HomeMy WebLinkAbout20233144.tiffSummary of the Weld County Planning Commission Meeting
Tuesday, October 3, 2023
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held in the Weld County Administration
Building, Hearing Room, 1150 O Street, Greeley, Colorado. This meeting was called to order by Chair,
Elijah Hatch, at 1:31 p.m.
Roll Call.
Present: Elijah Hatch, Skip Holland, Butch White, Michael Wailes, Pamela Edens, Michael Palizzi, Virginia
Guderjahn, Barney Hammond.
Absent: Shana Morgan.
Also Present: Chris Gathman, Melissa King and Diana Aungst, Department of Planning Services; Lauren
Light, Department of Health; Karin McDougal, County Attorney, and Michelle Wall, Secretary.
Motion: Approve the September 5, 2023, Weld County Planning Commission minutes, Moved by Skip
Holland, Seconded by Butch White. Motion passed unanimously.
Case Number COZ23-0003
Applicant PV East, LLC
Planner Diana Aungst
Request: Change of Zone from the A (Agricultural) Zone District to the C-3 (Business
Commercial) Zone District.
Legal Description: Part of the SW1/4 of Section 15, Township 2 North, Range 67 West of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado.
Location: East of and adjacent to County Road 19; approximately 600 feet north of County
Road 20.
Diana Aungst, Planning Services, presented Case COZ23-0003, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Staff sent notice to 7 surrounding property owners within 500 feet of the subject
parcel. No responses were received. The Department of Planning Services recommends denial of this
application.
Commissioner Wailes asked Staff who was responsible for the mislabeling of the Weld County Opportunity
Zone. Staff explained that "opportunity zones" are fairly new to Weld County Code. Planning submitted
their criteria to GIS and then the "opportunity zones" were generated onto the Property Portal. Ms. Aungst
said there is not a particular person who was responsible, just a combination of not verifying that the
opportunity zones were accurate. Commissioner Wailes concluded it was the County's mislabeling. He
asked how far along in the application process the applicant was when they learned they were not in the
opportunity zone. Ms. Aungst said they were notified early on.
Commissioner White asked if the Town of Firestone controlled that section of County Road 19. Ms. Aungst
answered that Firestone did; they annexed it. Commissioner White asked since they control the access
there, could they deny the access permit. Staff answered if Firestone chose to do deny it, they could.
The Chair commented it was a unique situation for the applicant because Fort Lupton wants to annex and
Firestone controls the access. Ms. Aungst said it would require a coordinated process.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Bob Choate, representing Blackfoot Properties, and their Project Partner — Elevated Excavating, 1711 61st
Avenue, Greeley, Colorado. They plan to purchase the property from PV East, LLC. Mr. Choate feels this
application should be approved and he respectfully disagrees with staffs' recommendation of denial. He
explained reasons why he feels the applicant meets the criteria of Section 23-2-30.A.1. and A.2. Mr. Choate
said this property was chosen because it checks all the boxes and is a great place for this type of
development.
Mr. Choate said the language of the "Opportunity Zone" is very clear. He said the language is from the
Comprehensive Plan and states, "within one-half mile of the following types of intersections, a collector and
Gotown: Cot ions
(c%5 /23 2023-3144
an arterial." He said County Road 19 is an arterial road all the way through in this location. County Road
20 is a collector road to the west and a local road to the east; therefore, making an intersection of a collector
and an arterial. Mr. Choate reviewed Fort Lupton and Firestone's future land use maps in his slideshow
presentation. He said the property is close to 1-25 and Highway 85, it has public water availability, there is
plenty of room for septic. Mr. Choate feels the Comprehensive Plan has been met.
Mr. Choate feels the proposed project is compatible with the area. There are several oil and gas facilities,
there is a Class 1 Compost Facility, natural-gas pipeline and many other USRs in the area.
The Chair asked Mr. Choate where the nearest neighbor lives. Mr. Choate said there is a property that is
adjacent to the south. Mr. Hatch asked Mr. Choate if he was aware of any services or benefits that Fort
Lupton would be providing the applicant to annex with them. Mr. Choate replied that he was not aware of
any.
Commissioner Holland asked if the compost facility was active and if it was a public facility. Mr. Choate
said it is active but privately owned.
The Chair asked Staff if the County looks poorly on flagpole annexations. Ms. Aungst replied that the State
has rules on flagpole annexations, and they make the decision.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the Development Standards and Conditions of
Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in agreement with the
Development Standards and asked the Planning Commission to make findings that the application is in
compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and compatible with the surrounding land uses.
Motion: Forward Case COZ23-0003 to the Board of County Commissioners with the Planning
Commission's recommendation of approval, Moved by Michael Wailes, Seconded by Pamela Edens.
Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 6, No = 2, Abstain = 0).
Yes: Barney Hammond, Butch White, Elijah Hatch, Michael Palizzi, Michael Wailes, Pamela Edens.
No: Skip Holland, Virginia Guderjahn.
Commissioner Palizzi stated that he feels the applicant meets the requirements of the "Opportunity Zone."
He said he agrees with Mr. Choate's interpretation that the Town of Fort Lupton does not intend to have
the border of their future land use map zoned agricultural. Mr. Palizzi feels it would be a good idea to
research how Fort Lupton updates their future land use map.
Commissioner Hammond said he thinks the application is consistent and compatible with the surrounding
area. He feels it is overreach for the Town of Fort Lupton to want to annex.
Commissioner Wailes feels the surrounding uses are already dictating the proposed use. He feels that
the composting facility in the area has already set the pace. Mr. Wailes said both Comprehensive Plans
of both Firestone and Fort Lupton are important to look at. Firestone plans for that area for urban growth,
and he agrees with Mr. Choate's interpretation that Ft Lupton's future planning map shows agricultural
because that is what it is currently zoned.
Commissioner Edens said she agrees for the same reasons that have already been stated.
Commissioner Holland said he believes there is significant conflict between the two municipalities. He
also feels that the composting facility will not be a long-term use since it is privately owned.
Commissioner White said he feels it is important that Weld County respects the relationships with the
municipalities. He said Firestone was clear they didn't have any interest. Mr. White feel Fort Lupton is
spot annexing as they wish.
Commissioner Hatch said he agrees with all the reasons that have been voiced. He also does not see
the benefit to annexation when the Town of Fort Lupton is not able to provide services.
Case Number: USR23-0025
Applicant: Sandra Strobel
Planner: Chris Gathman
Request: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for Event
Facility (not agriculture -related) outside of subdivisions and historic townsites in
the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
Legal Description: Lot B of Amended Recorded Exemption, RE -936; being part of the SE1/4 of
Section 16, and part of the NE1/4 of Section 21, all in Township 1 North, Range
67 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
Location: North and East of and adjacent to County Road 8; approximately 3,500 feet east
of County Road 17.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case USR23-0025, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Planning Services sent notice to 9 surrounding property owners. Staff received
correspondence from 2 surrounding property owners. The letters contained concerns about noise, water
(would reduce aquifer in the area), potential for waste and litter getting into the adjacent reservoir, wildlife
impacts, fire concerns, traffic, parking, potential for guests trespassing onto adjacent properties and theft
concerns. One letter suggests limiting the occupancy limit to 30 people. The Department of Planning
Services recommends approval of this application along with conditions of approval and development
standards.
The Chair asked Staff if the County provides mag chloride to the Road or if the applicant is required to hire
a private company to apply it.
Melissa King, Development Review, replied that the County does an annual application of mag chloride on
County Road 8. Based on the additional traffic from the proposed project, if there are dust problems or
issues with the quality of the road, the applicant will be responsible to provide additional mag chloride.
Commissioner Hatch asked if the County does it and invoices the applicant. Ms. King said the applicant
normally hires a contractor who has to meet the County's standards.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Dain Strobel, 8601 County Road 8, Brighton, Colorado. Mr. Strobel said that he is Sandra Strobel's son.
He will be the Manager of the proposed site. He explained that the proposed use is for an event center for
all types of gatherings. Mr. Strobel said he and his wife want to have a place where the community can
gather together. The proposed business name is Selah Springs which means "place of rest". He said they
want to provide a top notch place of rest not only for themselves but for others who wish to have their
weddings, birthday parties, or gatherings at the event center. Mr. Strobel said they are very concerned
about noise, traffic and all the other issues their neighbors are concerned about and have been planning
on how to mitigate those issues for the past couple of years.
Travis Hertneky, ThEngineering, PO Box 337748, Greeley, Colorado. Mr. Hertneky explained that
ThEngineering has been hired to help with the engineering portions of this project. They have been working
with drainage, roads, survey, etc. Mr. Hertneky provided a copy of their road -improvement estimate into
the record. Because of the upfront road improvements that are required from the County, the project to
rebuild the road from the applicant's driveway to County Road 8, is estimated at $100,000.00. Mr. Hertneky
feels that is an excessive cost to request of a small business that intends to hold a few events a year. The
traffic from the event center would cause minimal impact to the road. Mr. Hertneky said that he requests a
more refined scope of road maintenance from Weld County.
Commissioner Wailes asked Mr. Hertneky what he thinks should be refined. Mr. Hertneky said that they
would request the road maintenance requirements be revised to applying mag chloride a specific number
of times per year.
Commissioner Edens asked Mr. Strobel how he calculated how many vehicles per family will be parked at
an event such as a wedding. Mr. Strobel explained that there are websites that post statistics on events
and similar studies for individuals planning to start a venue.
Commissioner Wailes asked Mr. Strobel to explain the total shares of water in North Star Reservoir. Mr.
Strobel said there is 9 and two sixths total shares. The farmer to the east is the only person who has
holding rights and he owns 9 shares. Mr. Strobel owns a sixth of a share and that is plenty of water to
irrigate his 12 -acre property.
Commissioner Hammond questioned Mr. Strobel about the number of events he plans on having. Mr.
Hammond said that they are saying a few events a year but are they really going to have 50 events a year.
Mr. Strobel said they want to have enough events to help pay for the property, but they do not plan to be a
nuisance to the neighborhood. He does not plan to exceed 20 to 25 events per year. Mr. Hammond
explained that Public Works looks at his numbers to determine the amount of traffic that could impact that
road. Mr. Strobel said he is willing to help pay for the road but also wants it to be done fairly and not be
paying for road improvements that are not created from traffic to the business.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Jennifer Hart, 3444 County Road 19, Fort Lupton, Colorado. Ms. Hart stated that she is strongly opposed
to the proposed event center in their neighborhood. She is concerned about noise, privacy, lights, traffic,
safety concerns, construction of the business, alcohol usage leading to possible DUls or public
disturbances, and the possibility of crime. Ms. Hart does not wish to have the tranquility and peacefulness
of the neighborhood disturbed by events held at the applicant's property. She is also concerned about
wildlife preservation.
Stephanie Vest, 2637, County Road 19, Fort Lupton, Colorado. not permitted. Ms. Vest is concerned about
the usage of water; such as the water that is retained in the reservoir and an irrigation ditch. She said that
the surrounding property neighbors would feel more comfortable if the applicants would secure municipal
water. Ms. Vest is concerned about noise, lighting and privacy. She stated that agricultural activities
happen in the neighborhood that could impact a wedding ceremony or event; activities such as burning
ditches, dust, noises and smells that come from agriculture. Ms. Vest feels these activities are incompatible
with an event center and create conflict.
Mr. Strobel stated that he is also concerned about the same issues that his neighbors are. They have
children of their own who live on the property. He said he reaches out to his neighbors all the time and has
a good relationship with his neighbors. Mr. Strobel explained the application process is not easy and they
have been working on it for four years. He plans to mitigate and address as many issues as he can.
Mr. Strobel spoke about the Thompson Ditch that Mr. Vest was concerned about. Mr. Strobel is the
Secretary of the Thompson Ditch Board. He explained the water rights and usage of the water in the area.
Commissioner Holland asked Mr. Strobel if he had any personal interest of using the event center. Mr.
Strobel said he runs a mission agency and will probably hold his fund raising events at the event center.
Commissioner Guderjahn asked if municipal water was available to his property. Mr. Strobel answered that
it is not.
Commissioner Edens asked Mr. Strobel if they have to permit the well to commercial. Mr. Strobel said it is
already permitted as a residential/commercial well.
Melissa King, Development Review, asked the Planning Commission to review Condition of Approval 1.A.
and look at the specific list of up -front improvements that are listed by Public Works. She explained that
those specific improvements are based upon the traffic study and maximum number of people traveling to
and from the site per day.
The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the Development Standards and Conditions of
Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in agreement but wish
to have further discussion on the road maintenance agreement and up -front improvements. The Planning
Commission discussed that is something that will have to be negotiated with the Board of County
Commissioners.
Motion: Forward Case USR23-0025 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of
Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval,
Moved by Michael Wailes, Seconded by Barney Hammond.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Yes: Barney Hammond, Butch White, Elijah Hatch, Michael Palizzi, Michael Wailes, Pamela Edens, Skip
Holland, Virginia Guderjahn.
Commissioner Palizzi stated that he thinks the Commissioners should take a look at the traffic numbers
provided by the applicant and if see if they agree that the road improvements should be set at this high of
a level.
Commissioner Wailes agrees with the applicant to revisit Condition of Approval 1.A. regarding the up -front
road improvements and maintenance agreement.
Commissioner Holland stated he also agreed the road improvements and maintenance agreement should
be reviewed.
The Chair said he also agrees with the other comments made.
The Chair called a recess at 3:45 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 3:53 p.m.
Case Number: USR23-0030
Applicant: Louis and Gina Fabrizius c/o CBEP Solar 30, LLC
Planner Chris Gathman
Request: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for a 3.6 MW
Solar Energy Facility (SEF) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
Legal Description: Lot B of Recorded Exemption, RE -4980, being part of the E1/2 of Section 8,
Township 7 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
Location: Approximately 0.5 miles north of State Highway 14; approximately 3,200 feet east
of County Road 39 and west of and adjacent to County Road 41 Section Line.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case USR23-0030, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Planning Services sent notice to 5 surrounding property owners. No referral
responses were received. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application
along with conditions of approval and development standards.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Brysen Daughton, Project Developer, Cloudbreak Energy, 300 East Cannon Street, Lafayette, Colorado.
Mr. Daughton said that he will give a broad overview of all 5 solar facilities and then go into specifics for
each case. Construction is planned for late 2024. Project lifetime is 20 to 35 years and will be
decommissioned according to Weld County guidelines. No permanent lighting is used, and systems do not
produce emission or odors. The panels do not cast glare. Sheep are expected to graze on each property
a few times a year to maintain vegetation which promotes growth of native plants, thus promoting soil
health.
The Lone Tree Creek proposed solar garden on this property is approximately 23 acres. It will produce the
equivalent of the annual electricity consumption of about 1,320 homes.
Farming this property has become more difficult because there is not enough water. The landowner would
like to use this area for solar and then can allocate water to the remaining portion of his property to farm.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Louie Fabrizius, 425 Quillan Gulch Road, Loveland, Colorado. Mr. Fabrizius is the property owner. He
feels the solar garden is a good fit for his property. There is a shortage of water, and it is getting very hard
to rent water. He said it would help him out on his farm and help him with another source of income. Mr.
Fabrizius said there is a lot of voltage issues in their area, and he hope this helps by providing more power.
He has farmed his property for 40 years.
The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the Development Standards and Conditions of
Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in agreement.
Motion: Forward Case USR23-0030 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of
Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval,
Moved by Butch White, Seconded by Michael Palizzi.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Yes: Barney Hammond, Butch White, Elijah Hatch, Michael Palizzi, Michael Wailes, Pamela Edens, Skip
Holland, Virginia Guderjahn.
Case Number: USR23-0031
Applicant Louis and Gina Fabrizius and Stanley and Carolyn Heinze c/o CBEP Solar 32, LLC
Planner: Chris Gathman
Request: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for a 5.7 MW
Solar Energy Facility (SEF) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
Legal Description: Lot B of Recorded Exemption, RE -3682, being part of the S1/2 of Section 16,
Township 6 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
Location: North of and adjacent to State Highway 392; approximately 1,600 feet east of
County Road 41.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case USR23-0031, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. The facility is to be located in the northern half of the property, setback from the
residences along Highway 392. Staff sent notice to 7 surrounding property owners. One response letter
was received. The letter addressed concerns in removing productive farm ground and that other more non-
productive farmland would be more appropriate. The applicant stated that a neighborhood meeting was
held on August 8, 2023. Two neighbors attended the meeting. Concerns were raised regarding removing
prime farm ground, fencing, the nature of the Xcel Community Solar Program, glare and heat associated
with panels and maintenance of the facility. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval
of this application along with conditions of approval and development standards.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Brysen Daughton, Cloudbreak Energy, 300 East Cannon Street, Lafayette, Colorado. Mr. Daughton said
that site is called the Lucerne Solar Project. The solar garden will be approximately 33 acres and will
produce the equivalent of the annual electricity consumption of about 1,500 homes.
As stated with the last case, the same reasons apply to farming this property. It has become more difficult
because there is not enough water. The landowner would like to use this area for solar and then can
allocate water to the remaining portion of his property to farm. The additional income can help them out
with farming the other portions of the property.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Louie Fabrizius, 425 Quillan Gulch Road, Loveland, Colorado. Mr. Fabrizius is one of the property owners.
He said he picked this location for the same reason, the shortage of water. It is getting harder to rent water
which makes it harder to farm.
Vince Harris, Baseline Corporation, 112 North Rubey Drive, Golden, Colorado. Mr. Harris said he serves
as the Town of Eaton's Contract Planner and is here to represent the Town of Eaton. He said the Town of
Eaton has recently updated their Comprehensive Plan within the past 2 years.
The Town of Eaton respectfully opposes this proposed development due to its location and potential impact
on future growth and development of the Town. State Highway 392 is Eaton's southern growth boundary
and because it is a major corridor, the Town finds that this development could remove valuable real estate
that could otherwise become commercial or residential. Eaton feels the solar facility could dissuade
development and negatively impact surrounding property values. The Town of Eaton also feels this takes
away from their strong vision of development, excellent infrastructure and image of high -quality design.
The Town of Eaton asks the Planning Commission to follow your good conscious and not vote in favor of
the applications for solar that are within or adjacent to the Town of Eaton's future growth boundary.
Commissioner White asked how far this site was from the southern growth boundary. Mr. Harris answered
2 miles.
Julie Nelson, 325 Cedar Avenue, Eaton, Colorado. Ms. Nelson said as a resident of Eaton, she does not
agree with what was just said by Mr. Harris. She stated that the overall opinion of the residents of Eaton
may not align with the town's plans.
Mr. Daughton said this site is currently not near any zoning that does not allow this use. He reiterated that
the solar farms are temporary facilities that eventually will return back to prime agricultural land. In the
meantime the facility will be helping out with local energy and help out the Fabrizius and Heinze families.
Mr. Daughton said that glare was mentioned. The panels are treated with anti -reflective material, and they
are stored at a 5 degree angle in the mornings and evenings to prevent any glare to neighbors. Mr.
Daughton said he has reports from several studies that have been done on the impacts of property values.
The reports show property values are not negatively impacted.
The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the Development Standards and Conditions of
Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in agreement.
Motion: Forward Case USR23-0031 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of
Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval,
Moved by Michael Wailes, Seconded by Virgins Guderjahn.
Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 7, No = 1, Abstain = 0).
Yes: Barney Hammond, Elijah Hatch, Michael Palizzi, Michael Wailes, Pamela Edens, Skip Holland,
Virginia Guderjahn.
No: Butch White.
Commissioner White said that he respected the Inter -Governmental Agreement between Weld County and
the Town of Eaton, so he voted against the application.
Case Number USR23-0032
Applicant McKee Ranch, LLLP c/o CBEP Solar 16, LLC
Planner: Chris Gathman
Request: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for a 7.5 MW
Solar Energy Facility (SEF) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
Legal Description: E1/2 NE1/4 of Section 24, Township 6 North, Range 66 West of the 6th P.M., Weld
County, Colorado.
Location: South of and adjacent to State Highway 392; west of and adjacent to County Road
37.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case USR23-0032, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Staff sent notice to 12 surrounding property owners. No responses have been
received. The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on August 10, 2023. Two neighbors attended the
meeting. Items discussed included impacts on property values and screening. The Department of Planning
Services recommends approval of this application along with conditions of approval and development
standards.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Brysen Daughton, Cloudbreak Energy, 300 East Cannon Street, Lafayette, Colorado. Mr. Daughton said
this is the McKee Ranch Community Solar facility. The solar garden will be approximately 40 acres and
will produce the equivalent of the annual electricity consumption of about 1,500 homes. There is no existing
water rights on the property which makes farming difficult and expensive.
Commissioner Hammond asked Mr. Daughton if they expect any stormwater issues with the berm. Mr.
Daughton said they will work with the County and make sure the berm meets requirements. The applicants
are requesting a berm instead of junipers.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Sherri Kerst, 17765 Highway 392, Greeley, Colorado. She said she also owns the adjacent property at
17725 which is vacant land. Ms. Kerst said she is in support of this project. She wasn't in the beginning,
but Cloudbreak has been very forthcoming with what they plan to do. Her husband asked for the berm
because sometimes junipers die, and they were concerned on how long it would take for the trees to be
replaced. Trees also take a lot of water. Ms. Kerst said that on a personal note, she first thought the land
could be used better by building residential houses. When they tried to get a tap for her property at 17725
they were not able to because of the moratorium with North Weld Water. They may not be able to build on
their vacant property.
Vince Harris, Baseline Corporation, 112 North Rubey Drive, Golden, Colorado. Mr. Harris said he serves
as the Town of Eaton's Contract Planner and is here to represent the Town of Eaton.
The Town of Eaton is opposed to this proposed development due to its location and potential impact on
future growth and development of the Town. State Highway 392 is Eaton's southern growth boundary and
because it is a major corridor, the Town does not wish to have solar farms as their boundary.
The Town of Eaton asks the Planning Commission to follow your good conscious and not vote in favor of
the applications for solar that are within or adjacent to the Town of Eaton's future growth boundary. Mr.
Harris mentioned that in this particular case the neighbor is requesting a berm; he asked if these solar farms
are approved, could the berm be extended all the way along Highway 392.
Linda McKee, 32363 County Road 37, Greeley, Colorado. Ms. McKee is a fourth -generation farmer and
inherited the farm next to this property from her father. She shared the history of this property including
how the water rights were sold and tons of soil and clay were removed from the land and sold. The McKee
family decided to purchase the property in order to prevent commercial or real estate from coming in.
Ms. McKee shared how difficult it has been renting water and the constant struggle to try and grow any
crop. They pay thousands of dollars in taxes and spraying to keep the weeds controlled with no profit. She
said that when the solar people came to talk to them, it seemed a Godsend. Ms. McKee voiced her
disappointment with the Town of Eaton and wondered how far out the Town was extending their control.
Her father used to brag that Eaton was blessed with the best farmland anywhere in the United States, but
the Town of Eaton has approved hundreds of farm acreage to sites that produce not one grain of food. Ms.
McKee feels that a solar farm produces something useful to many people.
Clara McKee, 3785 North 47th Avenue, Greeley, Colorado. Ms. McKee said that she is the General Partner
of McKee Ranch, LLLP. She said that on her drive out to her parents' farm today, she saw 3 dead animals
on the side of the road that have been forced out of their natural habitats due to new estate houses that are
being built. Ms. McKee feels that using their acreage for any other reason besides solar would be a mistake
because it could lead to an influx in traffic, traffic accidents, fatalities and noise disturbances. She feels
that their decision to keep the ground preserved for solar use is best for wildlife and humans. Ms. McKee
said she is so proud of the agricultural contributions that Weld County makes that is indicated in Weld
County's seal. She asked, "When was the last time you thanked a farmer or a rancher?" Approving this
application would be one of the best ways to thank them.
The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the Development Standards and Conditions of
Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in agreement.
Motion: Forward Case USR23-0032 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of
Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval,
Moved by Michael Wailes, Seconded by Barney Hammond.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Yes: Barney Hammond, Butch White, Elijah Hatch, Michael Palizzi, Michael Wailes, Pamela Edens, Skip
Holland, Virginia Guderjahn.
Case Number: USR23-0033
Applicant John Scott Byrnes Trust c/o CBEP Solar 28, LLC
Planner Chris Gathman
Request: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit fora 1.5 MW
Solar Energy Facility (SEF) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
Legal Description: N1/2 SW1/4 of Section 7, Township 8 North, Range 67 West of the 6th P.M., Weld
County, Colorado.
Location: East of and adjacent to County Road 13; approximately 2,600 feet south of County
Road 96.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case USR23-0033, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Staff sent notice to 6 surrounding property owners. No written response or
phone calls have received. The applicant submitted documentation that they held a neighborhood meeting
on August 10, 2023. No neighbors attended the meeting. The Department of Planning Services
recommends approval of this application along with conditions of approval and development standards.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Brysen Daughton, Cloudbreak Energy, 300 East Cannon Street, Lafayette, Colorado. Mr. Daughton said
this is the Saddleback location. The solar garden is approximately 9 acres and will produce the equivalent
of annual electricity consumption of about 540 homes. There is no existing water rights on the property
which makes farming difficult and expensive.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the Development Standards and Conditions of
Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in agreement.
Motion: Forward Case USR23-0033 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of
Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval,
Moved by Skip Holland, Seconded by Virginia Guderjahn.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Yes: Barney Hammond, Butch White, Elijah Hatch, Michael Palizzi, Michael Wailes, Pamela Edens, Skip
Holland, Virginia Guderjahn.
Case Number: USR23-0034
Applicant Barry James Reider Living Trust and Julie Ann Nelson Living Trust c/o CBEP Solar
17, LLC
Planner: Chris Gathman
Request: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for a 5.8 MW
Solar Energy Facility (SEF) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
Legal Description: Lot B of Recorded Exemption, RE -4923, being part of the S1/2 NW1/4 of Section
5, Township 7 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
Location: East of and adjacent to County Road 39; approximately 1,300 feet south of County
Road 86.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case USR23-0034, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Staff sent notice to 4 surrounding property owners. Staff received
correspondence from one property owner within 500 feet. The letter outlined concerns about potential
health issues from heavy metals in solar operations, fire concerns and the proximity to the nearest
residence, electromagnetic pulses, viewshed concerns (glare from panels, obstructed views and property
value reduction were mentioned). Based on these concerns the property owner is objecting to the location
of the solar energy facility. The applicants held a community meeting on August 7, 2023. Five neighbors
attended this meeting. Items discussed included the nature of screening, the frequency of the sheep
grazing and the potential for leaching of chemicals and heavy metals. The Department of Planning Services
recommends approval of this application along with conditions of approval and development standards.
Commissioner Hammond asked Staff to point out where the property owner who sent the letter of concern
lived.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Brysen Daughton, Cloudbreak Energy, 300 East Cannon Street, Lafayette, Colorado. Mr. Daughton said
this is the Trappers' Trail Community Solar facility. The solar garden will be approximately 38 acres and
will produce the equivalent of the annual electricity consumption of about 1,500 homes. There is no existing
water rights, and the land is under a dry -up covenant with East Larimer County Water District. The property
is currently a dry -land pasture. The applicant proposes to screen the proposed facility from the nearest
residence to the west with Rocky Mountain Juniper trees.
Mr. Daughton addressed the concern of electromagnetic interference. He said according to the US
Department of the Navy, the only component of a PV array that may be capable of emitting EMI is the
inverter. Inverters produce extremely low frequency EMI similar to electrical appliances and at a distance
of 150 feet from the inverters the EM field is at or below background levels. Mr. Daughton said all
residences are located further than 150 feet away from the inverters.
Mr. Daughton spoke on a study done by the panel manufacturer on the topic of leaching of chemicals and
heavy metals. Panels are made with 76 percent glass, 10 percent plastic, 8 percent aluminum, 5 percent
silicon and 1 percent of heavy metals. The Toxic Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) was performed
to check if lead, cadmium, arsenic, barium or mercury were found. The test findings were below Colorado
and Federal regulations for any leachate.
Mr. Daughton addressed the concern about fire. There was a battery fire at a solar farm that made the
news recently. He said that none of the solar farms will have any batteries. If a ground fault is detected by
the software, inverters will automatically shut down and disconnect the DC module strings from the AC
electric system. Cloudbreak's team will have remote capabilities to disconnect the system and shut down
each electrical component in case of emergency.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Michael Woodruff, 41640 County Road 34, Ault, Colorado. Mr. Woodruff said he is the property owner and
resident who lives next to this property. He lives extremely close to the project and is very concerned of
health threats from heavy metals, chemicals and other elements that were not listed in Cloudbreak's
presentation. Mr. Woodruff said they have well water, and he does not want their water contaminated.
Contaminated water could then affect his livestock, grasslands, gardens, etc. He is also worried about the
possibility of an electrical fire starting.
Commissioner Hammond asked Mr. Woodruff if the applicant agreed to more screening such as a berming
or other screening would it change your mind at all. Mr. Woodruff answered that if it had to go through, he
would much rather not have to see it. He also feels if the company is doing a berm for one person, they
should do it for everyone.
Mr. Woodruff reiterated that his biggest concern is leachate. Commissioner Holland asked Mr. Woodruff if
he had any proof of leaching happening from solar panels. Mr. Woodruff said he provided that information
with his letter that is submitted into record. Commissioner Palizzi asked Mr. Woodruff if his house was
uphill or downhill from the site. Mr. Woodruff replied downhill and directly across from it.
Barry Reider, 325 Cedar Avenue, Eaton, Colorado. Mr. Reider said he is one of the property owners. He
said they have been working with Cloudbreak for 4 years on this project and he is very impressed with
them. Because the land is under a dry -up covenant, he feels this is the best use for their property.
Julie Nelson, 325 Cedar Avenue, Eaton, Colorado. Ms. Nelson said she is the other property owner and
wife of Mr. Reider. She said they purchased the property to build a home on and eventually plan to live
there.
Mr. Daughton said they would be open to more screening. He referenced the TCLP findings that were
below Colorado and Federal regulations for any leachate.
Commissioner Hammond asked Mr. Daughton if they would be willing to test Mr. Woodruff's soil and well
water prior to the solar panel project and then again after a year of the panels being on the property so that
Mr. Woodruff can have peace of mind. The Chair stated that would be an agreement between Cloudbreak
and Mr. Woodruff and not enforced by Weld County.
The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the Development Standards and Conditions of
Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in agreement.
Motion: Forward Case USR23-0034 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of
Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval,
Moved by Skip Holland, Seconded by Pamela Edens.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Yes: Barney Hammond, Butch White, Elijah Hatch, Michael Palizzi, Michael Wailes, Pamela Edens, Skip
Holland, Virginia Guderjahn.
The Chair asked the public if there were other items of business that they would like to discuss. No one
wished to speak.
The Chair asked the Planning Commission members if there was any new business to discuss. No one
wished to speak.
Meeting adjourned at 6:02 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Michelle Wall
Secretary
Hello