HomeMy WebLinkAbout20232674.tiffSummary of the Weld County Planning Commission Meeting
Tuesday, September 5, 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 1:30 pm.
Roll Call.
Present: Elijah Hatch, Skip Holland, Michael Wailes, Pamela Edens, Michael Palizzi, Shana Morgan,
Virginia Guderjahn, Barney Hammond.
Absent: Butch White.
Also Present: Kim Ogle, Diana Aungst, and Tom Parko, Department of Planning Services; Lauren Light,
Department of Health; Karin McDougal, County Attorney, and Kris Ranslem, Secretary.
Motion: Approve the August 1, 2023 Weld County Planning Commission minutes, Moved by Michael
Wailes, Seconded by Pamela Edens. Motion passed unanimously.
Case Number:
Applicant:
Planner:
Request:
Legal Description:
Location:
USR23-0018
Korwell Land Holdings, LLC
Kim Ogle
A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for Open
Mining (topsoil) and employee and equipment parking associated with operations
outside of subdivisions and historic townsites, in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
SW1/4 of Section 25, Township 4 North, Range 66 West of the 6th P.M., Weld
County, Colorado.
North of and adjacent to County Road 40; east of and adjacent to County Road
35.
Kim Ogle, Planning Services, presented Case USR23-0018, reading the recommendation and comments
into the record. Mr. Ogle noted that notices were sent to eight (8) surrounding property owners. He added
that Staff received one (1) telephone call from a surrounding property owner regarding general inquiries
about the land use permit and another telephone call was received on inquiry of the location of the hearing.
Mr. Ogle stated that an electronic email was received regarding concerns of air quality and an approved
traffic haul route.
Mr. Ogle stated that the applicant is proposing to mine the upper 15 to 18 percent of topsoil from the irrigated
portion of the existing agricultural land in order to apply topsoil for reclamation of third -party development
sites. They will extract approximately 12 to14 inches of topsoil and leave at least three (3) to six (6) inches
on site for reclamation purposes. There will be third -party haulers using dump trucks throughout the life of
the mine. This is estimated to generate up to 30 trips (15 round trips) daily, five days per week. The
Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application along with conditions of approval
and development standards.
Commissioner Wailes asked to clarify the number of traffic trips per day. Mr. Ogle replied that there will be
15 round trips.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, noise, Air Emissions Permit and the Waste Handling Plan.
Mr. Ogle stated that he was incorrect and said that the application stated 200 truck trips per day with 50
percent going north and 50 percent going south on County Road 35.
Will Charles, Baseline Engineering, 112 North Ruby Drive, Golden, Colorado, stated that 200 truck trips
was the initial expectation, however, in the traffic study that they will be submitting the expectation is 20 to
30 total daily trips or 15 round trips per day. He said that the 200 number was used before they knew how
much dirt would be able to be moved per day.
CoMMvco.+;..n5
oq /1O/23
2023-267LI
Trent Korby, 1832 Seadrift Court, Windsor, Colorado, stated that he is one of the partners for Korwell Land.
He stated that the premise for this is to provide the soil for reclamation projects for oil and gas and other
third -party considerations. He added that they intend to be a good neighbor.
Commissioner Edens asked when topsoil is removed how long does it take to replenish that. Mr. Korby
said that he didn't know but added that they will leave three to six inches depending on the topography of
the section.
Commissioner Hatch asked if it would return to agricultural use when reclamation happens. Mr. Korby
replied yes.
Commissioner Wailes asked if there will be stockpiling or if it will be a call to order for the topsoil. Mr. Korby
said that there will be some stockpiling but it will be scraped as needed to keep the stability of the soil. Mr.
Wailes asked how much would be stockpiled. Mr. Korby said that at the most there might be a few acres
of the property at any given time that will have a mound of dirt.
Commissioner Holland asked if this property is currently irrigated. Mr. Korby said it is pivot irrigated. He
added that it is currently sugar beets and corn.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Max Ulrich, 19401 CR 33, stated that he owns property to the west of the proposed mining operation. Mr.
Ulrich said that this ground was used previously for a dumping site for drill mud. His biggest concern is the
traffic on the road. He added that there is another mining operation down towards Gilcrest and they see a
lot of that traffic. Mr. Ulrich stated that County Road 35 is maintained by Weld County only one (1) day per
year.
Rick Krumpeck, 17313 CR 38, stated that he lives approximately one (1) mile south of the proposed mining
operation. Mr. Krumpeck wished to answer Commissioner Eden's question regarding the topsoil and said
that the organic matter in topsoil is usually in the 12 to14 inches only. After that there is no organic matter
and it doesn't regenerate unless organic matter is put back into it.
Mr. Krumpeck would like to have clarified where the access to the mining operation is on County Road 35.
Mr. Krumpeck referred to the stockpiling comments and said that they get some tremendous wind storms
and it can blow and asked if there will be a water truck available on the weekends to keep the dust down.
Gerald Johnson, 18628 CR 33, stated that the previous owner saturated that property with drill mud. He
said that it seems the first step would be to test the soil if it is viable. Mr. Johnson said that the applicants
stated that they want to return it to agricultural use but would like to define what the ag use would be. He
added that the information is very vague to the surrounding land owners. He asked who they are supposed
to call when the dust is blowing.
Eric Ewing, 16974 CR 40, referred to Development Standard 3 related to expanding hours of operation into
the night if there is an emergency that the Planning Director would receive notice. He asked if it would be
possible to add a notification requirement to the surrounding property owners within a certain distance of
the mine. The Chair asked what distance he is proposing. Mr. Ewing said that he doesn't have a specific
distance but didn't know what seemed reasonable to the Planning Commission.
Mr. Ewing referred to Development Standard 33 regarding notifying the county of any revocation and/or
suspension of any state issued permit and asked if violation notices could be included as well.
Mr. Ewing stated that right before this hearing he called Mr. Rasmussen who is one of the partners in this
project and added that Mr. Rasmussen stated that the haul route would only be north to the pavement. Mr.
Ewing said that Mr. Rasmussen verbally agreed to that and would like to see it in writing in the development
standards. Mr. Ewing stated that he would like to propose a change to the hours of operation from 8 am to
5 pm weekdays as the applicant is proposing daylight hours and that might be a little disruptive to his current
uses for his property.
2
Commissioner Wailes said that the Planning Commission can amend development standards, however,
they try to shy away from that especially when in this case we are still waiting for a traffic study to come in.
He added that they allow that to be handled by the County Commissioners because the Planning
Commission can spend a lot of time rewriting the development standards that may be overruled. He added
that the comments made by the public are a part of the record and it is important as the County
Commissioners listen to the minutes.
Rockelle Rissler, 17313 CR 38, Platteville, Colorado, stated that most of her concerns were addressed by
her neighbors. She asked what round trip number will be in the USR permit and how will they be held to
that number. She referred to the Surety Bond and said as of February 17, 2023 it is $0 according to the
State Division of Mining. She stated that they are under air quality alerts every day and a lot of it is the
dust.
Cindy Clement, 18520 CR 33, LaSalle, Colorado said that they have been inundated with industry and
surrounded by two (2) separate very large gas compressor plants. These two plants constantly smoke,
buzz, flare and have a deafening rumble sound, and far too much truck and equipment traffic that tears up
the county roads. She expressed concern with being overrun by industry and asked when it is enough.
Will Charles said the Surety Bond was done in April 2023 so it should show up if you were to search for it
today. Mr. Charles said that the haul route is from County Road 35 to County Road 42. With regard to
future uses for this property they will be determined by who will come onto that property next. Mr. Charles
said that they are not planning for any lighting on this site so the daylight hours are beneficial to them for
this operation. He said that they will be entering into a road maintenance agreement with the County. Mr.
Charles clarified that the access is in the northwest quadrant, as close as possible to the north but avoiding
the oil and gas appurtenances.
Mr. Korby said that when they bought the property none of the soil samples came back out of spec. They
also have various clients that will take their own samples as well so they don't feel the soil is of concern.
Mr. Korby said that daylight hours is what they can commit to and anything else might be a condition of
approval. They don't feel that the surrounding property owners are going to be impacted by anything
different than the agricultural uses in the area. He added that there is a well on the property and can be
utilized for dust abatement.
The Chair asked what the number of trips will be on the final permit. Mr. Charles said that it will be up to
30 trips per day. He apologized for any confusion but 30 is the intended number. He added that they have
applied for an Air Emissions Permit but haven't heard back yet from the State on any requirements that
they will have.
Commissioner Hammond asked if there will be any signage for contact information for emergencies. Mr.
Korby said that signage will be posted near the entrance of the location.
Commissioner Hammond asked if the existing well is permitted for the use they intend. Mr. Korby said it is
permitted for industrial use. Mr. Hammond asked about setbacks on the high-pressure gas line that runs
north and south. Mr. Charles said that they are only going down one and one-half feet but they will adhere
to the requirements. Mr. Hammond just wanted the applicants to be aware that you will be crossing over a
12 -inch high-pressure gas line with several trips a day.
Commissioner Wailes asked Staff if the County is notified of any State violations. Ms. Light said that Staff
is notified as they have a contract with the State on air inspections but if there are other things they may
not be notified. She said that they do receive a compliance advisory and added that this could be added in
the development standard.
Commissioner Wailes asked if notice is given to surrounding property owners when hours of operation have
been expanded for emergencies. Mr. Ogle said the applicant would have to make a request to the Planning
Director for extended hours of operation and added that they would be surprised if the applicant would
request extended hours for a soil mine as the request has been typically used for aggregate mines.
Commissioner Wailes said he is hung upon trips and is unsure if it needs to be included in the development
standards. Melissa King, Development Review, stated that the original application included a short traffic
3
narrative that said 200 vehicle trips per day. At that time Staff notified them that there would be concerns
from CDOT about the use of Highway 85 to the west and that Staff needed additional information. Ms. King
said that they hadn't heard back from the applicant so the information presented today is new information.
However, they did write the resolution such that when an approved traffic report is submitted that the
improvements and road maintenance agreement will reflect the information in that. Mr. King referred to the
access and stated that the current proposed access point does not meet minimum spacing criteria;
however, because it is not an existing access point the actual location of it can be determined at access
permitting time.
Commissioner Edens asked who monitors the trips per day. Ms. King said that if there are triggered
improvements Staff will go out annually and look at the traffic. If it is a road maintenance agreement, then
they are put on a schedule to do road maintenance but with the dryness in the area we rely on the citizens
of the area to call and complain about the dust.
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 USR23-0018 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 Shana Morgan.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Yes: Barney Hammond, Elijah Hatch, Michael Palizzi, Michael Wailes, Pamela Edens, Shana Morgan, Skip
Holland, Virginia Guderjahn.
Commissioner Wailes said that pending the outcome of the traffic study, reasonable measures should be
taken for mitigation if that number is closer to 200 trips per day.
Commissioner Hatch said that Staff has done a wonderful job and understands the difficulty of completing
and answering all the questions without having all of the information and hopes that all of this is clarified
before this goes before the County Commissioners.
Case Number: USR23-0019
Applicant: Michael Boulter Farms, LLC, c/o CBEP Solar 26, LLC
Planner: Kim Ogle
Request: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for a Solar
Energy Facility (SEF) outside of subdivisions and historic townsites in the A
(Agricultural) Zone District.
Legal Description: Lot D Recorded Exemption RE -4420; being part of the SW1/4 of Section 14,
Township 4 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
Location: North of and adjacent to County Road 44; East of and adjacent to County Road
45.
Kim Ogle, Planning Services, presented Case USR23-0019, reading the recommendation and comments
into the record. Mr. Ogle noted that five (5) notices were sent out to surrounding property owners and
added that no written correspondence or telephone calls were received. The applicant held a neighborhood
meeting with one property owner in attendance and issues discussed included glare, encroachment of well
heads, access location into the facility, additional traffic on area roads, screening of the facility and impacts
to sunrise views. 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, noise, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Zach Brammer, Cloudbreak Energy Partners, LLC, 408 Melba Road, Sterling, Colorado, stated that the life
of these facilities will be 20 to 35 years and added that construction will start in late 2024 and into early
2025. There will be no permanent lighting on any of these projects and the systems will not produce any
emissions or odors. He added that the panels are recyclable and the project will be decommissioned
according to Weld County guidelines. The facilities will not cast any glare onto any of the neighboring
homes. Mr. Brammer said that sheep grazing will be implemented across the majority of these projects to
keep the property agriculturally productive during the life of the solar project.
4
Mr. Brammer referred to Case USR23-0019 and said that this project will be approximately 62 acres in size
and will provide electricity to power about 3000 homes.
Commissioner Hatch asked how much of Weld County is supplied by Xcel Energy. Mr. Brammer did not
know that answer but is happy to find that out. He added that Weld County has multiple suppliers.
Commissioner Holland asked how the rocky mountain junipers will be watered. Mr. Brammer said that they
will water the trees with water trucks and added that they have found that after the first two years, with
consistent watering, the trees are established and they will water them on an as needed basis.
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 staff if there are any changes to the resolution. Mr. Ogle requested that Condition of
Approval 1.F be deleted as that condition has been met.
Motion: Delete Condition of Approval 1.F, Moved by Michael Wailes, Seconded by Michael Palizzi.
Motion carried unanimously.
The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the amended 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 USR23-0019 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the amended
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of
approval, Moved by Michael Palizzi, Seconded by Barney Hammond.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Yes: Barney Hammond, Elijah Hatch, Michael Palizzi, Michael Wailes, Pamela Edens, Shana Morgan, Skip
Holland, Virginia Guderjahn.
Case Number: USR23-0020
Applicant Wake, LLLP, c/o CBEP Solar 20, LLC
Planner: Kim Ogle
Request: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for a Solar
Energy Facility (SEF) outside of subdivisions and historic townsites in the A
(Agricultural) Zone District.
Legal Description: 61/2 SW1/4 of Section 24, Township 6 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado.
Location: North of and adjacent to County Road 66; approximately 0.5 miles west of County
Road 49.
Kim Ogle, Planning Services, presented Case USR23-0020, reading the recommendation and comments
into the record. Mr. Ogle said that notices were sent to 9 surrounding property owners and added that one
(1) letter was received by a residence to the south of the facility with concerns of property maintenance and
landscape. The applicant held a neighbor meeting with five (5) property owners in attendance and issues
discussed included construction hours, how does the discount work for Xcel Energy, who owns the land,
where the facility will be located, and how will trees be irrigated. 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.
Zach Brammer, Cloudbreak Energy Partners, LLC, 408 Melba Road, Sterling, Colorado stated that this site
will be about 47 acres in size and will supply electricity to power about 2000 homes. Mr. Brammer stated
that the land will remain a fully operational farm through the life of the solar project. He added that to his
knowledge this will be the first of its kind allowing for alfalfa and wheat farming inside the solar project's
boundary throughout the life cycle of this solar project. Mr. Brammer said that a drip irrigation system will
be installed around the solar project and each row of solar panels will be placed 60% further apart than
5
other projects. This will accommodate 40 -foot alleys which will allow a combine and grain truck to travel
between the rows of solar panels.
Commissioner Hatch said that harvesting creates a lot of dust and asked if there will be any mitigation to
keep the panels clean. Mr. Brammer said that they will clean the panels.
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 USR23-0020 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 Michael Palizzi.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Yes: Barney Hammond, Elijah Hatch, Michael Palizzi, Michael Wailes, Pamela Edens, Shana Morgan, Skip
Holland, Virginia Guderjahn.
The Chair called a recess at 3:23 p.m. and reconvened the hearing at 3:31 p.m.
Case Number: USR23-0021
Applicant: Dave Weinmeister, c/o CBEP Solar 13, LLC
Planner: Kim Ogle
Request: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for a Solar
Energy Facility (SEF) outside of subdivisions and historic townsites in the A
(Agricultural) Zone District
Legal Description: Lot B Recorded Exemption RE -4137; being part of the S1/2 SW1/4 of Section 24,
Township 5 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
Location: North of and adjacent to County Road 54; approximately 0.5 miles west of County
Road 49.
Kim Ogle, Planning Services, presented Case USR23-0021, reading the recommendation and comments
into the record. Mr. Ogle noted that eight (8) surrounding property owners were notified, however, no written
correspondence or telephone calls were received. The applicant held a neighborhood meeting; however
there were no attendees at this 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.
Zach Brammer, Cloudbreak Energy Partners, LLC, 408 Melba Road, Sterling, Colorado, stated that this
project will be on approximately 27 acres and will supply electricity to power about 1,100 homes.
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 USR23-0021 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 Shana Morgan, Seconded by Barney Hammond.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Yes: Barney Hammond, Elijah Hatch, Michael Palizzi, Michael Wailes, Pamela Edens, Shana Morgan, Skip
Holland, Virginia Guderjahn.
Case Number USR23-0022
Applicant: Michael Morgan, c/o CBEP Solar 15, LLC
Planner: Kim Ogle
6
Request:
Legal Description:
Location:
A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit fora Solar
Energy Facility (SEF) outside of subdivisions and historic townsites in the A
(Agricultural) Zone District.
NE1/4 of Section 30, Township 5 North, Range 66 West of the 6th P.M., Weld
County, Colorado.
South of and adjacent to County Road 54; west of and adjacent to County Road
27.
Kim Ogle, Planning Services, presented Case USR23-0022, reading the recommendation and comments
into the record. Mr. Ogle said that notice was sent to eight (8) surrounding land owners; however, no written
correspondence or telephone calls were received for this project. The applicant held a neighborhood
meeting; however, there were no attendees at this 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.
Zach Brammer, Cloudbreak Energy Partners, LLC, 408 Melba Road, Sterling, Colorado, stated that this
project will be approximately 60 acres in size and will supply electricity to power about 3000 homes.
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 USR23-0022 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 Palizzi, Seconded by Virginia Guderjahn.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Yes: Barney Hammond, Elijah Hatch, Michael Palizzi, Michael Wailes, Pamela Edens, Shana Morgan, Skip
Holland, Virginia Guderjahn.
Case Number: USR23-0023
Applicant Thomas and Marjorie Brown, c/o CBEP Solar 27, LLC
Planner: Kim Ogle
Request A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for a Solar
Energy Facility (SEF) outside of subdivisions and historic townsites in the A
(Agricultural) Zone District.
Legal Description: S1/2 SE1/4 of Section 23, Township 5 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P.M., Weld
County, Colorado.
Location: North of and adjacent to County Road 54; west of and adjacent to County Road
47.
Barney Hammond recused himself from this case.
Kim Ogle, Planning Services, presented Case USR23-0023, reading the recommendation and comments
into the record. Mr. Ogle said that notice was sent to nine (9) surrounding land owners. Staff received one
(1) letter from the adjacent property owner to the north regarding concerns of the setback of the solar energy
facility to property line, potential of noise issues, historic drainage patterns and future drainage associated
with proposed facility, and property values. The applicant held a neighborhood meeting with one
surrounding property owner in attendance. Issues discussed were in regard to drainage, screening of the
facility, and property values. 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.
Zach Brammer, Cloudbreak Energy Partners, LLC, 408 Melba Road, Sterling, Colorado, stated that this
project will be on approximately 20 acres and will supply electricity to approximately 1020 homes. He said
7
that they have worked with the neighbor to the north and have agreed on 100 -foot buffer with a 12 foot high
fence and rocky mountain junipers for landscaping.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Steven Louis -Prescott, with Hamre, Rodriguez, Ostrander & Prescott, 118 Inverness Drive West,
Englewood, Colorado, stated that he is representing Gary Alles who is the landowner to the north. Mr.
Louis -Prescott said that Mr. Alles doesn't oppose the solar project; however they are seeking reasonable
enforcement of the code and a reasonable balance of land use. In this case, the solar facility will be 278
feet from the Alles home. According to Section 23-4-1030.C.3 there is a presumptive 500 foot setback from
a residence unless there is consent from an adjacent landowner or if landscaping is being proposed. Mr.
Louis -Prescott said that don't believe the 278 setback is enough of a setback. He added that Cloudbreak
has agreed to their request of the 12 foot high fence with trees for landscaping. However, the Alles' are
requesting to increase the setback from 120 feet from the property line to 240 feet from the property line.
This results in their home being 398 feet from the solar facility. They are looking to come to a reasonable
negotiation to be less than 500 feet but more than 300 feet. Mr. Louis -Prescott stated that with this it is still
a viable project with this additional setback. Alternatively, there is plenty of space to the west of the
proposed facility so whatever space they lose to the north they can expand to the west.
Mr. Louis -Prescott said that another issue is the Union Ditch where Cloudbreak will be crossing it. There
is no crossing agreement with the Union Ditch Company. He added that Mr. Alles is on the Board of the
Ditch Company. Mr. Louis -Prescott stated that they are requesting two (2) conditions of approval; 1) to
have 240 feet from the north property line, and 2) a crossing agreement with the Union Ditch Company
before they proceed.
Commissioner Morgan asked if they can put a condition in for a third party such as the ditch company. Mr.
Ogle referred to Condition of Approval Item I.B that the applicant shall address the requirements of the
Union Ditch Company.
Commissioner Holland asked for clarification on the presumptive distance from the home.
Mr. Ogle referred to Section 23-4-1030.C.3 that states "the improved area must be at least five hundred
(500) feet from existing residential buildings and residential lots of a platted subdivision or planned unit
development". Mr. Ogle stated that Mr. Alles' home is not within a plated subdivision or planned unit
development. Mr. Ogle continued to read Section 23-4-1030.C.3 that states "The residential setback
requirement may be reduced if appropriate screening through landscape or an opaque fence is installed,
or upon submittal to Weld County of a waiver or informed consent signed by the residence owner agreeing
to the lesser setback. If landscaping or opaque fencing is substituted for setback, a landscaping plan or
fencing plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Planning Services". Commissioner
Holland said that the County Code is pretty clear that Mr. Alles' home is not in a platted subdivision. Mr.
Prescott said that perhaps it is different legal interpretation of the code and added that it clearly refers to
residential buildings on the one hand or platted lots for a future subdivision. He added that this applies to
homes within 500 feet or future subdivision lots within 500 feet so it does apply here as there is a home
within 500 feet. Karin McDougal, County Attorney, stated that she agrees with Mr. Ogle's interpretation of
the code that 500 feet from existing residential buildings and residential lots of a platted subdivision or
planned unit development is correct. She added that in her legal interpretation it is not separated.
Mr. Brammer said that they did send a letter to the Union Ditch Company about three (3) weeks ago, but
haven't heard any response yet, however, they intend to work with ditch company to obtain a crossing
agreement. Mr. Brammer said that they did discuss moving the project to an area further west on this
property, but unfortunately it didn't work for the landowners given the operations they have in place with
PDC and their farming operation. Additionally, they have a pre-existing contract in place with Xcel Energy
for this particular project and they do have specific requirements for how much solar that each project has
to provide so reducing this system by a few more panels gets uncomfortably close to that number. He
added that is why they are hesitant to increase the setback any further.
Commissioner Palizza noted that Weld County did send a referral to the Union Ditch Company and they
did respond. Mr. Ogle agreed and added that Staff did receive a referral from the Union Ditch Company.
8
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 USR23-0023 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 Pamela Edens.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 7).
Yes: Elijah Hatch, Michael Palizzi, Michael Wailes, Pamela Edens, Shana Morgan, Skip Holland, Virginia
Guderjahn.
Absent: Barney Hammond.
Commissioner Hatch said that he understands the Alles' position as they are being surrounding by solar
facilities but unfortunately due to the nature of the code we are obligated to follow that.
Case Number:
Presented by:
Request:
Ordinance 2023-12
Tom Parko/Diana Aungst
In the Matter of Repealing and Reenacting, with Amendments, Chapter 23
Zoning of the Weld County Code (Floodpiain Regulations).
Tom Parko, Planning Services, presented Ordinance 2023-12. Diana Aungst, Planning Services provided
a brief summary of the proposed code changes relating to floodplain regulations.
Commissioner Holland asked if someone from the county has asked what impacts this has on future
planning. Mr. Parko said that staff has looked at all the FIRM panels but didn't look at it from an engineering
aspect. He added that this would be a very costly endeavor for the county to do that because we would
have to hire someone to refute FEMA on that. Mr. Parko said that there were several public meetings that
they could walk the landowners through challenging it if they believe they were in the floodplain or not. He
added that Weld County does allow landowners to build in the floodplain or floodway with additional
requirements, whereas there are several counties that do not.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this Ordinance.
No one wished to speak.
Motion: Forward Ordinance 2023-12 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Planning
Commission's recommendation of approval, Moved by Skip Holland, Seconded by Pamela Edens.
Motion carried unanimously.
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 4:47 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
9
Hello