HomeMy WebLinkAbout20181139.tiffSUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, April 3, 2018
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,
Terry Cross, at 12:30 pm.
Roll Call.
Present: Bruce Johnson, Bruce Sparrow, Jordan Jemiola, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck,
Terry Cross, Tom Cope.
Absent: Gene Stille
Also Present: Kim Ogle, Chris Gathman, Ryder Reddick, Michael Hall, and Angela Snyder, Department of
Planning Services; Lauren Light and Ben Frissell, Department of Health; Evan Pinkham and Hayley
Balzano, Public Works; Bob Choate, County Attorney, and Kris Ranslem, Secretary.
Motion: Approve the March 20, 2018 Weld County Planning Commission minutes, Moved by Bruce
Sparrow, Seconded by Tom Cope. Motion passed unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR17-0044
APPLICANT: KYLE KEMPEMA
PLANNER: MICHAEL HALL
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT FOR A USE PERMITTED AS A USE BY RIGHT, AN ACCESSORY USE,
OR A USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW IN THE COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL
ZONE DISTRICTS (COMMERCIAL PARKING AND STORAGE OF TRUCKS,
TRAILERS AND EQUIPMENT FOR A GAS LINE INSTALLATION BUSINESS)
PROVIDED THAT THE PROPERTY IS NOT A LOT IN AN APPROVED OR
RECORDED SUBDIVISION PLAT OR LOTS PART OF A MAP OR PLAN FILED
PRIOR TO ADOPTION OF ANY REGULATIONS CONTROLLING
SUBDIVISIONS IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PART SW4 SECTION 11, T5N, R65W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY,
COLORADO.
LOCATION: SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO EAST 18TH STREET; APPROXIMATELY 0.06
MILES EAST OF FERN AVENUE.
Michael Hall, Planning Services, presented Case USR17-0044, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application
with the attached conditions of approval and development standards.
Evan Pinkham, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic and access to the site.
Hayley Balzano, Public Works, reported on the drainage conditions for the site.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Kyle Kempema, 2770 E 18th Street, Greeley, stated that he is proposing a storage yard for a gas company
that is replacing gas lines in Greeley.
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 he has read through the Development Standards and Conditions of
Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that he is in agreement.
Motion: Forward Case USR17-0044 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 Bruce Sparrow, Seconded by Bruce Johnson.
1
U o n fl' cQ4 o n3 2018-1139
LI/tCo/Le
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Bruce Sparrow, Jordan Jemiola, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck, Terry
Cross, Tom Cope.
CASE NUMBER: USR18-0004
APPLICANT: CHARLES ANDERSON, C/O OAK LEAF SOLAR XXVIII, LLC
PLANNER: ANGELA SNYDER
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT FOR SMALL SCALE SOLAR FACILITY (2MW) IN THE A
(AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SE4 SECTION 9, T3N, R66W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 34 SECTION LINE, APPROXIMATELY 300
FT WEST OF CR 31.
Angela Snyder, Planning Services, presented Case USR18-0004, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Ms. Snyder noted that a letter was received from Anadarko objecting to this
USR; however, they would like to negotiate a Surface Use Agreement with the surface owner. The
Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application with the attached conditions of
approval and development standards.
Hayley Balzano, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic, access to the site and the drainage
conditions on the property.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Mike McCabe, Oak Leaf Energy Partners, 2645 East 2nd Avenue, Denver, Colorado, stated that Oak Leaf
has been in the solar business for 12 years and added that they have historically done work in Weld County.
The proposed site is approximately 12 acres in size and will serve the Weld County Airport, school districts,
and the Island Grove housing complex in Greeley.
Commissioner Jemiola asked how they suppress noxious weeds. Mr. McCabe said that after installing the
system, they will seed the site with low -growth native grass. He added that if there are noxious weeds they
will work with Weld County to take care of that problem.
Commissioner Jemiola referred to the letter from Anadarko and asked if the applicant has spoken with
Anadarko. Mr. McCabe replied that they have talked with Anadarko and have made some changes to the
site plan to accommodate their concerns. He added that they are currently working on a Surface Use
Agreement with Anadarko.
Commissioner Cope referred to Anadarko's gas line to the southeast of the site and said that it doesn't
appear that there are easements identified on the site plan. He cautioned the applicant to not build on top
of those easements.
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.
Commissioner Cope wished to clarify if the final map will identify the easements on site. Ms. Synder replied
that all easements will be shown on the map.
Motion: Forward Case USR18-0004 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 Bruce Johnson, Seconded by Lonnie Ford.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Bruce Sparrow, Jordan Jemiola, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck, Terry
Cross, Tom Cope.
2
CASE NUMBER: USR18-0008
APPLICANT: KERR MCGEE GATHERING, LLC
PLANNER: KIM OGLE
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT FOR A GREATER THAN 12 -INCH HIGH PRESSURE NATURAL GAS
PIPELINE APPROXIMATELY 2.5 MILES LONG (24 -INCH NATURAL GAS
PIPELINE) IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: THE PIPELINE WILL ORIGINATE IN SECTION 15, T1N, R67W AND CROSS
SECTIONS 16, 9, 19, AND 8 AND TERMINATE AT A PROPOSED
COMPRESSOR STATION IN SECTION 7, Ti N, R67W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD
COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF CR 8; EAST OF CR 13; SOUTH OF CR 12
AND WEST OF CR 21.
Kim Ogle, Planning Services, presented Case USR18-0008, reading the recommendation and comments
into the record. Mr. Ogle noted that one letter was received from a surrounding property owner who is
opposed to any oil and gas activities due to the negative impacts by producers on their lives. The
Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application with the attached conditions of
approval and development standards.
Evan Pinkham, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic and access to the site.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Sam Samet, Kerr McGee, 1099 18th Street, Denver, Colorado, stated that staff covered the project very
well and is available to answer any questions.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
CJ Adams, Apache Road, Casa Grande, referred to the one person in the area that wrote a letter and asked
how close the resident was to the pipeline. Mr. Ogle replied that he will need to research the distance.
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 USR18-0008 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 Bruce Johnson, Seconded by Bruce Sparrow.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Bruce Sparrow, Jordan Jemiola, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck, Terry
Cross, Tom Cope.
CASE NUMBER: USR17-0066
APPLICANT: GENARO NUNEZ AND JOSE & MARIANA RAMIREZ
PLANNER: RYDER REDDICK
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT FOR ONE (1) SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING PER LOT OTHER THAN
THOSE PERMITTED UNDER SECTION 23-3-20.A AND TWO HOME
BUSINESSES: ONE BEING FOR THE STORAGE OF UP TO TWO (2)
COMMERCIAL VEHICLES AND INDOOR STORAGE OF SUPPLIES FOR A
CARPET LAYING BUSINESS, AND A SECOND HOME BUSINESS FOR A TAX
PREPARATION BUSINESS TO BE CONDUCTED ON SITE IN THE A
(AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: NW4 SECTION 10, T5N, R65W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY,
COLORADO.
LOCATION: NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO THE INTERSECTION FOR EAST 16TH
STREET AND DELWOOD AVENUE.
3
Ryder Reddick, Planning Services, presented Case USR17-0066, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record.
The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application with the attached conditions
of approval and development standards. Mr. Reddick requested to add a Condition of Approval 1.A Prior
to Recording the Plat that states "All derelict vehicles and personal items stored outside and located on the
property must be moved outside of the 100 -year floodplain boundaries. The items, if remaining, on site and
outside of the 100 -year floodplain boundaries must also be screened from all adjacent properties and public
rights -of -way, or be completely removed from the property. For a vehicle to be considered non -derelict it
must be operational with current tags and license plates and evidence of such shall be provided to the
Department of Planning Services".
Evan Pinkham, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic and access to the site.
Hayley Balzano, Public Works, reported on the drainage conditions for the site.
Ben Frissell, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan. Mr. Frissell requested that Condition of Approval 1.B be moved
into the Development Standards.
Mariana Ramirez, 1777 E 16th Street, Greeley, Colorado, stated that staff covered everything and has
nothing to add.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
Motion: Add Condition of Approval 1.A, as recommended by Staff, Moved by Jordan Jemiola, Seconded
by Bruce Johnson. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion: Remove Condition of Approval 1.B and move to Development Standard 17, as recommended by
Staff, Moved by Jordan Jemiola, Seconded by Bruce Johnson. 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 USR17-0066 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 Tom Cope, Seconded by Michael Wailes.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Bruce Sparrow, Jordan Jemiola, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck, Terry
Cross, Tom Cope.
The Chair called a recess at 1:46 pm and reconvened the hearing at 2:00 pm.
CASE NUMBER: USR18-0001
APPLICANT: WETCO FARMS, INC, C/O BRETT BLOOM
PLANNER: CHRIS GATHMAN
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT FOR ANY USE PERMITTED AS A USE BY RIGHT, AN ACCESSORY
USE, OR A USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW IN THE COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL
ZONE DISTRICTS (SALE OF CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT,
MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT AND TRUCKS AND TRAILERS, VEHICLE
MODIFICATION AND DISMANTLING OF WRECKED VEHICLES AND SALE
AND/OR RECYCLING OF DISMANTLED VEHICLE PARTS) PROVIDED THAT
THE PROPERTY IS NOT A LOT IN AN APPROVED OR RECORDED
SUBDIVISION PLAT OR LOTS PARTS OF A MAP OR PLAN FILED PRIOR TO
ADOPTION OF ANY REGULATIONS CONTROLLING SUBDIVISIONS. THIS
PROPOSED USR ALSO INCLUDES A REQUESTED WAIVER FROM THE
WELD COUNTY SIGN REQUIREMENTS DELINEATED IN CHAPTER 23 OF
4
THE WELD COUNTY CODE TO ALLOW ONE (1) NINETY (90) SQUARE FOOT
FREESTANDING SIGN THAT IS TWENTY-EIGHT (28) FEET IN HEIGHT AND
ONE (1) ONE -HUNDRED (100) SQUARE FOOT WALL SIGN.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: W2 AND PART E2 SECTION 4, T4N, R63W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY,
COLORADO.
LOCATION: NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO STATE HIGHWAY 34; SOUTH OF AND
ADJACENT TO CR 50.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case USR18-0001, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Mr. Gathman noted that three (3) letters were received outlining concerns from
blowing sand from the site, traffic concerns, access to Highway 34 and concerns of the potential user on
site.
The applicant is requesting a waiver from the Weld County sign requirements to allow one 90 square foot
freestanding sign that is 28 feet in height and a 100 square foot wall sign. Both proposed signs will be
unlighted signs. Staff is not in support of a larger sign on Highway 34 and recommends that the freestanding
sign meet the Agricultural Zone District requirements of 16 square feet and a maximum height of 6 feet.
Staff has no concerns with the proposed building sign. The Department of Planning Services recommends
approval of this application with the attached conditions of approval and development standards.
Evan Pinkham, Public Works, reported on the proposed traffic to the site and the required Improvements
Agreements.
Hayley Balzano, Public Works, reported on the drainage conditions for the site.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Mr. Gathman noted that the CDOT referral indicated that they will be writing an Access Permit for the site;
however they were concerned with the proposed traffic volumes. They will accept the traffic volumes, but
do so cautiously.
Brett Bloom, 3202 Barkley Court, Evans, said that staff covered everything and he would answer any
questions the Planning Commission might have.
Commissioner Jemiola asked what material will be used for imperviousness. Mr. Bloom said that all the
work will be performed inside the shop building.
Commissioner Jemiola referred to a letter submitted by Jim Park regarding the blowing sand from the
subject site to Mr. Park's property and asked the applicant to explain how he will mitigate that. Mr. Bloom
said that there is over 100 acres of cornfield and doesn't know how to stop the wind blowing. He added
that during construction he is willing to install a silt fence to help.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Jim Park, 32730 CR 50, stated that he owns 279 acres east of and adjacent to the site. The south half of
that section is nothing but blow sand and agrees that once the building is in place the sand won't blow. Mr.
Park said that this issue should have been going through this process one year ago. He added that he
invested in installing a white fence that prevented the blowing sand onto his property. He submitted a bill
for the installation of the fence and requests that WETCO pay the bill.
Commissioner Jemiola noted that they can't force the applicant to pay for the fence but asked if there is
anything else the applicant can do to mitigate these concerns. Mr. Park replied that he can pay for the
fence.
Glenn McClain, superintendent of Platte Valley School District, Kersey, Colorado, stated that they submitted
a referral in January 2018. At that time with the number of employees and traffic stated, they didn't have
any concerns. However, he has recently been contacted by some of the residents and was told that the
5
traffic was over 84 vehicles per day. He added that if there is that level of traffic, he is concerned about the
bus stops as there are school bus stops in the area.
Commissioner Jemiola said that according to the traffic study, it states that there will be 84 vehicle trips per
day. Mr. McClain said that it if there is a high level of traffic during school bus time, he is concerned.
Ms. Balzano asked to clarify if the concern is on County Road 50 or Highway 34 and County Road 50. Mr.
McClain said that school buses travel both roads so he would be concerned with both roadways.
Mark Kain, 31954 CR 50, stated that he is concerned with the amount of traffic and adding to it with this
proposed use. He noted that on the west side of the applicant's property it appears that there is a super
highway he built there and inquired what the applicant will be doing there. Mr. Kain added that the existing
building on site is rented to a commercial business, which he understands is not allowed. He said that this
site is turning into an industrial area and emphasized that this is a farming community. Additionally, Mr.
Kain said that he has heard rumors that the applicant would like to construct additional buildings and rent
them to oil and gas companies.
Commissioner Cope asked to clarify what they are doing on the west side of the property. Mr. Kain said
from the access point up the west side of the property it looks like a highway — two to three lanes wide with
really good rock. He added that it appears they are preparing for something in the future. Mr. Kain said
that he is afraid of what they are going to do on the west side of the property.
Carl Hergenreder 32385 CR 50, stated that he echos the concern of the amount of traffic on the roads. He
stated that he also serves on the Latham Ditch Company and they have talked with the applicant about
crossing their ditch. He indicated that the applicant has not provided traffic numbers, weight or type of
traffic and he added that they need to have a Crossing Agreement.
Commissioner Ford asked if there is an existing Agreement that they can cross the ditch. Mr. Hergenreder
replied that there is an agricultural crossing but there is no agreement or authorization for a commercial
crossing.
Alycia Carmin, 31544 Highway 34, expressed concerns with the traffic coming off of Highway 34. She
understands that CDOT performed a traffic study but doesn't believe it is correct. She has witnessed
several truck and vehicle accidents. She stated that she is opposed to this use due to the increase in traffic
and lack of safety for their children.
Commissioner Ford asked what could be mitigated. Ms. Carmin said that a turn lane from both directions
would be necessary, if it is approved.
Jana Gettman, 30997 CR 50, said that County Road 50 is a dirt road and can't imagine 84 vehicles traveling
on that dirt road per day. She added that the intersection of County Road 50 and Highway 34 is a very
narrow and believes it is a safety hazard.
Mr. Bloom said that he hired professionals to do the traffic study. He said that he doesn't want to make
anyone mad and feels he has done everything he needs to do. He said that this shop will not generate that
much more traffic than what is out there already.
In regard to Latham Ditch concerns, he said that he left several messages and added that no one returned
his phone calls.
Commissioner Cope referred to the what might be happening to the west side of the property and asked
what the plan is for that. Mr. Bloom said he has no clue and said that he started working for WETCO Farms
one year ago and that road was already in. He added that it is recycled concrete; however, he is not aware
of anything going on the west side of the property.
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.
6
Commissioner Wailes expressed concern that there is no Crossing Agreement with the Latham Ditch and
asked Staff if they received anything from the Ditch Company. Mr. Gathman said that a referral was sent
to them; however, they did not respond.
Motion: Forward Case USR18-0001 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of
Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of denial, Moved
by Jordan Jemiola, citing Section 23-2-220.A.3 as it is not compatible with surrounding uses and Section
23-2-220.A.6 as he doesn't believe a diligent effort is being made to conserve prime farmland, Seconded
by Richard Beck.
Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 7, No = 1, Abstain = 0).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Bruce Sparrow, Jordan Jemiola, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck, Tom
Cope.
No: Terry Cross.
Commissioner Johnson said that there should be some form of documentation with the Ditch Company.
He is also concerned with the intersection of Highway 34 and County Road 50 as it is a dangerous turn.
Commissioner Beck agreed with Mr. Johnson's comments and added that he doesn't believe they are
getting enough information from the proper people at WETCO Farms.
Commissioner Cope said that he has serious concerns about Highway 34 and County Road 50. He realizes
that Highway 34 is out of their control; however, he doesn't want to the see the County potentially create
an additional safety hazard at an intersection that could be fairly dangerous already. He added that he
would like to see an upgraded traffic count before something like this gets approved and doesn't believe
the traffic study is very well prepared.
Commissioner Ford said that he has concerns that there is no crossing agreement with the Ditch Company.
Additionally, the intersection at County Road 50 and Highway 34 needs to be addressed as that is a
dangerous intersection.
Commissioner Wailes cited Sections 23-2-220.A.3 and Section 23-2-220.A.6.
Commissioner Cross stated that he doesn't think this USR will generate that much traffic, understanding
the nature of the business.
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
REQUEST:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOCATION:
3MJUSR18-95-1092
OPAL FOODS, LLC
KIM OGLE
A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT FOR AGRICULTURAL SERVICE ESTABLISHMENTS PRIMARILY
ENGAGED IN PERFORMING AGRICULTURAL, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY OR
HORTICULTURAL SERVICE ON A FEE OR CONTRACT BASIS, INCLUDING A
LIVESTOCK CONFINEMENT OPERATION (L.C.O.) (4.5 MILLION POULTRY
BIRDS) AND USES SIMILAR TO THE USES LISTED AS USES BY SPECIAL
REVIEW AS LONG AS THE USE COMPLIES WITH THE GENERAL INTENT OF
THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT (FEED MILL, GRAIN AND/OR FEED
STORAGE, IN -LINE POULTRY BARNS, PULLET BARNS, EGG PROCESSING
PLANT AND APPURTENANCES ASSOCIATED WITH A COMMERCIAL EGG
FACILITY) IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT.
SE4 AND SW4 SECTION 12, T2N, R63W AND SE4/S1100' OF THE NE4 AND
THE NE4 IN SECTION 13, T2N, R63W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY,
COLORADO.
WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 73; 1 MILE NORTH OF CR 18.
Kim Ogle, Planning Services, presented Case 3MJUSR18-95-1092, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application
with the attached conditions of approval and development standards. Mr. Ogle added that they would like
to correct Development Standard 36 to reflect the 2017 National Electrical Code that was recently adopted
by the Board of County Commissioners.
7
Commissioner Cope stated that he has worked on this facility previously and would like to excuse himself
from this case.
Evan Pinkham, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic, access to the site and drainage conditions for
the property.
Ben Frissell, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan. Mr. Frissell requested to amend Condition of Approval 6.B.,
add new Development Standard 20, and amend Development Standard 27 for clarification purposes.
Tim Naylor, AGPROfessionals, 3050 67th Avenue, stated that the applicant is requesting to amend the
existing permit from 1.53 to 4.5 million birds, including 24 new poultry barns, 6 pullet barns, processing
facility, a proposed feed mill and grain storage located on approximately 640 acres. The project is planned
to be constructed in phases.
Mr. Naylor said that originally they requested 4.5 million birds in their application; however, they have scaled
that number back. He added that for this amendment, however, they will continue to request up to 4.5
million birds.
Commissioner Johnson asked how they will control odor and disease migration. Brock Peterson, Opal
Foods, said that chickens are very susceptible to aviant influenza, therefore they keep the facilities very
clean and the pullet facilities will prevent bird movement. He added that chicken manure is best controlled
when it is dry, therefore the systems on site are designed to dry the manure and the manure is stored
indoors.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Joel Shoeneman, 8672 CR 73, stated that he is concerned with the increase of employees and the increase
of traffic. He suggested acceleration and deceleration lanes to prevent potential accidents. Additionally,
Mr. Shoeneman expressed concern for the amount of water available, the potential for buildings built in the
floodplain, odor from the manure, flies and the trash blowing from the site.
Laurene Grabowski, 9061 Apache Road, Longmont, Colorado asked what happens with the chemicals
when they are washed off the trucks.
Mr. Naylor said that at this time they do not anticipate building the two proposed barns on the south end of
the facility. He added that when or if they do build those they will get the appropriate Floodplain Permits.
Mr. Naylor said that there are approved wells for 129 acre feet of water for the facility and they are in the
final process for designation of water rights from Laramie Fox Hills and they are also adjudicating a well for
commercial use to a total water available amount of over 500 acre feet of water. He added that 4.5 million
birds will required about 300 acre feet of water.
Mr. Naylor said that they will mitigate the flies and odor concerns through their Nuisance Management Plan.
He provided a brief explanation of how the manure will be dried and the flies mitigated.
The Chair referred to Staffs recommendation of correcting Development Standard 36 reflecting the 2017
National Electrical Code.
Motion: Amend Development Standard 36, as recommended by Staff, Moved by Bruce Sparrow,
Seconded by Bruce Johnson. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Frissell suggested adding a Development Standard 20 that states "The facility shall operate in
compliance with Colorado Water Quality Control Commission Regulation 81 (5 CCR 1002-81) and 61 (5
CCR 1002-61). There shall be no discharge of manure or process wastewater, except as provided in the
facility's Colorado Discharge Permit".
Mr. Frissell recommended amended Development Standard 27 to read "With the exception to emergency
conditions, no manure shall be stored on the property, outside of the designated manure storage areas.
8
The facility shall maintain evidence that it has the ability to prevent the stockpiling of manure on the property
outside of designated manure storage areas".
Motion: Add Development Standard 20 and amend Development Standard 27, as stated by Staff, Moved
by Bruce Johnson, Seconded by Lonnie Ford. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Frissell requested amended Condition of Approval 6.C to read "The applicant shall submit evidence of
an Underground Injection Control (UIC) Class V Injection Well permit from the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) for any septic systems located on the property or associated with the business that service
over 20 individuals. Alternately, the applicant can provide evidence from the EPA that they are not subject
to the EPA Class V requirements.
Motion: Amend Condition of Approval 6.C, as stated by Staff, Moved by Bruce Johnson, Seconded by
Michael Wailes. 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 asked for clarification on
Development Standard 26 as he believes that language is what Regulation 81 and 61 already state. He
referred to the sentence regarding the areas that shall be constructed to minimize seepage or percolation
of manure contaminated water and said that the stormwater pond is required to have seepage requirements
not the entire manure storage area. He said that it seems this language is redundant to Regulation 81
which the facility must adhere to.
Mr. Frissell stated that this language is placed on all of the CAFO facilities in the County. Nuisance
conditions can be determined by the County and don't have to be necessarily outlined by the State, as this
gives the County the ability to assess that situation. He agrees that the last sentence regarding Regulation
81 may be removed as that is covered in other places in the Staff Report.
Mr. Naylor recommended leaving the first and second sentence as there are enough development
standards in there that address everything they would be reviewing.
Motion: Amend Development Standard 26 to read "The applicant shall remove, handle, and stockpile
manure from the livestock area in a manner than will prevent nuisance conditions. The manure piles shall
not be allowed to exist or deteriorate to a condition that facilitates excessive odors, flies, insect pests, or
pollutant runoff", Moved by Jordan Jemiola, Seconded by Richard Beck.
Motion: Amend the motion to amend Development Standard 26 to read "The applicant shall remove,
handle, and stockpile manure from the livestock area in a manner than will prevent nuisance conditions.
The manure piles shall not be allowed to exist or deteriorate to a condition that facilitates excessive odors,
flies, insect pests, or pollutant runoff. The surface beneath the manure storage areas shall be of materials
which are protective of state waters. These areas shall be constructed to minimize seepage or percolation
of manure contaminated water", Moved by Bruce Johnson, Seconded by Lonnie Ford.
The Chair called for a vote to the first motion.
Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 4, No = 3, Abstain = 1).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Bruce Sparrow, Lonnie Ford, Terry Cross.
No: Jordan Jemiola, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck.
Abstain: Tom Cope.
Bob Choate, County Attorney, clarified that there is a motion on the floor to amend Development Standard
26 to delete the last sentence alone.
The Chair called for a vote.
Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 6, No = 1, Abstain = 1).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Bruce Sparrow, Jordan Jemiola, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Terry Cross.
No: Richard Beck.
Abstain: Tom Cope.
9
Mr. Naylor said that the manure storage areas are not required to have protected ground, but if this is the
decision of the Board then they will accept it.
The Chair clarified if the applicant is in agreement with the amended Development Standards and
Conditions of Approval. The applicant replied that they are in agreement.
Motion: Forward Case 3MJUSR18-95-1092 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 Jordan Jemiola, Seconded by Michael Wailes.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 7, No = 0, Abstain = 1).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Bruce Sparrow, Jordan Jemiola, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck, Terry
Cross.
Abstain: Tom Cope.
The Chair called a recess at 4:13 pm and reconvened the hearing at 4:25 pm
Michael Wailes left the meeting at 4:13 pm.
CASE NUMBER: USR17-0064
APPLICANT: LORENA GARCIA
PLANNER: RYDER REDDICK
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT FOR ONE (1) SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING PER LOT OTHER THAN
THOSE PERMITTED UNDER SECTION 23-3-20.A AND A HOME BUSINESS
(STORAGE OF UP TO 3 COMMERCIAL DUMP TRUCKS) IN THE A
(AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 25 CASAGRANDE ESTATES 1ST ADDITION, BEING PART OF SECTION
17, T2N, R67W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO APACHE ROAD AND NORTH
APPROXIMATELY 0.2 MILES FROM PINE CONE AVENUE.
Ryder Reddick, Planning Services, presented Case USR17-0064, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Mr. Reddick noted that six (6) letters were received in opposition to this request
outlining concerns that allowing the second residence would open the door for all surrounding lots to be
approved for second homes, the home business would allow for unsightly materials (concrete and
commercial waste items), negatively affect surrounding property values, and negatively affected drainage
on site.
The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application with the attached conditions
of approval and development standards. Mr. Reddick requested adding Condition of Approval 1.A to read
"All outdoor storage of materials related to the commercial business on site other than the three commercial
dump trucks proposed in the application must be removed from the property prior to recording the plat.
Photographic evidence shall be provided to the Weld County Department of Planning Services showing
that outside storage of all commercial related items stored on the property have been removed from the
site"
Commissioner Johnson asked if there is an active Homeowner's Association and if there are active
covenants for Casa Grande Estates. Mr. Reddick replied that there is no active Homeowner's Association
and added that if there are covenants, they are not currently active.
Evan Pinkham, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic and access to the site.
Hayley Balzano, Public Works, reported on the drainage conditions for the site.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Lorena Garcia, 9231 Apache Road, Longmont, Colorado, stated that the purpose of the second home is
for family coming to stay.
10
Commissioner Sparrow asked how inspections can be completed when the home has been built. Mr.
Reddick stated that the applicant applied for a Building Permit for a residential addition; however, they built
the second home without obtaining the appropriate building permits. Jose Gonzalez, Assistant Building
Official, stated that the Building Department requests that an engineer provide an observation assessment
of what work has been completed and not inspected.
Commissioner Sparrow asked the applicant if they were aware that they needed a building permit. Ms.
Garcia replied that she did know and hired a contractor to build it and added that he obtained a permit to
build the home. However, when she called for inspections she learned that the contractor did not submit a
building permit. Ms. Garcia stated that they converted the existing garage on the original home to a living
space and were told by the contractor that he submitted permits for both the conversion and the second
home.
Commissioner Ford asked the applicant if they intend to use this house as a rental. Ms. Garcia said that
they have daughters who will live there and family who will stay.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Gary Harper, 9132 Apache Road, stated he is opposed to the multi -family approach. He said that he has
no concerns with the business operation from this site. Mr. Harper said that he doesn't understand how
the second home was built when inspections were performed on the garage conversion. Mr. Gonzalez said
that there was a building permit to convert the garage into habitable space and added that it was during an
inspection that a building inspector noted that additional work was done outside of the scope of the building
permit. Therefore, the Building Department placed a stop work order and then the applicant was required
to submit land use permits for the second home.
John Adams Gordon, 9261 Apache Road, stated that the applicant stated it was for family and friends and
it seems to him that it is a rental situation.
Commissioner Cope asked Mr. Gordon if he is opposed to the second home. Mr. Gordon replied yes. Mr.
Cope asked if he is opposed to the second business. Mr. Gordon said he is not opposed to the second
business.
Tom Moore, 9062 Apache Road, Longmont, Colorado, stated that he doesn't object to the business but he
opposes the second home.
Commissioner Jemiola asked Staff whose name is on the permit for the garage renovation. Mr. Gonzalez
stated that the permits are listed under the homeowners' name; however, a contractor can submit a building
permit on behalf of the homeowner.
Freddie Martinez, 9262 Apache Road, stated that he is not opposed to the business but he is opposed to
the second home.
Mr. Gonzalez followed up on Commissioner Jemiola's inquiry and stated that Luis Gonzales submitted the
building permit and was authorized by the homeowner to renovate the garage.
Kathy Burger, 9055 Del Camino Lane, stated that she is opposed to the second home as this could lead to
everyone building second homes within this subdivision and that was not the intention.
Bernice Walker, 7501 CR 20, stated that a few years ago she approached Weld County to build a second
home for her in-laws and they were told that they could apply for a variance and put a trailer on the property;
however, that structure would have to be removed when their parents were gone. She also opposes the
second home and the business as the applicants have not been truthful.
Elmer Walker 7501 CR 20, stated that he is opposed to the second home and business.
James Grabowski, 9061 Apache Road, stated that he is opposed to the second home.
11
Jane Moore, 9062 Apache Road, stated that she is concerned with the speed and disregard to safety of
the drivers. She is also concerned with the second home and is confused if it will be used as a rental or for
family.
Darlene Abell, 9461 Apache Road, said that she has also asked in previous years if she could divide her
land and was told that she was not able to divide it. She said that it is a residential community and it should
remain residential. She is not opposed to the business but is concerned with the traffic.
Laurene Grabowski, 9061 Apache Road, said that she is concerned with the second residence and the
speed of the trucks.
Commissioner Jemiola is torn because they have approved second homes on properties smaller than this
and he is concerned that they haven't had inspections performed on the property. Ms. Garcia said that no
inspections have been done because they were told to stop building. She added that the home is only a
shell.
Commissioner Johnson said that it appears this entire subdivision has businesses without the appropriate
land use permits. He feels that it needs to be brought back to the HOA to review their covenants and
organization.
Motion: Add Condition of Approval 1.A, as recommended by Staff, Moved by Jordan Jemiola, Seconded
by Bruce Sparrow. 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.
Commissioner Cope said that if we are designing single lot subdivisions then they are intended to be single
lot subdivisions. He is in opposition of this second home because the intent is to design and plot a piece
of ground with one (1) single dwelling unit. When you start approving this it sets a precedence. He
understands other properties with mother-in-law homes and rental properties but he doesn't believe it is
intended for areas that have already been divided and developed as single lot subdivisions.
Commissioner Jemiola concurred with Mr. Cope.
Commissioner Sparrow said that he doesn't have a problem with the garage and the business, but agrees
with Mr. Cope regarding the second home.
Commissioner Beck sympathized with the applicant but said that he doesn't feel it fits in the rules.
Commissioner Ford said that he is opposed to two houses.
Commissioner Cross said that he agrees with Mr. Jemiola and said that they have approved a number of
second homes on subdivision lots. However, it is already there and some of the rules have been violated.
Motion: Forward Case USR17-0064 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the amended
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of
denial, Moved by Bruce Sparrow, Seconded by Tom Cope.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Bruce Sparrow, Jordan Jemiola, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck, Terry
Cross, Tom Cope.
Commissioner Jemiola stated that he would like to see some way that the garage can be salvaged and is
in support of the applicant being able to maintain a landscaping business, if it is screened.
CASE NUMBER: 2MJUSR18-12-1792
APPLICANT: DCP LUCERNE 2 PLANT LLC
PLANNER: KIM OGLE
12
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND 2ND AMENDED USE BY
SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT NO. USR-1792 (FOR MINERAL RESOURCE
DEVELOPMENT FACILITIES, OIL AND GAS SUPPORT AND SERVICE,
NATURAL GAS PROCESSING FACILITY) ONE (1) UP TO ONE HUNDRED (100)
FEET IN HEIGHT SECURE COMMUNICATIONS TOWER, AND THE ADDITION
OF NEW GAS PROCESSING EQUIPMENT TO IMPROVE CAPACITY AND
EFFICIENCY OF THE EXISTING PLANT IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE
DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT B REC EXEMPT RECX12-0034, BEING PART SE4 SECTION 31, T5N,
R64W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 50; WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 51.
Kim Ogle, Planning Services, presented Case 2MJUSR18-12-1792, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Mr. Gathman noted that five (5) letters were received outlining concerns
regarding visual, noise, and screening mitigation associated with the plant, flare production issues, and
historic issue with lighting. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application
with the attached conditions of approval and development standards.
Hayley Balzano, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic, access to the site, and the drainage
conditions for the property.
Ben Frissell, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Patrick Groom, representative for DCP Operating, LP, 822 7th Street, Greeley, Colorado, stated that DCP
is proposing to increase the O'Connor Plant due to the increase gas production in the Wattenburg field.
Due to the increased drilling, there is a tremendous amount of gas being produced and, in order to
accommodate that, more processing capability is needed.
As part of this application, DCP conducted two open houses with the community. The property owners
made clear that they had concerns about DCP breaking commitments in the past. DCP communicated to
those property owners that whatever DCP commits to be reflected in the Resolution in this case, if approved.
For example, one of the concerns was lighting and it had been an ongoing problem at the plant. Mr. Groom
stated that DCP is committed to a dark skies development standard, meaning that at night the lights would
be turned off, unless they have to be turned on for maintenance or in the event of emergencies.
Another concern was in regard to the noise at the plant. Under the proposed resolution, the County
suggested a Residential Noise Standard; however, DCP feels that they should have to adhere to the Light
Industrial Noise Standard (65 decibels), which is what the Board of County Commissioners approved for
the Mewbourn Expansion. In order to achieve that, DCP intends to house all of the rotary equipment within
insulated structures on site, including the existing equipment as well.
Mr. Groom said that it appears that one of the ongoing problems in the past is communication between
DCP and the neighbors. In order to resolve that issue, DCP has set up a communications platform to allow
neighbors to communicate directly with DCP. There is a facebook page that allows neighbors to post
comments and post complaints, as well as a special hotline for neighbors to call and register complaints or
post questions.
When this plant was originally permitted, there was no landscaping required. Under this proposal, DCP
intends to plant over 70 trees at 8 to 10 feet in height on this property. The species selected will grow up
to 40 feet. Additionally, DCP is proposing placing a 6-7 foot berm along the southern boundary of the
property and a 3-4 foot berm on the east side of the property. He added that a split rail signature stone
fence along the entire southern and eastern boundaries and wrapping around a small distance on the west
and north sides of the plant will be installed as well.
Mr. Groom said that the old flare would go off on a frequent basis and generated particular problems for
surrounding property owners, such as vibrations liquid flames that ignited adjacent property grassland. The
new flare is a modernized flare and DCP does not expect that the new flare will generate the same
problems. Commissioner Ford asked what will be done with the old flare. Mr. Groom said that they will
13
disconnect the existing flare but it will remain in place in the event of an emergency that would require it;
however, they intend to use the new flare for operation.
Commissioner Johnson said that they have found that vibration is an issue. Mr. Groom said that the
vibration problems experienced by the surrounding property owners were caused primarily by the existing
flare. When that flare went off it caused damage to homes and a nuisance. He said that by eliminating
that flare, they believe that will address that problem considerably.
Commissioner Ford asked if there will be an increase in the number of employees. Mr. Groom said that
DCP will be increasing the number of employees from 10 to 15 employees.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Amy and Virtus Banowetz, 24081 CR 50. Ms. Banowetz stated that they have a USR for a gathering center
on their property. She expressed concerns with the expansion and view from their home. She said that
DCP has not followed through with addressing any of their complaints and are concerned that they will
continue.
Mr. Banowetz requested landscaping to block the view from their house since they operate a wedding
venue and bed and breakfast business. He requested support from the Planning Commission.
Scott and Ali McGregor, 25116 CR 51. Mr. McGregor expressed concerns with sound, lighting and
landscaping. He added that they planted up to 500 trees on their 38 acres and feels that 70 trees at this
facility will not be sufficient. He added that the sound resonates through their home.
Ms. McGregor stated that this has greatly impacted their quality of life. She added that they have a hard
time believing that they will follow through with what they say they commit to since it hasn't happened.
Don Loloff, 25461 CR 50, expressed concern with the noise, the flare, and the lighting. He said that DCP
has made improvements but the flare is a concern and added that they have had property damage in their
home from the flare. Mr. Loloff said that the noise is a constant whining sound and would like to see them
held to residential noise levels.
Brad Wagner, 25455 CR 50, emphasized concern with the flare and the noise, vibration and lighting from
the facility. Mr. Wagner submitted a noise study performed by Colorado State University that he had
requested. He said that he doesn't want to see this expanded and add more problem to what they can't
already correct.
Todd Loose, 25201 CR 53, submitted photos of the flare in operation during the day and night. He
expressed concerns of the existing flare, noise, damage to homes, lack of mitigation from original permit
and lack of landscaping. Mr. Loose said that a noise study was provided by Mr. Wagner to the
Environmental Health Department and added that Weld County did not follow up on it.
Tim Shutte, 2935 11th Avenue, Evans, said that he is friends with some of the surrounding property owners.
He suggested constructing the facility into the ground and not on top of the hill. He has witnessed the
windows shaking and the noise from their homes.
Mr. Groom said that DCP has met with the individual property owners on several occasions and they intend
to continue to reach out to them to accommodate their specific concerns. He appreciates their concerns
with the lack of commitment from DCP in previous history; however, he has confidence in DCP with the
new management that they will mitigate those concerns and will follow through with what they said. He
added that the commitments that DCP makes today should be part of the USR.
Commissioner Cope asked if there is more potential with almost tripling the size of the plant for the flare to
go off more times. Mr. Groom said that they are anticipating, due to the improvement of technology, that it
will not. The flare goes off in extreme circumstances when there has to be a release of product from the
plant.
14
Commissioner Cope agreed that the berming and trees may not be enough landscaping and is concerned
with the lack of water for the landscaping. Additionally, he is concerned with the lack of innovation and
would think that they could create some kind of sound barriers that could be artistic.
Motion: Amend Development Standard 11 to adhere to 65 decibels 24 hours per day, Moved by Bruce
Sparrow, Seconded by Jordan Jemiola. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Ogle suggested adding the following Conditions of Approval: 1) The applicant shall develop a
landscape and screening plan in consultation with surrounding property owners, 2) The applicant shall
develop an approved lighting plan, 3) The applicant shall develop an approved Communication Plan with
the surrounding property owners, and 4) The applicant shall develop a Noise Mitigation Plan.
Additionally, he suggested adding the following Development Standards: 1) The applicant shall maintain
compliance with the approved Landscape and Screening Plan, 2) The applicant shall maintain compliance
with the approved Lighting Plan, and 3) The applicant shall maintain compliance with the approved
Communication Plan.
Motion: Add Conditions of Approval and Development Standards, as recommended by Staff, Moved by
Bruce Sparrow, Seconded by Bruce Johnson.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 7).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Bruce Sparrow, Jordan Jemiola, Lonnie Ford, Richard Beck, Terry Cross, Tom
Cope.
Absent: Michael Wailes.
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 2MJUSR15-12-1792 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 Jordan Jemiola, Seconded by Bruce Johnson.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 7).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Bruce Sparrow, Jordan Jemiola, Lonnie Ford, Richard Beck, Terry Cross, Tom Cope.
Absent: Michael Wailes.
Commissioner Sparrow commented that the neighbors are willing to accept oil and gas activities and hopes
that the applicant will meet them half way.
Commissioner Beck said that the companies need to be more proactive.
Commissioner Jemiola said that it is important to reach out to the surrounding property owners on their
concerns.
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 7:46 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
4444tgikt,
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
15
Hello