the inserts from Planning Services are grammatical issues. Access issues at the
Wellfield site are from both 51 and 58 and the addition of the letter dated 10/25/01. Item 2.A. on Planning
Staff with regards to the Oil and Gas exploration, would prefer it to be prior to the hearing before the Board
of County Commissioners, not the scheduling of the hearing.
Mr. Bain stated that the one outstanding issue has been resolved and there is nothing left but to get it down
in black and white for signatures. The one issue of concern has been resolved. This agreement can be done
prior to the hearing. Ms. Mika stated it that the requirement of an oil and gas agreement can be moved to"two
weeks prior to Board of County Commissioners hearing" rather than "prior to scheduling BOCC hearing."
Item 2.A.(5)deals with the parking area and requests that it be paved. This would take the ground out of use
for something else. Mr. Miller asked if it was road base or some other type of material. Ms. Mika stated that
the words"be paved and"can be removed.
Ms. Mika added that there are some issues that need to be addressed prior to the motions. One of those
being the submittal of a Cooling Tower Vapor Study Fog Plan to the Weld County Department of
Environmental Health for approval with the outcome being incorporated into the design of the site. This would
be addition of things. Also the Planning Department would like to have the applicant submit to scale a plat
layout showing all structures to the FAA for approval. All conditions of the FAA will be incorporated into the
design of the structure and facilities. FAA might want to require beacons on the tops of the towers. There
are also some specific changes to 2.A.with regards to the applicant shall submit a copy of the agreements.
2.E. suggests the submitting of the maps with a adequate scale. The plat maps need to be the same scale.
Page 11 number 22 specifies the hours of operation needs to be something. The suggestion is that the hours
of operation during construction should be M-S from 6am -6 pm. This will cause renumbering.
Luis Llerena questioned the hours of operation for construction as well as the actual operation. The
suggestion is to go from sunrise to sunset instead of actual hours.
Mr. Palmeroy stated that there will be a need for 12 hours a day during the construction but at the time of
commission of the plant there will be a need for 24 hours on occasion. There may be time during construction
that will need to be more than the 12 hours a day. Mr. Palmeroy agreed to the 6-6 time frame.
Fred Walker moved to accept the applicants proposed language for page 7,item 2.B.in the County document.
Cristie Nicklas seconded motion . This will be placed as a Development Standard#2
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Stephan
Mokray,yes;Michael Miller,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes;Cristie Nicklas,yes; Fred Walker,yes;
Luis Llerena, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Cristie Nicklas moved to change 2.C.to be accomplished within two weeks prior to BOCC hearing and that
Cultural Resource Study be done by a third party. Bryant Gimlin seconded.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Stephan
Mokray,yes;Michael Miller,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes;Cristie Nicklas,yes; Fred Walker,yes;
Luis Llerena, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Bryant Gimlin moved to accept the language on item 2C from the applicant changes with regards to the
Contingency Plan and make it 3A(6). Cathy Clamp seconded
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Stephan
Mokray,yes;Michael Miller,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes;Cristie Nicklas,yes;Fred Walker,yes;
Luis Llerena, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Cristie Nicklas moved 3A(3)that deals with the conservation easement. It is moved to accept the applicants
language. Bryant Gimlin seconded
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Stephan
Mokray,yes;Michael Miller,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes;Cristie Nicklas,yes; Fred Walker,yes;
Luis Llerena, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Cristie Nicklas moved that"be paved in" be removed from 3A(5). Cathy Clamp seconded
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Stephan
Mokray,yes;Michael Miller,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes;Cristie Nicklas,yes; Fred Walker,yes;
Luis Llerena, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Cristie Nicklas moved to change the word approval to application in 3B. Bryant Gimlin seconded
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Stephan
Mokray,yes;Michael Miller,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes;Cristie Nicklas,yes; Fred Walker,yes;
Luis Llerena, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Cathy Clamp moved to change the location of 3C, H, Ito 4 A, B, C under the heading of Prior to the issuance
of CO. Bruce Fitzgerald seconded
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Stephan
Mokray,yes;Michael Miller,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes;Cristie Nicklas,yes; Fred Walker,yes;
Luis Llerena, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Cristie Nicklas moved to delete 3 J, K, L and insert Ms. Mika language stated earlier with reference to the
Memo from Department of Public Works. Cathy Clamp seconded
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Stephan
Mokray,yes;Michael Miller,yes; Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes;Cristie Nicklas,yes; Fred Walker,yes;
Luis Llerena, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Cristie Nicklas moved to accept the applicant language and change it to the Department of Public Works.
Bryant Gimlin seconded
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Stephan
Mokray,yes;Michael Miller,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes;Cristie Nicklas,yes; Fred Walker,yes;
Luis Llerena, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Bryant Gimlin moved that Development Standard #4 be deleted and it be renumbered. Cristie Nicklas
seconded
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Stephan
Mokray,yes;Michael Miller,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes;Cristie Nicklas,yes; Fred Walker,yes;
Luis Llerena, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Bryant Gimlin moved to change the hours of operation to Monday thru Saturday from 6am to 6pm during plant
construction and during commission phase the applicant will be allowed to operate 24 hours a day. Cristie
Nicklas seconded
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Stephan
Mokray,yes;Michael Miller,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes;Cristie Nicklas,yes;Fred Walker,yes;
Luis Llerena, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Cristie Nicklas moved to change 2A to two weeks prior to the BOCC Meeting. Cathy Clamp seconded
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Stephan
Mokray,yes;Michael Miller,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes;Cristie Nicklas,yes;Fred Walker,yes;
Luis Llerena, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Bryant Gimlin moved to change the order of the Development Standard to consist of #2 being the water
agreement, #3 be the boundary issues 3A(3). Cristie Nicklas seconded
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Stephan
Mokray,yes;Michael Miller,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes;Cristie Nicklas,yes;Fred Walker,yes;
Luis Llerena, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Bryant Gimlin moved that Case USR-1339,along with the amendments,be forwarded to the Board of County
Commissioners along with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning
Commissions recommendation of approval. Stephan Mokray seconded the motion
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Stephan
Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes with comment; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Cathy Clamp, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes;
Fred Walker, yes with comment; Luis Llerena, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Walker commented that the water supply plan has some lasting effects on the farmers in the area.
Mr. Miller commented that they are in a difficult position with trying to balance the growth of the County and
the new development. They are in a position to try and make things work. The Board of Count
Commissioners needs to be aware of the concession made by the Board with regards to the water and the
buffer area. Those issues need to be addressed at the Board of County Commissioners hearing.
Meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted
\c\\�s� -
Voneen Macklin
Secretary
Hello