HomeMy WebLinkAbout20002699.tiff SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING (Corrected)
Tuesday, October 17, 2000
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held Tuesday, October 17, 2000, in the
Weld County Public Health/Planning Building, (Room 210), 1555 N. 17th Avenue, Greeley, Colorado. "'-he
meeting was called to order by Chair, Cristie Nicklas, at 1:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Fred Walker Present
Cristie Nicklas Present
John Folsom Present
Jack Epple Present
Michael Miller Present
Stephan Mokray Present
Arlan Marrs Absent
Bryant Gimlin Present
Cathy Clamp Present
Also Present: Chris Gathman, Kim Ogle, Anne Best Johnson, Julie Chester, Sheri Lockman, Lauren Liyht,
Department of Planning Services; Sheble McConnellogue, Trevor Jiricek, Department of Public Health and
Environment; Don Carroll, Public Works; Lee Morrison, Assistant County Attorney; Trisha Swanson,
Secretary.
The summary of the last regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission held on October 3, 2C 00,
was approved as read.
Fred Walker moved to change the agenda to allow the following cases to be first in order to continue: USR-
1279, Z-548, USR-1291, and USR-1287. Michael Miller seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decis on. Jahn
Fo som, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Cathy Clamp,
yes; Fred Walker, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1279
APPLICANT: Aggregate Industries
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the W2 and the NW4 of Section 8, Township 4 North, Range 66
West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Permit and Special Use Permit for a Gravel Mining Operatio in
the Agricultural Zone District.
LC CATION: North of and adjacent to WCR 46; East of and adjacent to SH 60.
Kim Ogle, Planner, noted that the applicant is requesting a continuance for December 5, 2000, to allow t me
to work out traffic issues. Mr. Ogle noted that the Department of Planning Services is in agreement with this
continuance.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this continual on.
Nc one wished to speak.
Stephen Mokray moved that Case USR-1279 be continued to December 5, 2000. John Folsom seconded
the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. J
Folsom, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Cathy Clamp,
yes; Fred Walker, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
06/YtiLi yr
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
October 17, 2000
Page 2
CASE NUMBER: Z-548
APPLICANT: California Home, Inc.
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the NW4 of Section 35,Township 3 North, Range 68 West of the 6th
P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Change of Zone from Agricultural to PUD for a proposed 18-lot business park PUD
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to WCR 28, East of and adjacent to 1-25 frontage road.
Chris Gathman, Planner, noted that the applicant has asked for a continuance to work with Public\A orks on
the realignment of the road.
Cathy Clamp asked if this case has been re-posted or re-advertised. Chris noted that the signs have been
placed twice, but that there have been no public letters involved with this case.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against his conti warce.
No one wished to speak.
John Folsom moved that Case Z-548 be continued to November 7, 2000. Stephen Mokray seconded the
motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision John
Folsom, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Cathy Clamp,
yes; Fred Walker, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes. Motion carried unanimously
CASE NUMBER: USR-1291
APPLICANT: H S Gathering, LLC
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the N2 NW4 of Section 14,Township 2 North, Range 66 West of the
6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Special Use Permit for a natural gas processing plant and CO2 removal facility.
LOCATION: South of WCR 22, 1 mile west of WCR 31.
Chris Gathman, Planner, noted that the Department of Planning Services is asking for a continuance to
November 7, 2000, as the location was stated incorrectly. Chris noted that a property owner who wished to
speak was not in town and preferred that the case be continued as the location was incorrect. Chris noted
that the Assistant County Attorney recommended this continuance in order to allow the neighboring property
owner to submit material evidence before the Planning Commission.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
John Folsom moved that Case USR-1291 be continued to November 7, 2000. Cathy Clamp seconded the
motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes: Catny Clamp,
yes; Fred Walker, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-r,287
APPLICANT: Hodges Mining Resource/Asphalt Specialties Company, Inc.
PLANNER: Anne Best Johnson
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: S2 of Section 17, Township 2 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., Weld
County, Colorado.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
October 17, 2000
Page 3
REQUEST: Use by Special Review in the Agricultural Zone District for a Gravel Mining and Batch Plant
Operation.
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to WCR 20.5 and west of and approximately 1/4 mile east of WCF 3
Anne Best Johnson, Planner, noted that the applicant is requesting a continuance to December 19, 2000 h
order to resolve issues with the surrounding property owners, Public Works, the ditch company, and he
Department of Planning Services. Anne also noted that the comments received were preliminary and that he
Department of Planning Services would be sending out new packets at the time of the hearing and to turn in
the packets they had received.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Stephen Mokray moved that Case USR-1287 be continued to December 19,2000. Bryant Gimlin seconc ed
the motion.
The Chair asked he secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Cathy Clamp,
yes; Fred Walker, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes. Motion carried unanimously
CASE NUMBER: USR-1285
APPLICANT: Lambland Inc., dba A-1 Organics
PLANNER: Julie Chester
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of Section 36,Township 3 North, Range 64 West of the 6th P.M., Weld
County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a Solid Waste Disposal Site
and Facility (Composting Facility).
LOCATION: Adjacent to the Coors Energy Site on a private road, approximately four miles north of 176
and five miles from the Town of Keenesburg.
Jack Epple stepped down to avoid a conflict of interest.
Julie Chester, Planner, read the Department of Planning Services recommendation of approval into the
record. Julie also noted that the Planning Commission would have to vote first on the Special Use Permit,
then have a second vote to approve the Certificate of Designation.
Cristie Nickles noted that Development Standard #15 should read "four" instead of"our". Julie agreed hat
this should be changed.
John Folsom asked if the Planning Commission is the final authority or if this moves on to the Board of County
Commissioners for final approval. Julie noted that the Board of County Commissioners will have the final
approval on this application.
Cathy Clamp asked if the concerns of Waste Management were covered in a condition of approval. Julie
noted that the new improvement agreement addresses this concern.
Bob Yost, representative for the applicant, stated that this s an active composting area of 200 acres wi'.hin
the 400 plus acres of the site. Mr.Yost noted that there will be no toxic components to the composting faci:ity.
Mr. Yost also noted that the compost is shipped off site and that the site will not be a landfill.
John Folsom asked if the site would be receiving raw material from Waste Management. Mr. Yost noted that
they could recycle materials received by Waste Management. John Folsom also asked if they would be
accepting materials from dairies and feedlots. Mr. Yost stated that they would.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
October 17, 2000
Page 4
Cathy Clamp asked if the site would be by wholesale only or if it would be open to the public. Mr. Yost noted
that they could possibly open to the public. Cathy Clamp noted that because of possible molds in the area
they should post signs warning of the possible health hazard of the mold. Mr. Yost noted that they would be
willing to do this.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Cr stie Nicklas asked if the applicant was in agreement with the Conditions of Approval and Development
Standards. Mr. Yost noted they are in agreement.
Cr stie Nicklas asked Don Carroll if Public Works felt the improvements agreement will suffice for toe issue
of road maintenance. Mr. Carroll noted that Public Works will work with the applicant to get an acceptable
agreement.
Cathy Clamp moved that Case USR-1285 be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with
the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the amendment to Development Standard 415
wording with the Planning Commissions recommendation of approval, noting that the application was in
compliance with the proposed Amendment 24. Michael Miller seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. J
Folsom, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller,yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Cathy Clamp,yes; Fred\Nal cer,
yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Cathy Clamp moved that the Certificate of Designation for USR-1285 be approved and forwarded to the Board
of County Commissioners along 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; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Cathy Clamp, yes; Fred Walker,
yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: Ordinance 191-F
APPLICANT: Weld County
PLANNER: Anne Best Johnson
REQUEST: Amendments to the Mixed Use Development (MUD) Plan to encompass the removal of
Section 3 and Figure 2.10 from the MUD Plan, Ordinance 191.
Arne Best Johnson, Planner, noted that this is to remove Section 3 from Ordinance 191-E, as this ,vas
mistakenly recorded. Anne noted that Section 3 is the background information used to create the ordinance
and was never intended to be a part of the document. Anne also noted that Figure 2:10 is a part of the
Subdivision Ordinance and will be easier to reference and change if it is only in one ordinance.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Michael Miller asked if this would create a new ordinance that contained the background information. Anne
noted that no new ordinance would be created.
Jack Epple moved that Ordinance 191-F be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of
approval. Stephen Mokray seconded the motion.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
October 17, 2000
Page 5
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Cathy Clamp,
yes; Fred Walker, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1290
APPLICANT: Nextel Communications
PLANNER: Lauren Light
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SE4 SE4 of Section 18, Township 3 North, Range 66 West of the 6th P.M ,
Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a Major Facility of a Public
Utility (Wireless Communication Facility).
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to WCR 32; approximately 1/2 mile east of SH 85.
Lauren Light,Planner, read the Department of Planning Services recommendation of approval into the recc rd.
Lauren noted that the antennas will be placed on an existing water tower with existing antennas.
Cathy Clamp asked if the antennas would be larger than the existing antennas. Lauren noted the a,plicant
would be able to answer that.
Fred Walker asked why Development Standard #8 allowed industrial noise levels. Sheble McConnellogJe,
Department of Public Health and Environment, noted that the past USR's for the same application have all
had this Development Standard. Sheble noted that this is usually for construction purposes.
Herb Quintana, Representative for Nextel Communications, noted that the antennae would be sirnilam to the
existing antennae on the water tower.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Herb Quintana noted that they are in agreement with the Development Standards and Conditions of Approval.
Stephen Mokray moved to approve Case USR-1290 with the Conditions of Approval and Development
Standards, noting that the application was in compliance with the proposed Amendment 24. Michael Miller
seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Jack Epple, yes: Bryant Gimlin, yes; Cathy Clamp,
yes; Fred Walker, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1288
APPLICANT: Mike Goss
PLANNER: Sheri Lockman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the SE4 of the SW4 of Section 16, Township 5 North, Range 66
West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for an Agricultural Service
Establish (Animal Training and Boarding) in the Agricultural Zone District.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to 289' Street and approximately 800 feet west of 65' Avenue.
Sheri Lockman, Planner, presented Case USR-1288 and read the Department of Planning Services
recommendation of approval into the record. Sheri noted that the City of Greeley asked for denial of 'his
application, but the City of Greeley is not part of an IGA with Weld County. The applicant will be required to
attempt to address the concerns of the city.
Michael Miller asked if there would be any changes to the site from its current state.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
October 17, 2000
Page 6
Sharyn Frazer, AgPro Representative for the applicant, noted that Mr. Goss has been doing this on nis
property for the past four years, he is just looking to protect his property for the future. Ms. Frazer noted bat
this will allow Mr. Goss to continue training the animals he works with,that the cattle are for training purposes,
then fattened back up and sold.
Cristie Nicklas asked why Mr. Goss is doing this as a commercial permit, rather than keeping it private. M ke
Goss,Applicant, noted that he would like to keep the property in the same use when the city has surrounded
him, and that the USR will allow him to keep the animals he uses within the city limits. Michael Miller asked
if Mr. Goss only uses the animals for practice. Mr. Goss noted that he uses them to train his horses.
Cathy Clamp asked if he planned on using this for public performances,with heavy traffic or events Mr. Goss
noted that he does not plan on events on his property, that this is only for training of his animals.
Bryant Gimlin asked what problems the applicant has with the City of Greeley. Sharyn Frazer noted that 'he
City of Greeley wants Mr. Goss to pave his driveway and try to meet the City's animal unit requirements
Cathy Clamp asked if Mr. Goss would have to lower his animal units if annexed. Tom Haren with AgPro noted
that if this application is approved, it would act like a non-conforming use, allowing Mr. Goss to continue in
his current capacity.
John Folsom asked if the only animals on premises would be in training or if there would be animals traile ed
in for several days. Mr. Goss noted that he is not looking to be a horse boarder, he will board some animals
he is training, but that these animals would be on his site for 30-60 days
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 Nicklas asked if the applicant is in agreement with the Development Standards and Cond'tionm of
Approval. Sharyn Frazer indicated that the applicant is in accordance.
Bryant Gimlin moved that Case USR-1288, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with
the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of
approval, noting that the application was in compliance with the proposed Amendment 24. Michael M Iler
seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision John
Folsom, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Jack Epple, yes, Bryant Gimlin, yes; Cathy Clamp,
yes; Fred Walker, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1289
APPLICANT: Terry Dye, Dye:iands Dairy LLC
PLANNER: Julie Chester
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Parts of the W2 of Section 5, T7N, R67W of the 6th P.M., Weld Cou ity,
Colorado.
REQUEST: S.te 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 (4,000 head Dairy).
LOCATION: East of and adjacent to WCR 15; north of and adjacent to WCR 84.
Cristie Nicklas noted that the Planning Commission would take several minutes to look over the large packet
of letters that had just been handed to them.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
October 17, 2000
Page 7
Julie Chester,Planner,presented USR-1289 and read the Department of Planning Services Recommendaton
into the record. Julie noted that much of the letters were recently received and that the Department of
Planning Services has not had time to completely research them.
Cathy Clamp asked about the concerns with the application not being complete and the legal notification tot
being legal. Julie noted that the letter Ms. Clamp was referring to had just been received, but that the s aff
felt the legal description was sufficient for notification and that the staff did feel the application was compl.ate
when received on August 21, 2000. Julie further noted that the file has had several pieces show up missing
as there has been so much activity with surrounding property owners.
Lee Morrison noted that from the number of public attendees that notification had been thorough enough. Mr.
Morison further noted that the argument that the application was not complete could be argued each way,
but that the application was believed complete when it was accepted. Mr. Morrison also noted that the
argument that the application might not be in accordance with Amendment 24 could be argued against by the
county as this could be considered agricultural.
Michael Miller asked if the water would be acceptable for the use. Julie noted that the North Weld County
Water District has stated the ability to provide water for the site. Julie noted that the applicant will purchase
the water as they expand, not wanting to buy the taps and water without an approval for their site
John Folsom asked if the case should be heard if the completeness of the application is in question. tee
Morrison noted that the staff had determined the application complete. Mr. Morrison also noted that the
Planning Commission could decide if they felt the application was incomplete and use that as a reason for
denial if they chose. Julie Chester noted that the Department of Planning Services felt the application was
complete when turned in, but that certain records had since become missing from the file.
Discussion concerning covenants in the area followed. It was decided that this was for a neighboring property,
not for the site.
Terry Dye, Applicant, noted that he will only be milking 2,000 cows at a time, that the rest will be dry cows or
calves,which is the reason they asked for 4,000 cows on the application. Mr. Dye also noted that the site will
only expand as the supply is demanded. Mr. Dye also noted that only about 60-70 acres of the 278 acres will
be part of the dairy,the rest will be farmed. Fred Walker asked if Mr. Dye was planning on keeping the young
and dry stock at a separate site and milking 4,000 cows at this site. Mr. Dye noted he does not plan to move
these cows off the site.
Gristle Nicklas asked at what hours the machinery and trucks will be run on the site. Terry Dye noted that
there will be employees during the day and machinery for feeding, but only from about 5:00 am to 5:00 pm.
Michael Miller asked about the farming on site. Mr. Dye noted that the approximately 200 acres not in the
actual dairy will be farmed.
Michael Miller asked if Mr. Dye expected this much resistance from the neighboring property owners Mr. Dye
noted that he has never had a complaint about his current dairy to the west (that he considered this a good
location for a dairy, surrounded by the farmland and agricultural uses). Mr. Dye noted that he feels that the
surrounding property owners would rather have a huge subdivision there instead which surprised him a lot.
Terry Dye noted that the land is perfect for a dairy, that it is close to 1-25 for transport of his product, and that
it is close to his current dairy. Michael asked if Mr. Dye planned to operate both dairies. Mr. Dye stater he
planned to operate both dairies.
John Folsom asked how many cows are at the current site. Mr.Dye noted there are 2,000 cows at his can ent
dairy in Larimer County, that the new dairy could have 1,100 as a use by right, but they wanted to plan ahaad
for the future.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
October 17, 2000
Page 8
Cathy Clamp asked how many large trucks would be coming into the site per day. Mr. Dye noted that there
will be about 5 trucks per day into this site,for the feed, milk trucks, etcetera. Cathy asked about the on-site
accessory housing. Mr. Dye noted that dairies are starting to offer on-site housing to keep help, that he lid
not originally want the housing, but wanted to plan for the possibility in the future.
Cristie Nicklas asked about the many signatures in favor of his new dairy. Mr. Dye noted that these were
signatures of people who had been to his current dairy and were in support of his proposed dairy
Torn Haren with AgPro, Representative for the applicant, noted that this is a good dairy site, noting it is lot
landlocked,that the natural hills leave very little of the dairy visible and that the dairy site has been placed 500'
from the south road and 600'from the west road. Mr. Haren noted that the number for the 4,000 head was
his idea, in order to keep close to 2,000 head milking. Mr. Haren noted that Mr. Dye's herd is a closed herd
that is registered, allowing for Less disease and better milk. Tom Haren noted that the application he turned
in was complete, bJt that the Department of Planning Services file seemed to have some things missing frjrn
the original.
Cathy Clamp asked if the applicant would be willing to move the ponds farther from the surrounding property
owners. Mr. Haren noted that the ponds have been set back quite a distance from the property line, but that
the applicant would be willing to berm to the west as well as the south. Mr. Haren also noted that the ponds
are large, but that is because the system they are setting up for this dairy uses relatively little water,the larder
pond will be for emergency and storm runoff, probably being dry most of the time.
Discussion concerning an aerial photo taken of the site followed,with notes made that most of the homes .are
to the south, west, and southwest. Julie noted that the aerial photo being discussed is from exhibit 20 Pram
Dr. Kimberling.
Michael Miller asked why dairies were expanding if milk prices were so low. Mr. Haren noted that smaller
dairies are closing, while it is taking larger dairies to make a profit anymore.
Cathy Clamp noted that most of the opposition concerned the size of the dairy. Ms. Clamp wanted to krow
if the applicant would be willing to lower the numbers at the dairy and amend the permit as they grew. Tom
Haven noted that this would change the entire balance of the dairy. John Folsom noted that he would prefer
they had a large enough dairy to meet the conditions that the Use by Special Review placed upon the
operation. Mr. Haren also noted that if they do not get the Use by Special Review, they will still be allowed
to have 1,100 cows by right and these cows will all be milkers, not dry cows and calves.
Cristie Nicklas asked the Planning Commission members their thoughts on the completeness of the
application and if they were concerned with continuing the hearing. Fred Walker noted that the applicai ion
was complete. Michael Miller noted that the application essentially is complete, that all planning cases nay
be needing some additional information, but that this is complete enough to continue. Cathy Clamp noted that
she has a concern with the legal notice given within 500'. Stephen Mokray noted that he feels that the number
of people at the hearing shows that enough people were contacted concerning this case.
Jack Epple moved that Case USR-1289 was a complete application and to continue the hearing. Stephen
Mokray seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Cathy Clamp,
yes; Fred Walker, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes. Motion carried unanimously
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Brent Coan, attorney for Mary Weiss, noted that his client is concerned with the health problems of dist,
property values lowering, as well as the groundwater and water supply for the site.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
October 17, 2000
Page 9
Mike Goss noted that he has been to Mr. Dye's current dairy and stated that it is one of the best dairies he
has ever been to for cleanliness and for management.
Dale Tanaka, Banker for Mr. Dye, noted that Mr. Dye has always made good concise decisions, and follows
the advice of professionals in order to do the best job possible.
Howard Ramsdell, a nearby property owner and CSU professor, noted he is concerned with the possible
health problems associated with living near a dairy. Mr. Ramsdell noted that there are several recent
subdivisions downwind of this site. Mr. Ramsdell noted that pulmonary disease has been linked to dairies,
as well as asthma and allergies. Cristie Nicklas asked for more data and the name of the study that linked
dairies to pulmonary disease. Mr. Ramsdell noted he did not have that information, but could try to find it.
Michael Miller asked where Mr. Ramsdell felt a good place for a dairy was, in his opinion Mr. Ramsdell stated,
where there were no residences nearby.
Sonja Stonestreet noted that a buyer of her property is concerned with the possible trailers for on-site f elp.
Ms. Stonestreet noted that the trailer homes would devalue her property. Ms. Stonestreet also noted a
concern about the water being available.
Linda Russell,surrounding property owner, noted that she and her husband have lived there for 29 years and
that the area is small family farms, not commercial in scope. Ms. Russell noted that she does not feel this
dairy would be good for her grandchildren to play on her farm. Bryant Gimlin asked how the dairy would effect
her grandchildren's safety. Ms. Russell noted that she feels there will be more traffic. Discussion concerning
Ms. Russell's covenants followed, noting that this does not have any effect on Mr. Dye's dairy.
Lynn Russell, surrounding property owner, noted he had the same concerns as his wife.
Keith Mullins,a surrounding property owner,noted that the Planning Commission has allowed the subdivis ons
in the area, changing the face of the area to a more residential feel. Mr. Mullins noted that he feels the
groundwater is too high for the ponds and that there will be more trucks than the 5 per day noted. Cathy
Clamp asked if Mr. Mullins has a problem with the use by right in the area. Mr. Mullins noted that he does not
feel there is enough water in the area for either the Use by Special Review or the use by right.
Jane Lens, a surrounding property owner, noted that she feels the area is becoming developed ane tha the
trucks will be a problem.
Inge Dirmhein, a nearby property owner, noted that she does not feel the ponds will be able to hold the water
and might effect her land. Ms. Dirmhein noted that she also feels the scent will blow down the hill along with
dust.
Randolph Denney noted that he has worked with Mr.Dye for years and that he lives between the existing carry
and the proposed dairy. Mr. Denney noted that Mr. Dye runs a very clean operation, controls flies, dust, and
is an excellent manager.
Caroline Cleary, a surrounding property owner, noted that she is opposed to the dairy, not Mr. Dye, and that
she is worried about her ditch being disturbed by the access.
David Haak, a surrounding property owner, noted that he would support a use by right but does not wan the
Use by Special Review. Mr. Haak notes he feels the odors, noise, and property values can not be rn tigated.
James Erthal,the property owner to the southwest of Mr. Dye, noted that they have had a petition agains.the
dairy at the site since July. Mr. Erthal noted that he does not want 4,000 milkers, that he wants the Plan ling
Commission to limit the number of milkers at the site. Bryant Gimlin noted that this is not a high density
residential area, that it is an agricultural area.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
October 17, 2000
Page 10
Les Gelvin, noted that there are subdivisions in the area and that he feels the employees and the dairy will
have an impact on the roads. Cristie Nicklas noted that subdivisions tend to generate more traffic than the
dairy would generate. Fred Walker noted that the subdivision was allowed in the agricultural zone, which is
a newer use. Mr. Walker noted that this area was an agricultural zone first, then the subdivisions were
allowed in to the area.
Jeanne Gelvin, a surrounding property owner, noted that she feels this is more like a factory than agriculture,
with all the lights and trucks.
Betty Kimberling, a property owner for 32 years, noted that she feels the dairy will not be able to control the
possible runoff and that this may effect her farm as well as other farms in the area.
Mike Katsampes,Mr. Dye's veterinarian,noted that this is an immaculate facility,that Mr. Dye has a very good
management scheme, that the disease control is very good for his closed herd, and that Mr. Dye's dairy has
always been run better than dairies near his own home. Mr. Katsampes also noted that the dry dairy Mr. Dye
is proposing will have less odors than most dairies.
Tracy Eichheim, a nearby property owner, spoke for several minutes, using some of the surrounding property
owners time. Mr. Eichheim noted that the neighborhood is mostly retired people,that this dairy would ruir the
retirement financing many people are considering their land to be. Mr. Eichheim also noted that he does not
feel sure that the Department of Health and Environmental Services has looked at the waste management
plan proposed. Mr. Eichheim noted that he feels the groundwater is too high for this dairy, that the Cactus
Hill ditch on the northwest hill seeps and will effect the groundwater when run through the dairy. Mr. Eichheim
also noted that he feels the land proposed to be farmed will not be enough for the size of the dairy
Tom Haren, Representative for the applicant, noted that he would address the concerns that the property
owners had by answering questions of the Planning Commission.
Cristie Nicklas noted that the availability of water for the site seemed to be one of the main concerns. Mr.
Haren noted that the water is expensive, but available and that Mr. Dye will buy this water if the applics tion
is approved, as buying it now would be expensive unless he were to get this new dairy.
John Folsom asked about the groundwater questions raised. Mr. Haren noted that there is some water a the
site, but that most of the water is standing on bedrock. Mr. Haren also noted that the ditch does seep, but that
the applicant is willing to work with this, by either placing concrete in the ditch or other means. Mr. Haren
further noted that a major portion of the lagoon is above grade.
Cathy Clamp asked how the applicant would deal with the manure if there are times of no crops. Mr. Huron
noted that the manure is generally applied when there is no crop,that the CAFO regulations are followed, and
that constant monitoring is involved to keep an even amount of chemicals in the ground at an agronomic ate.
Mr. Haren also noted that the fines for not following CAFO regulations are very high and more strict char the
county could impose. Cathy Clamp asked where the dewatering would be done. Mr. Haren noted that the
dewatering will still be done at agronomic rates and that storm water has less nitrogen, making it easier to
dewater,but that the excess will not be placed on saturated ground. Cathy Clamp asked about the odor,oust,
and insects associated with the dairy. Mr. Haren noted that dairies have to keep their animals clean and that
dairies generally do not have much problem keeping with.n the bounds required. Mr. Haren noted thar the
dairy works to balance the moisture and dust to keep the animals in the best health and the site as clea i as
possible.
Cristie Nicklas asked about the acreage being enough to dewater the storm water retention pond. Mr. Huron
noted that because this is a very low water facility the 10 day 10 year pond will be able to hold the water until
the excess can be assimilated by the crop land.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
October 17, 2000
Page 11
Fred Walker asked about the composting being applied to the land. Mr. Haren noted that the compost is sold
to local landscaping companies, but the composting materials will all be from the site, not brought in 'Yom
outside sources.
Fred Walker asked about the irrigating structures being noted on the plat. Mr. Haren noted that the applicant
would be willing to reinforce these and place them on the plat, allowing the continued delivery of water
Fred Walker asked about the number of cows being milked possibly increasing. Mr. Haren stated tha the
milking barn will be designed for 2,000 cows, that it will not allow more than that many to be milked.
Fred Walker asked if the applicant would be willing to place more trees along the south side. Torn Haren
noted that they would be willing to place these as well as trees to the west.
Stephen Mokray asked if the composting would create more dust. Mr. Haren noted that the compost has to
be kept moist, that the dust would possibly come from traffic, but that the local traffic on the dirt roads already
created an equivalent amount of dust.
Trevor Jiricek, Department of Public Health and Environment, noted that they respond to complaints and
check out the facility for violations of dust and insects.
Bryant Gimlin asked for clarification concerning the homes proposed. Mr. Haren noted that these will be
modular and only placed on the site if needed. Tom Haren noted that this housing would be for people who
are on site during the nights and for higher salaries.
Bryant Gimlin asked about the storm water information. Mr Haren noted that the penalties are quick for this
type of infraction and that the major infractions seem to be older dairies that are not designed to deal with the
new regulations, but that this dairy should have no problem complying.
Cathy Clamp had questions concerning the harrowing versus the ditch water seepage. Mr. Haren noted that
the harrowing will not be digging deep into the ground, that it simply evens the level in the pens and tha the
ground will not allow seepage after a short time of the animals being in the pens.
Cristie Nickles asked if the applicant is in agreement with the Development Standards and Conditior s of
Approval. Mr. Haren noted that the applicant is in agreement.
Julie noted language for Condition of Approval #3. K. 3, adding language to include all easements for
ingress/egress.
Mr. Haren noted that the applicant has no problem with the manufactured home definition applying tc the
homes allowed on the property and would even be willing to remove the manufactured homes if that would
be more agreeable to the Planning Commission. Lee Morrison noted that leaving the condition in and
modifying it might limit the use by right in the area.
Fred Walker noted that he does not have any affiliation with the applicant, even though he lives in the area.
Stephen Mokray moved to amend Development Standard#1 to read as follows,"A Site Specific Development
Plan and 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 (4,000 Head) and Four Additional Accessory to the Farm Dwelling Units for
Employees restricted to manufactured homes on a temporary foundation, a maximum of 2,000 milking cows
allowing for calves, steers, replacement heifers and dry cows for a total of 4,000 head in the Agricultural Zone
District, as indicated in th application material on file in the Department of Planning Services and subject to
the Development Standards stated hereon." Bryant Gimlin seconded the motion.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
October 17, 2000
Page 12
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. , ohn
Folsom, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Cathy Clamp,
yes; Fred Walker, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Haren noted that the applicant is in agreement with this change.
Bryant Gimlin moved to add Condition of Approval #3. K. 3 to read: "To include all easements for
ingress/egress and maintenance of any ditches located on the subject property." Stephen Mokray seconded
the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. ,ohn
Folsom, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Cathy Clamp,
yes; Fred Walker, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Bryant Gimlin commented to the surrounding property owners that this is an agricultural zone, even if there
are small farms, that this is an agricultural purpose. Mr. Gimlin also noted that this Use by Special Review
gives the county policing authority and the applicant has regulations to follow. Mr. Gimlin noted that this is
compatible with the zoning of the area and the Use by Special Review is the best way to control the standards
of the dairy.
Michael Miller commented that if he had to have a dairy built next to him, this is the dairy he would like to see,
but that he understands the concerns of the surrounding property owners. Mr.Miller noted that he agrees with
the surrounding property owners that three times the number of animals allowed is scary. Mr. Miller also
noted that he is not sure there is not some detriment to the health of the surrounding property owners.
Fred Walker noted that there will be a dairy at this site whether or not this application is approved, but the Use
by Special Review will regulate the dairy. Mr.Walker also noted that the surrounding property owners should
try to work with the applicant in a non-combative manner, that the attacks and anger do not accomplish
anything.
Cathy Clamp noted that she lives by a turkey farm and the smell may be strong 5 days out of the year, that
the berms will be a benefit and that the dairy's effect will not be as large as the surrounding property ow iers
th nk.
John Folsom noted that he lives by a feedlot, a dairy, and two turkey farms and that there is some odor but
that houses are selling very well in the area. Mr. Folsom noted that there is a fine line between property rights
and the rights of society and the choice may be hard, but that this dairy does not seem to be as bad a thing
as the property owners seem to think.
Stephen Mokray noted that humans resent change,but that the world always changes. Mr. Mokray noted that
there are a lot of pre-set minds in the crowd and that this would be one of the best dairies to have near heir
land. Mr. Mokray noted that the surrounding property owners should look at this with more open minds and
to try to work with Mr. Dye.
Cristie Nicklas commented that she owns a feedlot and that dairies are usually better run than feedlots. Ms.
Nicklas noted that it is economical to maintain the clean dairy for the health and welfare of the cows. Ms.
Nicklas also noted that she would be more understanding of the surrounding property owners if they coulc say
they had complaints on how Mr. Dye's current dairy is run, but they have stated none. Ms. Nicklas noted that
this seems to be a fear of the future, not existing problems. Ms. Nicklas also noted that taking the rft k to
expand in today's agriculture market is a brave and scary step.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
October 17, 2000
Page 13
Fred Walker moved that Case USR-1289 be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the
amended Conditions of Approval and amended Development Standards with the Planning Commissions
recommendation of approval, noting that the application was in compliance with the proposed Amendment
24. Stephen Mokray seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Fo som,yes;Stephan Mokray,yes; Michael Miller,no;Jack Epple,no; Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cathy Clamp,}es;
Fred Walker, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes. Motion carried.
Michael Miller commented that the number allowed as a use by right are appropriate and that this application
has too high a number. Mr. Miller noted that he has to balance the rights of the surrounding property owr ers
with the applicant and he feels the 4,000 cattle will adversely effect the neighbors beyond an acceptable level
and cause damages to their property value and quality of life.
Jack Epple commented that he feels the application is correct and the manure management plan is
acceptable, but that there is a compatibility issue with the surrounding property owners.
John Folsom commented the duties of the Planning Commission are to find if the applicant has met the
standards required and that the applicant has met those substantially.
Cathy Clamp commented that this appears to be a slow process across several years and that the effect u ion
surrounding property owners will be minimal for a long period of time.
Bryant Gimlin noted that there may be more odor in Greeley and to encourage the surrounding property
owners to work with the applicant as they are going to be neighbors and that would be the best choice no
matter what the final outcome of this case.
Meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted
0,V,,C) v� tivr-4:,--
Trisha Swanson
Secretary
Hello