The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About780249.tiff RESOLUTION RE: DENIAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT NO. 365 - FLATIRON PAVING CO. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado held a public hearing on the 13th day of September, 1978 at the hour of 2 : 00 o ' clock p.m. in the Chambers of the Board of County Commissioners , for the purpose of hearing the application of Flatiron Paving, P. O. Box 229 , Boulder, Colorado 80301 for a Special Use Permit for an asphalt plant and concrete batch plant on the following described property: The Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 30 and of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 2 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M. , Weld Cowrty, Colorado more particularlydescrihed as follows: Beginning at the East one-quarter corner of Section 30, thence South 88°18'05" West 1288.10 feet to the Southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 30; thence North 01°21'13" West 1314.76 feet to the Northwest corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 30; thence North 88°44'54" East 1329.01 feet to the Northeast corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 30; thence South 89°45'19" Fast 1331.60 feet to the Northeast corner of the Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 29; thence South 00°25'56" West 1307.19 feet to the Southeast Corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 29; thence North 89°40'23" West 1331.86 feet to the point of beginning, containing 79.274 acres more or less. WHEREAS, representatives of the petitioner were present and presented evidence in support of its application for the Special Use Permit, and WHEREAS, surrounding property owners and interested citizens presented evidence urging denial of the Special Use Permit, and WHEREAS , Section 3 . 3 .E of the Weld County Zoning Resolution authorizes such uses in an agricultural district upon approval by the Board of County Commissioners after finding that the PL0592 L w frC 1/O 780249 proposed operation conforms to the requirements of Section 3 . 3 E. 2 of said Zoning Resolution, and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, heard all the testimony and statements of those present, has studied the request of the petitioner, the comments of sur- rounding property owners and interested citizens , the recommenda- tions of the Weld County Planning Commission, and all of the exhibits and evidence presented in this matter, and having taken the matter under advisement from September 13 , 1978 until the date of this Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Com- missioners of Weld County, Colorado that the application of the petitioner for a Special Use Permit for an asphalt plant and concrete batch plant on the abovedescribed tract of land be, and hereby is, denied as failing to satisfy the requirements of the Weld County Zoning Resolution found in Section 3 . 3 .E of said Resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board that the following findings of fact are adopted as reasons for the Board ' s rejection of the Planning Commission recommendation dated August 1, 1978 and transmitted to the Board in this matter : 1. The Board of County Commissioners disagrees with the conclusion of the Weld County Planning Commission that the pro- posed asphalt plant and concrete batch plant cannot be located within the comprehensive planning area of a municipality. The Board notes that Flatiron presented evidence that it has several plants located within the municipal boundaries, has had no com- plaints about those plants and has no plans to move any of such plants. 2 . On the basis of the testimony presented by the applicant, the Board finds that the economic advantage purportedly to be gained from a decrease in hauling costs by the approval of this application is not of great significance. The Board notes the evidence presented by Flatiron that it is currently paying hauling costs into its Longmont plant yet has no plans to move said plant. 3. The Board finds that the applicant has not thoroughly investigated alternative sites for the plant which could be more compatible with the surrounding areas. 4 . The Board finds that the application presented before it is based upon anticipated future economic development and needs and not upon existing needs. 5. The Board finds that the roads in the area of the proposed Special Use Permit are not in a condition to withstand the increased traffic produced by the installation of the proposed plants. 6 . The Board finds that approval of this application would result in extensive adverse affects upon the neighborhood. The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 18th day of September, A. D. , 1978 . BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO ‘42/2 ^f �- 417-'6/ c 7-7-.7, 2 ,l ATTEST: ,:' ".-,.•,/��1 Ot.,?ri4 to / Weld County Clerk and Recorder and Clerk to the Board ni By:k d ) 1 Li C&Al. A,, ( iy , Deputy County Clerk APk.ROV, AS TO FORM: .) �, y�-rrzw. O 5 e- //, County Attorney Date Presented: September 27 , 1978 • BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Date August 1, 1978 Case No. SUP# 365:78:17 APPLICATION OF Flatiron Paving Company c/o Michael J. Hart ADDRESS P.O. Box 229, Boulder, Colorado 80301 Moved byFrank Suckla that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning Commission: Be it Resolved by the Weld C my P i� C miss] that t e appli- cation for site approval of `asspHal i.n� y aric re �t ng pp plan rancre e �"t? the following described property in Weld County, Colorado, See attached with Develppment Standards be recommended (favorably)! ) to the Board of County Commissioners • This recommendation is subject to the concurrent adoption of the proposed Development Standards which are designed to set standards for the operation and maintenance of the facility. The Planning Commission further recommends the adoption of staff recommendation No. II concerning the routing of traffic to and fron the facility, although the final decision concerning this particular matter is to be left to the Board of County Commissioners. These recommendations are based on the following reasons: (see attached) Motion seconded by Ben Nix Vote: For Passage Chuck Carlson Against Passage Jerry Kiefer Ben Nix Irma White Frank Suckla Percy Hiatt I3ette Iiountz The Chairman declared the Resolution passed and ordered that a certified copy be forwarded with the file of this case to the Board of County Commissioners for further proceedings. CERTIFICATION OF COPY I, Shirley A. Phillips , Recording Secretary of the Weld County Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing Resolution is a true copy of the Resolution of the Planning Commission of weld County, Color- ado, adopted on August 1, 1978 and recorded in Book No. VI of the proceedings of the said Planning Commission. Dated the 2 day of August , 1978 . Secretary Z . a-- 4- '.----. €9.6 S� NN Q `~ N � p J N T 20 •o O � } N2 ocEn.E w E W v wo N a) .5 o W (f)Go 6 � 4 V map 0 � cn w c t 3 8�5 .c a1 °72 Y o gig +-R N E � • N 8oc�", 'St 2w46 2z ° w4._ N'_" 7 ,71 izu Ea: § c:Dc w4-vi E 4-- d +- 0) o 4- �cOvio4 � L� .5 L>4O T C. 43 o CNV 0 CO tc oo W zapU) ici "` v °- a) ‘V Cndz t- to Qj .. OU) — N v t (n M �~ So -F- 4- 1 r;;t49_ i4- 4- o ,- 3 W 32 6 4 v 0Z._ °Lm c a ro E '=-p v 0 N N 4-- g N Q Li ln 8 di c_ v � = O O G, LL � c rn w � ornco i s_t b. OE O .w W E 2;12 Q REASONS FOR APPROVAL Frank Suckla: "I think Weld County is going to get the short end of the deal regardless of how it goes and I feel that this area adjacent to Boulder County-- the residents of the area are primary, their interest is Boulder County and Boulder County will also get the biggest benefit of the gravel and cement asphalt plants. I think Weld County will benefit some, but not like Boulder County will , but realizing that it is one of the necessary evils , I will have to vote yes. " Bette Kountz: "I 'm following the recommendation of the staff which I am in agreement with. " (See attached) Percy Hiatt : "Based upon the additional testimony• that we' ve received today from Flatiron , I 'm convinced their operation will not have an adverse impact on the community out there. " Ben Nix; • "I would place my judgment somewhat in line with that of Mr. Hiatt . But I ' d like to also state that it ' s my conviction that Flatiron people will be necessary for them to meet the health standards, it will be necessary for them to develop this thing and operate it in such a way that it will not create a situation whereby properties will be lowered in value. And I would like to state further that I think that it goes without saying that the county minerals are perhaps for the benefit of those people who live there are unfortunately located in along the crease of major streams that eventually enter the Platte River and this is the minable resource that we have in this county which we must pre- serve and mine as it is needed. Therefore, this is the reason for my vote affirmative." Chuck Carlson : "Basically speaking, the State of Colorado has passed a low not to put any permanent structure over any minable product . And this includes gravel . And when you have a minable product such as this, the expense that goes into moving this product gets phenomenal if you have to move it very far because there is a load heaviness of the product that has to be moved. That expense has to be passed on to the people and the people, you and I , have to pay for it . There isn 't any ' of us in this room that doesn 't use gravel or • asphalt . You couldn 't have got here today if you didn ' t . We all use it . We all benefit from it . And the best ways we can do to keep the expense down is things that we've got to consider. Probably 90% of you that are opposed of , it are in--are pros for Proposition 13 in California and still here you are opposing this. And that don 't really make a lot of sense . But in one respect we 've got to save dollars where we can save dollars and their minable product has to be used when its available to be used. And there is so many things I think that are pro for it . I just couldn ' t go against it . " DESCENTING OPINIONS Jerry Kiefer: "I 've studied this pretty thoroughly. I ' ve gone back to the site. I 'm trying to weigh the pros and cons and I feel that there is still doubt in my mind and I feel that the additional operation of the asphalt plant--I am not convinced that this would not be incompatible. That it would not be in harmony with the present use of the land, so my vote would be no. " Irma White : "This isn 't a easy decision for me either, but I don ' t believe it ' s compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, that it should be an industrial zoned site, so my vote is no. " BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Date July 18, 1978 Case No. SUP# 365 :78: 17 APPLICATION OF Flatiron Paving Company c/o Michael J. Hart ADDRESS P.O. Box 229, Boulder, Colorado 80301 Moved by Frank Suck la that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning Commission: Be it Resolved by the Weld C unty P11 ni C mmis ion that the appli- cation S �— 610 y adding$ core i n cation for site approval of asphalt plant concree b c ,plant the following described property in Weld County, Colorado, ti- t�`. See attached Continued to the Planning Commission meeting August 1 1978 be �d�aM a� X ��4 XI S Xamaxxx �om for the following reasons: Any new information that can be presented Motion seconded by Percy Hiatt Vote: For Passage Frank Suckla Against Passage Chuck Carlson Jerry Kiefer Ben Nix Percy Hiatt Irma White The Chairman declared the Resolution passed and ordered that a certified copy be forwarded with the file of this case to the Board of County Commissioners for further proceedings. CERTIFICATION OF COPY I, Shirley A. Phillips , Recording Secretary of the Weld County Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing Resolution is a true copy of the Resolution of the Planning Commission of 'veld County, Color- ado, adopted on July 18, 1978 and recorded in Book No. VI of the proceedings of the said Planning Commission. Dated the 19 day of July 19 78 . Secretary C. 44 _ . Flatiron Paving vs. County Road Folks June 1 , 1978 7:00 p.m. Rinn Church Slide Show: White Rocks map of gravel mining & reclamation. Mining method, dewatering trench. Photos of dewatering trenches, pit rims at White Rock. Machinery, processes, equipment in use at other pits, similar or identical to what will be used at Nelson property. Question & Answer time - these folks are angry: 8 questions of 32 asked were answered. Angry about: 1 ) Why weren't all adjacent landowners contacted? Answer - we goofed. 2) Were additions typed onto petition? NO 3) Regulation proceedures followed? If we missed some people, we're sorry. What is the decibel rating of a truck? Boulder CITY standard on DB's are lower, more stringent than any other in the state. "Jacobs Brake" is a system of braking large trucks by creating back pressure. Will not be used in area where noise is a problem. Will not be used in Nelson property area. Number of trucks per day - 160 per day is Flatiron's maximum. estimate. 160 haul loads (going out) plus 160 coming in is 320 trucks per day. Ratio of number of gravel trucks to number of concrete trucks per pound of stuff hauled out is 1 :2.5. Is there a need for another plant here? Wouldn't have spent $750,000.00 if I didn't think so. .1...- • What studies were made to choose this site? Like a hound dog chasing a rabbit. Centered plant between Quad City Area. Is there another way out? Not really. Sight distance is BAD coming out on Highway 52. Sight on 16 1/2 to County Line Road is bad too. What about that? I guess we'll work with the county on that. (Body language is about 50/50 - open/closed.) Economic impact: "Evidence indicates no adverse economic impact." No way to look in crystal ball and tell whether inflation and other factors will combine and how they will affect land values. How much traffic out of White Rocks plant? Probably about 1/2 again what will ever come out of this one. What is the impact, total , on environment. Plant emission and dust and chemical and exhaust? Governmental controls regulate all of that. Lakes and water will effect decrease in particulate matter. How often are the trucks, plants checked? About 2 times a year that we know of. Pollutants vs. what smells bad. How far from that plant can I smell the asphalt plant? I'm not aware of any complaint we've ever had in 15 years about the smell of an asphalt plant. What percentage of product to be used in Weld, Boulder county? Great majority of all material will be used within a 15 mile radius. When the road is paved, will it add to traffic over and above Flatiron personnel? Any study on effects of plant, etc on wildlife, plant life? Cement dust is very fine powder. That's why bag processing to catch that. I know of no way cement dust will cause damage. Asphalt plant on Valmont has been there for 18 years. Land around there is now a wildlife habitat. -3- How much land is involved? Nelson property is about 600 acres, 3 lakes about 50 each, plant site about 60-70 acres. Once you move to the area, do we have guarantee this area won't turn into S. Sunset or Hover Rd? You have to have re-zoning to have that happen. How long does special use permit last? No limit in Weld County. You talk about a $750,000.00 investment - What alternatives do you have if you don't get special use permit? These are not permanent plants set in concrete. They have wheels on every piece and can be moved around. If Weld County says you can't put it here, were can you put it? We really don't know. You will mine gravel whether or not plant goes in, right? YES. You are actively seeking land for gravel? No, one person has approached us and Van Flint has approached the Lamar's. Mrs. Lamar: "The answer was NO. " One of your decisions was would you rather have gravel mined faster or slower? We are not arguing with gravel. It's the plant we're against. 15 years may be temporary for a big industty, but that's not temporary for a family. Do you send gravel trucks 1/2 empty? We try not to. Then you'd send one hell of a lot more concrete trucks than gravel trucks. 80% asphalt, 20% concrete. 128 loads of asphalt; 32 loads of concrete. Approximately 15% more loads with concrete. 160 hauls per day includes gravel and concrete. We think we've had a good day with 75-80 loads a day. Has anyone -done a study on what truck traffic will do to our roads? /If county doesn't maintain the roads they'll go downhill. What's economic impact to benefit Weld County? Taxation relates to size and weight of truck only, not which roads you use. -4- We are not going to fix County Line Road, Boulder County is responsible for that. If plants are not put in at this site, will you still pave 16 1/2 to get gravel out? NO, we're not planning on paving if not approved. If you don't want it paved, we probably won't anyway. What is the present traffic count and what will increase be? County engineer is in the process of putting out traffic counters. We're still waiting. Do you as a company know effects changes will have on lives of nearby residents? If we don't do that processing in one place we do it in another and no matter where we do people always ask why didn't you go somewhere else. Why s'buld people give up quality of life they paid for dearly for someone to destroy that? I've got one suggestion for you people - be sure these people are satisfied with your answers. We've tried to give you our best presentations to answer you're questions. Now its up to you to take part in the hearings and decide for yourselves what you want. Penalties on drivers? Any tickets are theirs. In 12 years I've run pre-mix - not aware of any speeding ticket we've ever gotten. We've asked you a number of things about diesel fuel and cement dust. What else comes out of asphalt and pre-mix plant? s The Weld County Planning Commission held a sehedu l ec1 meeting on August 1 , 1978, at 1 : 30 p.m. in the Weld County Centennial Center County Commissioners Hearing Room, first floor, 915 10th Street , Greeley, Colorado. Roll Call was as follows : Chuck Carlson Present Ben Nix Present 'Percy Hiatt Present Jerry Kiefer Present Frank Suckla Present Bette Kountz Present Irma White Present Also present were : Gary Z. Fortner , Director of Planning Tom Ilonn, Zoning Administrator Chuck Cunliffe , Assistant Zoning Administrator Kay Norton , Assistant County Atcorney As a quorum was present , the meeting proceeded as scheduled. The minutes of the July 18, 1978, meeting were unanimously approved. APPLICANT: Flatiron Paving Company CASE NI'MflE'.� : SUP-365 : 78 : 1G LEGAL DESCRIPTION : SE; NE k,, Section 30, and SW NW k, Section 29, T2N, RG8W LOCATION: 31 miles north and 1 mile east of Erie SUBJECT: Addition of Asphalt Plant and a Concrete Batch Plant Amending 6CP-260 APPEARANCE : Ed McDowell and Alike Hart DISCUSSION : This application was continued from the Planning Commission meeting co Thily 18 , 1978, for any further information to be presented. There was cc-xwern at the last meeting regarding compatibility with the surrounding area. Michael Hart stated in this regard that there is a parcel of laid on tue south side of Road l6 and on the west side of Boulder Creek that is zoned Industrial . There was also concern about the potential impact of the mining operation and the difference of the impacts regardiit air quality of the r.lea. Dr. George McVeel then gave an extensive report of ,his investigation of the air quality as it now exists in the area and what the catfacts would be of the sand and gravel alone. Tie stated that as the operation exists now the air quality is relati\,ely good ai, I he present time with the exception of some particulate matter :-uch as dust and small amounts of other pollutants from oil a gas wells in the area and from automobiles. The impacts of the sand and gravel operation alone will produce some particulate matter as will the asphalt and concrete plant . IIe stated that the impacts will be small in the long—run and on the average there will actual ry be a reduction of the acne 'hi of par! ' ''ular released in Lo the air. Disonss1o': followed regarding how many e:.LhloNees would be involved with the operation There will be approximately 5 persons involved according to Ed Tiel,ewell . Mr. Kiefer asked if the material mined five miles upstream isbroulit to the plant or will the asphalt and concrete plant use only the rateria1 that is on site. Mr. McDoWell stated that the material is hauled back to Boulder and is processed further i\c upstream in an asphalt plant there and used in Boulder. The concrete plant in Boulder presently has its own source of material where it is located . No material from these sites would be hauled to the proposed. e Planning Commissio !Mutes Page 2 August 1, 1978 plants and would be very uneconomical . Discussion followed where the majority of the material will be processed. Tom Bauer then expressed his opposition IO the proposal by ;Elting that the non-particulate emissions would be trapped because the proposal is in a valley and there would also be an increase of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons because of the increased traffic and dust . Helen Bryant stated that her father owned the property that is zoned industrial and had no i, intention of having an industrial operation on the land. At this time ', the slide presentation was again shown for the benefit of Mrs. Kountz that was prepared by surrounding property owners opposed to the proposal . Mrs. Kountz was not present for the previous Planning Commission hearing. Other persons expressing opposition because of incompatibility with the area, dust , noise , and pollution included : Ken Neuens , Dale and Lynn Johnson, John True , Mike Shaw, Carol Bultaup , Howard Rasmussen , Sandy True , 'irs , Saudee and Doris Saudee. Lucy Stromquist , also a surrounding property- owner , was concerned about the possible decrease of food production and Helen Nelson read some statistics which stated that there is 4 miles of surrounding property of which 1 . 75 miles and 110 acres represent those opposing the site and 2 miles and 960 acres which represent those who have no objection to the proposal . Mr. Nix raised the concern of the possible conflict of interest in knowing Mr. Milton :nelson „ No member on the Board felt it necessary for Mr. Nix to abstain from voting. Tom 'Tenn then read the conditions that were to be subject Go the staff ' s recommendation into the record. Chairman Carlson asked for clarification as to whether it was County Road 3 or 3 . Tom 3onn stated that the memo from the County Engineer ' s Office refers to it as County Road 3. Discussion followed regarding alternate routes . It was decided the .County Commissioners should make this f , nal decision . MOTION: De it therefore resolved to recommend approval with the Development Standards using County Road 3 as the alternate route to the Board of County Commissioners with the County Commissioners to make the f' nP1 decision regarding alternate routes . Motion by Frank Suckla, seconded by Bon Nix. A vote of "aye" was cast by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix, Frank Suckla, :'ercy Hiatt and Bette Kountz. A vote of "no" was cast by Jerry Kiefe. and Irma White. Motion carried 5 to 2. Each member was then requested by John Iloutcliens regar�!1ng clarification of why each Planning Cc„rrr,ission member voted the way they did which each member did as requested. APPLICANT: Charles Holiday CASE N11 1:o1,'; - Z-304 : 78 : 8 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: E', 1?', NE; , Section 6; Pt . SE; , Section 20, and . Pt . E , Section 31, T2N, R65W LOCATION : 2 miles west of Hudson SUBJECT: Change of Zone from "A" Agricultural to "B" Business District APPEARANCE : Don D.•awn r DISCUSSION: This application was tabled from the Planning Commission meeting on July 5 , 1978 , for a field trip and further information regards n•; i i e history of what has occurred to date. Chuck Cunliffe also brought the Planning Commission up-to-date as to what has occurred } Planning Commissic Minutes Page .3 August 1, 1078 to date. Discussion followed regarding what had happened at various points of time. Mr. Kiefer asked if there was a time table at all . Mr. Drawer responded there was not . Mrs . !';:, i i i Led she was not convinced the proposal was feasible with no water and no assurance it will ,be carried out . Mr. Kiefer asked if there was a certain time table to carry this out and have everything in order. Mr. Drawer responded there was not . Mr. Drawer also commented in regard to the staff ' s recommendation that he felt this would be of benefit to the county. Also stated that Mr. and Mrs. Earl Riley were opposed to this because they thought County Road 16 would be an access road, but Mr. Drawer assured them they do not want it to be an access . MOTION : Be it therefore resolved to deny the application based on the staff ' s recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners with the deletion of the last quoted paragraph and Reason #2 of the staff ' s recommendation and the last sentence of the recommendation . Motion by Ben Nix, seconded by Irma White. A vote of "aye" was cast by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix, Frani; Suckla, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , Bette Kountz, and Irma White . Motion carried. APPLICANT: F,rie Water and Sanitation District CASE NUMBER: SUP-367 : 78: 19 LEGAL DESCRITION: Pt . SE* NW* , Section 6 , T1N, R68W LOCATION: 1 miles north of Erie SUBJECT: Wastewater Treatment Plant APPEARANCE : Keith Bell DISC USSIO This l,rc)_rosal is to serve the community of Erie and is designed to accommodate the anticipated future growth of Erie and to meet the e f f i uent standards of the Weld County Health Department , the Colorado Department of Health and the EPA. The plant wilt employ a maximum of three persons. The noise level will be relatively low for the type of equipm ,ut which will be used and will be housed within the bui l d Ln g. The acti va ed sludge process is being utilized to minimize odors . T,., will be some odor , but will be very slight . This particular i ghhL uas chosen because of gravity flow, is not subject to flooding, is isolated from housing, and is down wird of prevailing winds. Discussion then followed regarding the selection of the site . Tom Honn read the stair ' s recommendation to continue the hearing to August 15 , 1978. Chairman Car] son then called for comments from the audience. At this time Virginia Thurman asked who will be served if the proposal is gr_a.n ted and requested more information regarding the odor . Joyce Rees expressed conce-n regarding the potential for flooding, and also stated that she had received a letter from the Town Clerk of Erie which stated there was s;ravel at the site . Mr. Bell later commented there was no gravel at a] 1 at this site. Carol Bulthaup expressed sonce� n ui Lh odor, Shirley Koch expressed concern about flooding as did Russell Rees. Mr. Bell stated that the 500, 000 per gallon per day plant will serve a population equivalent of 5, 000 people. However•, this is approximate because the water will also serve industrial uses , scheois , restaurants, etc. Discussion followed regarding the configuration of the land and the number of houses invovled along Colorado 52 . No further discussion. • Planning Commissio linutes Page 4 August 1, 1978 MOTION: Be it therefore resolved , continue the meeting to August 15 , 1978, based on the staff ' s recommendation . Motion by Jerry Kiefer, seconded by Irma White . A vote of "aye" ae c , Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix, Frank St.ckla, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , Bette Kountz, and Irma ;White. Motion carried. APPLICANT: Terry Bird CASE NUMBER: CUP-33 : 78 :2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . SW , Sectio n15, T6N, R67W LOCATION: l- mile east of Windsor on the north side of Colo. Highway 52 SUBJECT: Church APPEARANCE: Terry Bird DISCUSSION: This proposal is for a church and a residence on the site. Mr. Bird explained that the residence will be used for temporary worship for approximately one year and then if they have adequate membership a sanctuary wi ! 1 be onil t on the south side of the residence. The residence 1)OW is almost complete u ] th the exception of inside work yet to be done. The : round around the home has been raised to 24" with adequate drainage fc,r irrigation water and surface water onto a tile covered area south of the location . There being no questions at this time, Chur.: Cunlifle road the staff' s recommendation for approval and the Development Standards. Chuck Carlson asked what septic system would be used. Chuck Cunliffe responded it would be an engineering designed system designed with the approval of the Itei d County Health Dc'partr.,ant . John Pall confirmed this by stating that the system is an evapo t r.nn >> ration -ealed system and has been approved by the Weld County IIeaita Department . Mr. Nix expressed concern with how close the water table was to the surface . Mr. Bird responded it was about 4 feet. No further discussion . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend approval based on the staff ' s recommendation with the Development Standards to the Board of County Commissioners . Motion by Irma White , seconded by Ben Nix. A vote of "aye" 1%as cast by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix, Frank Sucicla, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , Bette Kountz, and Irma White. Motion carried. APPLICANT: Roger Vermeer , CASE NUMBEr : SUP-363 :78 : 18 LEGAL ULSCclPTION: Pt . NW*, Section 6, T8N, R67W LOCATION: 8 miles west of Nunn adjacent to Larimer County Line SUBJECT: Hog Operation APPEARANCE : Roger Vcrineor DISCUSSION : Mr. Vermeer stated that he presently owns a hog operation in Minnesota and has been looking for some time to find an area more conducive to raising bogs than Minnesota as Minnestota gets a lot of snow and approximately six months of winter. They have now found this area which is suited to their operation and situation and is relatively isolated. 51 acres are involved and will probably be for feeder pigs only unless there -i:-, a demond for finishing them. 200 sows are presently proposed. There is a well on the property and a permit for a second well has becn received. There being no questions or comments at this time , Chuck Cunliffe read the staff ' s recommendation for- approval with the Development Standards . No further discussion . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend approval with the Develop- ment Standards to .he Board of Co, aty Commissioners based on the staff ' s recommendation . Motion by Percy Hiatt , seconded by Jerry Kiefer. A vote A Planning Commissio [Mutes Page 5 August 1, 1978 of "aye" was cast by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix , Frank Suckla, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , and Bette Kountz. Motion carried . APPLICANT : James Bishop CASE NUMBER: S-138 : 77: 11 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . SE-, Section 30, T3N, R68W LOCATION: 3 miles south and 2 miles west of Mead immediately north of Union Reservoir (Calkins Lake) SUBJECT: Final Plat - Calkins Lake Subdivision APPEARANCE : James Bishop DISCUSSION: This proposal was begun approximately one year ago to create six 2 to 3 acre sites facing the lake. Longs Peak had given Mr. BL-. .op a water commitment , but since the drought occurred last year they with- drew the commitment . An alternate source was sought for water. A commercial well permit was then i:-, ued to him by the state temporarily. The County Planning Staff preferred to have a permanent well permit . An augmentation plan was then filed with the State Court and received final approval for the well and the augmentation plan. A problem has now ari: en with the Veld County .Iualth Department regarding the wator source and supply. The Health Department prefers to have the developer provide the water treatment center rather than on an individual basis . Mr. Bishop will have this hcanged un the plat . Water quality must be approved by both the State and County Health Departments. There being no questions at this time, Tom Honn read. the staffs recommendation Cor continuing the hearing. Mr. Bishop then stated that the water testing system for water quality is suite expensive, hown.nr they will proceed with this if necessary . .v;r. Bishop is quite anxious to get approval as this final p] ,l +- rreeess has taken a year 's time. John Hall stated he can do nothing unti ipproval is received by the State Health Department . Discussion t �lle-ree MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to continue the hearing based on the staff ' s reconjmendaion . Motion by i3en Nix, seconded by Jerry Kiefer. A vote of "aye" was cst by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix, Frank Suckla, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Iii ttt , _ucl Bette Kountz. Motion carried. APPLICANT : Lyle Picraux CASE NUMBER: VI-72 . -7 :20 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . Sla, Section 32 , T1N, R68W LOCATION: 3 miles vast of I-25 on the north side of Colorado State Highway 7 SUBUECT : Builder' s supply yard and office in the Agricultural Zone District APPEARANCE : Lyle !Picraux DISCUSSION: Cathy Carter, Zoning Violation Inspector, read the report on the property bringing the, Planning Commission up-to-date regarding what has occurred so far. Mr. Picraux stated that he has an application for a change of zone and also has now drawings made for this property to meet the requirements for the original change of zone request . This appliea Lion had been denied at a previous Planning Commission meeting. Chuck Cunliffe stated he was not aware that Mr. Picraux was working on a nt, •, a',u] ication as neither he or Tom Honn had spoke with Mr. Picraux. Mr. Picraux then said that his office personnel had contacted the office and requested that an application form be sent which was done. Mr. Cunliffe also stated that he would suggest 1-hat Mr. Picraux be given 30 days to submit the chr:ige of zone application and if not received by Planning Commissio finutes Page 6 August 1, 1978 . September 1 , 1978, the matter would be taken to the County Commissioners for legal action. Mr. Carlson said he felt this was reasonable . MOTION : Be it therefore resolved to recommend that Mr. Pr craux be given 30 days to suLmi t •r change of zone appi icat_ion to the Planning Office by September 1, 1978. IF not i ' ceived by that date the matter will be taken to the Board of County Commissioners for legal action . Motion by Jerry Kiefer, seconded by Bette Kountz. A vote of "aye" was cast by Chuck Carlson, Ben Nix, Jerry Kiefer, Frank Suckla, Percy Hiatt , Irma White , and Bette Kountz. Motion carried. APPLICANT: Larry and Carol Nelson CASE NUMBER: VI-87 : 78 : 11 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . Nn, Section 30, T3N, R68W LOCATION: 2 miles south and 2' miles west of Mead SUBJECT: Constrn i ion yard in the Estate Zone District APPEARANCE : Cnarles Saxton I)ISCL'SSION: Cathy Carter, Zoning Violation Inspector, stated that some very meet developments had occurred since her report was prepared for ; i e meeting. Sri- did read the report into the record regarding the violation I o bring the Planning Commission up-to-date. Subsequent to ' his report beine prepared, Cathy Carter received a phone call from Mr. Chuck Sa:,- , on , attorney represent.ing Mr. and Mrs. Larry Nelson . Mr. Nelson has this date hand delivered a copy of the October , 1972 letter referred to in Cathy Carter's Summary Report . Cathy Carter indicated that Bob Adams , who wrote the- Octo5er, 1972 , letter was present and avail able for questions regardi rig his recollection of this matter in the past . Copics of said letter were handed out to the Planning Commission members . Cathy Carter Caruher stated that several letters have been received in the Planning Office by the residents of Seemore Heights that arc- n i avor of Mr. and Mrs . Nelson os:'rati.)n. A phone call was received just prior to this hearing by Cathy Carter from a complainine person eemore Hei ,hts who stressed their concern about this evc_av,t t in., I continuing. Chuck Saxton at this time said that u i tnesses arc present at this meeting who can testify to the fact that Mrs . Nelson given assurr,iee in 1972 that the present use of the property was within the law and they could coninue it . There were also several peisons in attendance who ao not think the e-e of the property is obnoxic to their use of che property . Negotiations have been made at this Kay Norton then stated that in a meeting with Mr. Bob Adams of the P'lannlug Department Mr. Adams did in fact tell the Nelson ', in 1972 they could operate their business as a family operated business u der ;.ne home omc,nt,ation section of the Zoning Resolution . Al this point Mrs. Norton suggested that the best settle- ment, would he to get precise information on the operation as it is now, and to agree that the operation will not be changed or expanded in any quality or quantity from this day forward. Mr. Nelson stated that there would probably not be any equipment there if it were not for vandalism when the equipment is cored elsewhere . Cathy Carter suggested that the documentation of : quinment at present by the Nelson ' s be very well itemized and submire to the Planning Office so that it does not increase and they ' In keep track of it . Mr. Saxton stated that it would be submitted within vo weeks. ' Planning Commissior inutes Page 7 August 1_, 1f)18 MOTION: Be it therefore resolved that the use be allowed to continue as it exists as of August 1 , 1978 , and that Mr. Nelson will submit an agreement between Weld Count ! the Nelson ' s Ic, include an inventory and full description oI the operation and will not be allowed to expand o" change it in any ' ay . Motion by Ben Nix, seconded by Bette Kountz. A vote of "aye" was cast by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix , Percy Hiatt , Jerry Kiefer, Frank Suckla, Irma White , and Bette Kountz. Motion carried. After some discussion among the Planning Commission members regarding re-hearing the Lee ieck change of :Lone application , it was decided they would again hear the change of zone application . Motion by Frank Suckla, seconded by Ben Nix. A vote of "aye" was cast by Chuck Carlson , Bin Nix, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , Frank Suckla, Irma White and Bette. Kountz. ':cation carried. There he_in��, no further business , the meeting was c' iourned. Respectfully submitted, Shirley A. Phillips Planning Commission Secretary /sap The Weld County Plan ig Commission held a schec d meeting on July 18 , 1978 , at 1 : 30 p.m. iI, -Lhe Weld County Centennial center County Commissioners hearing room, 915 10th Street , Greeley, Colorado . Roll Call was as follows : Chuck Carlson Present Ben Nix Present Jerry Kiefer Present Percy Hiatt Present Frank Suckla Present Irma White Present Harry Ashley Present Marge Yost Absent Bette Kountz Absent Also present were : Gary Z. Fortner, Director of Planning Tom Honn , Zoning Administrator Chuck Cunliffe, Assistant Zoning Administrator Kay Norton , Assistant County Attorney Russ Anson , Assistant County Attorney As a quorum was present , the meeting proceeded as scheduled. The minutes of the July 5 , 1978, meeting were unanimously approved . APPLICANT: Cactus Hill Ranch Company CASE NUMBER: SUP-264 :78 : 15 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . NE}, Section 20, T7N, R67W LOCATION: 6 miles north of Windsor, mile west of State Highway 257 on south side of County Road 80 SUBJECT: Cattle Feedlot APPEARANCE : Tom Norton DISCUSSION: Tom Norton stated that the applicant desires to expand the cattle feeding operation to 5 , 000 head of cattle and increase the pens from three to fifteen . The drainage system will be containment of solids in the lower part and the release of the liquid from there into Fowler Reservoir owned by Bob Foster. A National Pollution Discharge Permit will be applied for in order to this before construction can begin . Water will be used from a small on-site well and North Weld Water District . No traffic problems are anticipated. Percy Hiatt asked for an explanation of the trash rack as shown on the plans . Mr. Norton explained that this is used in the solid holding facility to allow the liquid to drain off slowly into the reservoir and keep from plugging up. There being no further questions at this time, Chuck Cunliffe then read the staff ' s recommendation for approval and the Development Standards. Wilbur Schild, surrounding property owner directly west of the site , expressed his opposition to the proposal primarily because of the odor from the holding ponds created by the EPA. John Heckman , surrounding property owner, also expressed his opposition because of the pollution and dust that will be created . Mr. Suckla asked what the applicant will do if they are not issued a National Pollution Discharge Permit . Mr. Noton responded they will be required by the EPA and state regulations to building a holding pond and use the water for irrigation on the adjacent field which has generally been planted in corn. Discussion followed. MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend approval with the Development Standards based on the staff ' s recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners . Motion by Percy Hiatt , seconded by Ben Nix . A vote of "aye" was cast by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix, Frank Suckla, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , and Irma White. Motion carried. r Planning Commission utes Page 2 - July 18 , 1978 APPLICANT : Charles Hobday CASE NUMI3EII: Z-304 : 78 : 8 Hearing was not held as applicant did not appear. I I APPLICANT: Flatiron Paving Company 4 CASE NUMBER: SUP-365: 78 : 16 'r LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SE* NE, , Section 30 and SW* NW , Section 29, T2N, R68W LOCATION: 3z miles north and 1 mile east of Erie SUBJECT: Addition of Asphalt Plant and a Concrete Batch Plant Amending SUP-260 APPEARANCE : Ed McDowell and Mike Hart DISCUSSION: Mr. McDowell presented a slide series to the members of the Planning Commission which showed the site as it now exists and the plant that now exists in Greeley which will be similar to the one proposed by the applicant at this time. The applicant is requesting approval at this particular site because it is uneconomical to serve from their plants in Longmont and Boulder. Mike Hart then stated that permits granted thus far include : Special Use Permit #260, Mined Land Reclamation Permit in 1975, National Pollution Elimination Discharge Permit , and a Fugitive Dust Permit . Three areas of impact are traffic , economic impact to land values , and the environment . Mr. McDowell then discussed with the members the three alternatives of hauling the materials, these being: Hauling west on , County Road 16-' , hauling south on County Road 3 , or hauling all the sand and gravel to another site to process . He said they are willing and can haul any of the three alternative routes, but feels that hauling the sand and gravel to another site to process is the least reasonable of the three mentioned. They prefer hauling to the west because they will not have to upgrade any bridges . There being no questions at this time , Tom Ilonn read the staff ' s recommendation for approval and the Development Standards. The Chairman then called for audience participation to speak in favor of or against the proposal . Those speaking in opposition and their concerns included : John Houtchens-representing Ken Neuens, wrong time and wrong place; Furman Ansenl-devaluation of property and alternatives places to locate ; Dale Johnson-noise standards; Sandy True-road maintenance on County Line Road; Howard Rasmussen-area has productive land, safety of children , use alternative route to the south; Lynn Johnson-presented map exactly the same as what Flatiron presented, but indicated they left out 50% of the homes in the area which she included on her map; Dean McDonald-roads and safety of the children; Tom Bauer-air pollution that will be created ; Christi Neuens-safety , air and noise pollution, site pollution, quality of life ; John True-should be located elsewhere; Richard Balintine-not compatible with the area, Claudine-safety of the children ; Bill Weiss-air quality standards as proposed by applicant are misleading ; Milton Nelson- safety , pollution , good company with quality work; Mike Shaw-can be relocated elsewhere , not compatible with the area. Discussion followed regarding the traffic volume compared between the sand and gravel operation and the asphalt operation . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to continue the hearing to August 1 , 1978, for any further information that can be presented. Motion by Frank Suckla, seconded by Percy Hiatt . A vote of "aye" was cast by Frank Suckla, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , and Irma White. A "no" vote was cast by Chuck Carlson and Ben Nix. e Planning Commission ,utes Page 3 - July 18, 1978 APPLICANT: Lee Wieck, etal CASE NUMBER: Z-303 : 78 : 7 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . SE' , Section 5 , T1N, R68W LOCATION: 1', miles east and 1 miles north of Erie SUBJECT: Change of Zone from "A" Agricultural Zone District to "E" Estate Zone District APPEARANCE: Bill Sheeder DISCUSSION: Mr. Sheeder stated that he feels the changing conditions in the area now justify a new change of zone for this particular piece of property . If approval is received on this application , Mr. and Mrs . Wieck desire to create a subdivision of 33 lots . The property would be adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes to the north and Parkland Estates on the south . It also complies with the Erie Comprehensive Plan . There being no questions at this time, Chuck Cunliffe read the staff ' s recommendation for approval of this request . Discussion followed regarding the property line of the property. Surrounding property owners expressing their opposition included Virginia Thurman and Melvin Dinner representing the Erie Coal Creek Ditch and Reservoir Company and Mr. and Mrs . Kenneth Poch. Mr. Dinner stated that he and his clients do not feel this is the appropriate area or the time for this type of proposal and that it contradicts the Weld County Comprehensive Plan. He also stated he did not feel this should be approved just because Carmacar and Parkland would be neighbors and because it complies with the Erie Comprehensive Plan . David Oscarson , President of the Erie Coal Creek Ditch and Reservoir Company stated he was strongly opposed to the proposal because he feels just because the water rights have been sold and the ground would not be as productive is no reason to propose a subdivision. Virginia Thurman indicated she could not possibly understand why anyone would propose a subdivision next to a runway and endanger the lives of people who would be living in the proposed subdivision . Gary Bean , surrounding property owner, said that County Roads 5 and 3 are already in bad shape and create a lot of dust . The addition of a new subdivision would only make matters worse. The schools are they now exist are adequate and could probably not handle more children . Don Smith then stated that they sold their water rights to the property because they had more water than was necessary and had unnecessary expenditures along with it . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend denial to the Board of County Commissioners. Motion by Ben Nix, seconded b yFrank Suckla. A vote of "aye" was cast by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix, Frank Suckla, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , and Irma White. Motion carried. APPLICANT: Walter J. "Shorty" Peters CASE NUMBER: S-150 : 78 : 7 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . NW , Section 32 , T6N, R65W LOCATION: Adjacent to north side of U.S . Highway 85 By-Pass north of Greeley SUBJECT: Preliminary Plan - Peters Subdivision APPEARANCE: None DISCUSSION: Since the applicant or his representative were not in atten- dance to present this proposal , there was some discussion as to whether or not the Planning Commission should hear it . However, Tom Honn stated , ## 7b R..r..A.._ Planning Commissic___ Ainutes Page 4 July 18 , 1978 that he felt there was enough information received that it could be heard by the members and a decision made. The Commission decided to hear it and Chuck Cunliffe read the staff ' s recommendation for approval. No discussion followed. MOTION: I3e it therefore resolved to recommend approval the Board County Commissioners . based on the staff ' s recommendation . of A vote aye" was cast by Chuck Carlson, Ben Nix, Frank Suckla. Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , and Irma White. Motion carried. Proposed amendment to Section 3. 3E.4 of the Weld County Zoning Resolution . The proposed amendment would add alfalfa dehydration facility and animal manure dehydration facility as Special Use in the Agricultural Zone District 1 DISCUSSION: Ken McWilliams stated that since the drafting of this pro- posed amendment they would like to suggest that alfalfa dehydration facility be a separate Special Use and animal manure and animal by-products dehydration facility be another Special Use if the Board so desires. Mr. Carlson stated that this was very much needed. MOTION. Be it therefore resolved to recommend approval to the Board of CoxntyeCommissioners by scbased ton the staff 's of recommendation . Motion by Ben Ben Nix, Frank Suckla, Jerry Jerry Kieft. A er, Percy Hiatt , a" was nd Irma Whitt by e Carlson , carried. Motion Proposed amendment to Section 3. 3E. 4 of the Weld County Zoning Resolution. The proposed amendment would add outdoor drive-in theaters as a S ecial in the Agricultural Zone Distri'ct . p Use DISCUSSION: Ken McWilliams briefly outlined the Commission . The only change suggested was by Percy oHiatt to eliminate ing "parked cars to" from Section 6. 1(11)F. 1. which would read: projection scrren shall be oriented so as to minimize the potential traffic hazard created by people viewing the screen from adjacent highways. " MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend approval osed change to the Board of County Commissioners. Motion bywBen Nix,ith the seconded by Frank Suckla. A vote of "aye" was case by Chuck Carlson, Ben Nix, Frank Suckla, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , and Irma White. Motion carried. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned . Respectfully submitted, Shirley A. Phillips Date: `Lily 18, 1978 CASE NUMBER: SUP-365 :78:16 NAME: Flatiron Paving Company REQUEST: Asphalt Plant and Concrete Batch Plant LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SE4 NE4, Section 30 and SW4 NW4j Section 29, T2N, R68W LOCATION: 32 miles north and 1 mile east of Erie THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THIS REQUEST BE approved FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS : 1. It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that the request is in compliance with the basic goals and policies of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan . Within the Plan, it is stated on Pages 62 and 63 that : "Industrial land use in the rural areas of the county should be limited to those industries which cannot suitably be located within a municipality. Rural industrial developments should be encouraged only when the industry is agriculturally oriented or requires a physical environment that cannot reason- ably be furnished in a municipality. Industries such as concrete plants, asphalt plants, gravel and sand operations, . . . and other industries requiring location adjacent to their raw materials, . . . should be carefully controlled to insure the minimum damage to the environment and an acceptable highway or roadway impact . " The Plan sets forth a basic policy which relates to establish- ment of such uses as outlined above: Page 64-"Zoning for industrial use in areas outside the areas covered by the comprehensive plans of the existing municipalities shall be encouraged only for low employee concentration, agriculturally related industries or other industries that can show they cannot reasonably be accommodated within the areas covered by the municipalities' comprehensive plans. " It is the opinion of the Ilep.a went of Planning Sevvir.Ps staff that _the concrete batch plant and asphalt plant propnsPd by Flatiron Paving Company in the current application is consistent with the . OD ile • Flatiron Paving Company SUP-365 :78: 16 STAFF RECOMMENDATION July 18, 1978 determinations and policies set forth above as identified in the Weld County Comprehensive Plan. This opinion is based upon : A. The applicant has identified that the contiguous property contains a substantial raw material suited for use in producing asphalt and concrete batch , products. Further, the applicant addressed economic considerations which, in the opinion of 'the Department of Planning Services staff , show that due to the location of the adjacent raw material, it would not be reasonable to locate such requested facilities within areas covered by the municipalities ' comprehensive plans ; B. Minimal environmental affects are anticipated by the location of the requested asphalt and concrete batch plant . It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that potential air and water pollution will be effectively controlled and monitored. In addition noise will be limited to acceptable limits and flood plain effects will be mitigated by proper site design . The 'environmental standards are addressed in the proposed Development Standards attached hereto; and C. Impacts on highway and road surfaces can be satisfactorily mitigated. 2. � It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that the proposal is consistent with Sections 3. 3E. 2 and 3. which states : "The Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners shall consider the following in making their determination in approving or denying a Special Use Permit : Compatibility with the surrounding area, harmony with the character of the neighborhood and existing agricultural uses, need for the proposed use , its effect upon the immediate area, its effect upon future development of the area, and the health , safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the area and the county. Before a permit for a Special Use is issued, the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners shall determine through public hearings , that the following plans , methods and studies which shall accompany the application for a Special Use Permit , provide adequate pro- tection of the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the area and the county. " Flatiron Paving Company SUP-365 : 78 : 16 STAFF RECOMMENDATION July 18 , 1978 It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that the location , operation, and maintenance of the proposed asphalt plant and concrete batch plant facility as set forth in the Special Use Permit application and as controlled by the Development Standards attached hereto will minimize adverse impacts on surrounding uses and the area in question to the greatest extent possible. Further, it is the opinion of the staff that the current proposal provides adequate protection of the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the area and the county. These determinations are based on : A. The Colorado Water Conservation Board has indicated the flood hazard determinations by Leonard Rice Consulting Water Engineers , Inc. are acceptable and reasonable. B. The Weld County Health Department .has outlined the applicant shall obtain an emission permit for the concrete plant , an individual sewage permit for any permanent sewage disposal system, a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit for any anticipated effluent discharge and shall comply with noise levels established in Section 25-12-103 , Colorado Revised Statutes 1973, as amended. These items are addressed in the Development Standards. C. The Colorado Geological Survey has no objection to the request ; and D. The anticipated impact on roads in the immediate vicinity of the proposed operation will be minimized to the greatest extent possible. The manner of traffic control and road maintenance are specified below. 3. The Department of Planning Services recommendation is subject to the following conditions : A. Concurrent adoption of the attached Development Standards which are designed to set certain standards for the location, operation and maintenance of the proposed asphalt and concrete batch plant facility; and B. Prior to establishment of an asphalt and concrete batch plant facility on subject property , Flatiron Paving Company and the Weld County Board of County Commissioners mutually entering an agreement to define an acceptable program of traffic control and road maintenance required to mitigate highway and roadway impact which will be generated by said facility. Said agreement should also consider necessary temporary routes. • Flatiron Paving Spany SUP-365 : 78 : 16 STAFF RECOMMENDATION July 18, 1978 Based upon information received from the Weld County Department of Engineering Services and Boulder County, roads adjacent to and in the immediate vicinity of the proposed site are not designed for the traffic impacts . that the proposed operation will generate. Comments from Boulder County also indicate premature deterioration to the road surface of County Line Road will result due to hauling operations , and recommend consideration of alternative routing. The Weld County Department of Engineering Services identified limitations of existing Weld County Roads 16zi 3, and County Line Road. These roads and appurtenant bridges will suffer impacts as a result of the proposed facility if not properly re-designed and maintained. The following alternatives are suggested as alternative routing and maintenance programs to be agreed upon : I . Utilize County Road 16 and County Line Road as proposed by Flatiron Paving Company in the subject Special Use Permit application. Road 16z should be upgraded as specified in item 1 of a memo dated June 28, 1978, .from the Department of Engineering • 'Services. Additionally, a cooperative maintenance agreement should be made between Flatiron Paving Company , Weld County and Boulder County for the purpose of defining the method of repair and main- tenance for County Line Road between Colorado State Highways 119 and 52; II . Utilize County Road 3 to State Highway 52. In a memo dated July 14 , 1978, the Department of Engineering Services outlines two alternatives for utilizing this route. Numbers 1 and 2 of each alternative should be followed; and III . Utilize a private easement route from subject property crossing County Road 16? , south to Colorado State Highway 52. The safety and design of the County Road 16z intersection and dust abatement measures for the private easement route must be considered if this alternative is utilized. It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that Alternative II is the most desirable of the alternatives. Traffic will utilize existing public Right-of-Way. This alternative is also consistent with the routing approved with Special Use Permit 260 : 74 :23 on November 27, 1974, for the Nelson Properties gravel mining permit . Flatiron Paving Company DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 1. Permitted uses on the hereon described Special Use Permit area shall be a concrete batch plant , asphalt plant with associated parking, office and maintenance facilities, and those uses approved under SUP-260 : 74 :23. 2. Location and extent of required fill for the plant site shall be made in accordance with the recommendations of Leonard Rice Consulting Water Engineers, Inc. in their letter dated June 7, 1978, made a part hereof by reference and recorded in the office of the Weld County Clerk and Recorder. No use shall be established within the Special Use Permit area which will reduce the discharge capacity of the Boulder Creek channel and flood plain to less than 18, 000 cfs. 3. The Special Use Permit area shall be maintained in such a manner so as to prevent soil erosion , fugitive dust and growth of noxious weeds. The site shall be maintained in such a manner as to present a neat and well kept appearance. 4. One access to the site, shown hereon as "existing and future access road", shall be used for employee traffic. Access for truck traffic shall be located in accordance with an agreement for traffic control and road maintenance made with the Weld County Board of Commissioners. 5. All phases of the asphalt and concrete batch plant facilities and operations shall conform with all applicable County, State and Federal Health Standards and Regulations and any other applicable rules and regulations of governmental bodies having jurisdiction on the premisis. 6. All phases of the operation must conform to noise levels as ,set forth in 25-12-103 CRS, 1973. 7. The asphalt and concrete batch plants shall only be operated between the hours of 7: 00 a.m. and 5 : 00 p.m. 8. The Special Use Permit shall be limited to the plans shown hereon and governed by the Development Standards stated above and all applicable Weld County Regulations. Any material deviations from the plans and/or Development Standards as shown or stated above shall require the approval of an amendment to the Special Use Permit by the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners before such changes from the plans and/or Development Standards shall be permitted. Any other changes from the plans and/or Development Standards shall be filed in the office of the Department of Planning Services. Flatiron Paving Company SUP-365 : 78: 16 STAFF RECOMMENDATION July 18, 1978 determinations and policies set forth above as identified in the Weld County Comprehensive Plan. This opinion is based upon : A. The applicant has identified that the contiguous property contains a substantial raw material suited for use in producing asphalt and concrete batch products. Further, the applicant addressed economic considerations which, in the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff , show that due to the location of the adjacent raw material, it would not be reasonable to locate such requested facilities within areas covered by the municipalities' comprehensive plans; B. Minimal environmental affects are anticipated by the location of the requested asphalt and concrete batch plant . It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that potential air and water pollution will be effectively controlled and monitored. In addition noise will be limited to acceptable limits and flood plain effects will be mitigated by proper site design. The environmental standards are addressed in the proposed Development Standards attached hereto; and C. Impacts on highway and road surfaces can be satisfactorily mitigated. 2. It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that the proposal is consistent with Sections 3. 3E. 2 and 3. which states : "The Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners shall consider the following in making their determination in approving or denying a Special Use Permit : Compatibility with the surrounding area, harmony with the character of the neighborhood and existing agricultural uses, need for the proposed use, its effect upon the immediate area, its effect upon future development of the area, and the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the area and the county. Before a permit for a Special Use is issued, the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners shall determine through public hearings, that the following plans, methods and studies which shall accompany the application for a Special Use Permit , provide adequate pro- tection of the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the area and the county. " Flatiron Paving Company SUP-365 :78 :16 STAFF RECOMMENDATION July 18, 1978 It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that the location, operation, and maintenance of the proposed asphalt plant and concrete batch plant facility as set forth in the Special Use Permit application and as controlled by the Development Standards attached hereto will minimize adverse impacts on surrounding uses and the area in question to the greatest extent possible. Further, it is the opinion of the staff that the current proposal provides adequate protection of the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the area and the county. These determinations are based on : A. The Colorado Water Conservation Board has indicated the flood hazard determinations by Leonard Rice Consulting Water Engineers, Inc. are acceptable and reasonable. B. The Weld County Health Department has outlined the applicant shall obtain an emission permit for the concrete plant , an individual sewage permit for any permanent sewage disposal system, a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit for any anticipated effluent discharge and shall comply with noise levels established in Section 25-12-103, Colorado Revised Statutes 1973, as amended. These items are addressed in the Development Standards. C. The Colorado Geological Survey has no objection to the request ; and D. The anticipated impact on roads in the immediate vicinity of the proposed operation will be minimized to the greatest extent possible. The manner of traffic control and road maintenance are specified below. 3. The Department of Planning Services recommendation is subject to the following conditions : A. Concurrent adoption of the attached Development Standards which are designed to set certain standards for the location, operation and maintenance of the proposed asphalt and concrete batch plant facility; and B. Prior to establishment of an asphalt and concrete batch plant facility on subject property, Flatiron Paving Company and the Weld County Board of County Commissioners mutually entering an agreement to define an acceptable program of traffic control and road maintenance required to mitigate highway and roadway impact which will be generated by said facility. Said agreement should also consider necessary temporary routes. Flatiron Paving C..___pany SUP-365:78:16 STAFF RECOMMENDATION July 18, 1978 Based upon information received from the Weld County Department of Engineering Services and Boulder County, roads adjacent to and in the immediate vicinity of the proposed site are not designed for the traffic impacts that the proposed operation will generate. Comments from Boulder County also indicate premature deterioration to the road surface of County Line Road will result due to hauling operations , and recommend consideration of alternative routing. The Weld County Department of Engineering Services identified limitations of existing Weld County Roads 162, 3, and County Line Road. These roads and appurtenant bridges will suffer impacts as a result of the proposed facility if not properly re-designed and maintained. The following alternatives are suggested as alternative routing and maintenance programs to be agreed upon : I . Utilize County Road 162 and County Line Road as proposed by Flatiron Paving Company in the subject Special Use Permit application. Road 162 should be upgraded as specified in item 1 of a memo dated June 28, 1978, from the Department of Engineering Services. Additionally, a cooperative maintenance agreement should be made between Flatiron Paving Company, Weld County and Boulder County for the purpose of defining the method of repair and main- tenance for County Line Road between Colorado State Highways 119 and 52; II . Utilize County Road 3 to State Highway 52. In a memo dated July 14, 1978, the Department of Engineering Services outlines two alternatives for utilizing this route. Numbers 1 and 2 of each alternative should be followed; and III . Utilize a private easement route from subject property crossing County Road 162, south to Colorado State Highway 52. The safety and design of the County Road 162 intersection and dust abatement measures for the private easement route must be considered if this alternative is utilized. It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that Alternative II is the most desirable of the alternatives. Traffic will utilize existing public Right-of-Way. This alternative is also consistent with the routing approved with Special Use Permit 260 :74 :23 on November 27, 1974, for the Nelson Properties gravel mining permit . REASONS FOR APPROVAL Frank Suckla: "I think Weld County is going to get the short end of the deal regardless of how it goes and I feel that this area adjacent to Boulder County-- the residents of the area are primary, their interest is Boulder County and Boulder County will also get the biggest benefit of the gravel and cement asphalt plants. I think Weld County will benefit some, but not like Boulder County will, but realizing that it is one of the necessary evils , I will have to vote yes. " Bette Pountz: "I 'm following the recommendation of the staff which I am in agreement with. " (See attached) Percy Hiatt : "Based upon the additional testimony that we' ve received today from Flatiron, I 'm convinced their operation will not have an adverse impact on the community out there. " Ben Nix: "I would place my judgment somewhat in line with that of Mr. Hiatt . But I ' d like to also state that it 's my conviction that Flatiron people will be necessary for them to meet the health standards, it will be necessary for them to develop this thing and operate it in such a way that it will not create a situation whereby properties will be lowered in value. And I would like to state further that I think that it goes without saying that the county minerals are perhaps for the benefit of those people who live there are unfortunately located in along the crease of major streams that eventually enter the Platte River and this is the minable resource that we have in this county which we must pre- serve and mine as it is needed. Therefore, this is the reason for my vote affirmative." Chuck Carlson : "Basically speaking, the State of Colorado has passed a low not to put any permanent structure over any minable product . And this includes gravel. And when you have a minable product such as this, the expense that goes into moving this product gets phenomenal if you have to move it very far because there is a load heaviness of the product that has to be moved. That expense has to be passed on to the people and the people, you and I , have to pay for it . There isn't any of us in this room that doesn't use gravel or asphalt . You couldn't have got here today if you didn 't . We all use it . We all benefit from it . And the best ways we can do to keep the expense down is things that we've got to consider. Probably 90% of you that are opposed of it are in--are pros for Proposition 13 in California and still here you are opposing this. And that don't really make a lot of sense. But in one respect we 've got to save dollars where we can save dollars and their minable product has to he used when its available to be used. And there is so many things I think that are pro for it . I just couldn't go against it. " DESCENTING OPINIONS Jerry Kiefer: "I 've studied this pretty thoroughly. I 've gone back to the site. I 'm trying to weigh the pros and cons and I feel that there is still doubt in my mind and I feel that the additional operation of the asphalt plant--I am not convinced that this would not be incompatible. That it would not be in harmony with the present use of the land, so my vote would be no. " Irma White : "This isn't a easy decision for me either, but I don't believe it 's compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, that it should be an industrial zoned site, so my vote is no. " 11i i L I ; I (1; r'L ,\NNIN; SC HVICE PHONE (303) 3564000 EXT 40s, 916 iuiHSTREE 1 GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 :� ( Mel. :10 �.r to Y 'y F,` tl r ` J / !^ � O T •rc,r O3,June 13, 1978 Mr. Michael J. Hart Flatiron Paving Company P.O. Box 229 Boulder, Colorado 80301 RE : Request for a Special Use Permit amending SUP-260 : 74 :23 by the addition of an asphalt plant and a concrete batch plant on a parcel of land described as the SEA NE7, Section 30, T2N, R68W and SWa NWl, Section 29 , T2N, R68W of the 6th p.m. , Weld County, Colorado Dear Mr. Hart : Your application and related materials for the above described request are complete and in order. In addition to the submitted materials our office would like a copy of the water agreement with Mr. Milton Nelson for the water to be used for plant operation . I have scheduled a meeting with the Weld County Planning Commission for July 18, 1978, at 1 :30 p.m. This meeting will take place in the County Commissioners Hearing Room, first floor, Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado. It is recommended that you and/or a representative be there to answer any questions the Planning Commission might have with respect to your application. If you have any questions with regard to this matter, please do not hesitate to contact our office . Respectfully, Chuck Cunliffe Assistant Zoning Administrator CC:sap cc: Edwin C. McDowell , Jr. , Flatiron Sand & Gravel Co. , P.O. Box 229, Boulder, Colorado 80301 Mr. and Mrs. Milton II. Nelson , 2040 West I,ongspeak Avenue, s Longmont , Colorado 80501 ai • SENDER• Complete items 1,2,and i. ,n Add your address in the "RETURN TO" space on 1� 3 7("(. -- greverse ��®o - �4 G' C C fiPT FOR CE 0 1. The following service is requested (check one). IRED F:JA9� t- O Show to whom and date delivered 250 C,d[±`^��ry� MEOW�� < Show to whom,date,&address of delivery 4`¢ (=yl EO F.Gt��ilLlslO'— O EBT Fill I TrEf`.'20[011d[Mf1 ❑ RESTRIC UD DELIVERY. (see Reverse) °i Show to whom and date delivered 850 r SENT TO ❑ RESTRICTED DELIVERY. L� ,\ \ \ \�� Show to whom,date,and address of delivery ..$1.05 TREETAND 'o (Fees shown are in addition to postage charges and other It, '-- --16" fees). Pli,STATE A'I ZIP CODE 2. ARTICLE ADDRESSED TO: — �>?� _ � __ L `, * POSTAGE S C \ Us CERTIFIED FEE F r?q 0 2 , SPECIAL DELIVERY rn m0 RESTRICTED DELIVERY 3. ARTICLE DESCRIPTION: Li Cis REGISTERED NO. CERTIFIED NO. INSURED NO. P ¢ SHOW TOL'.HO'1AND DATE DELIVERED 0 M Q 1N Ly C - cl SHOW TO WHO'.1,DATE N (Always obtain signature of addressee or agent) Q AI,D ADDRESS OF 0 m I have received the article described above. o- 2 q DELIVERY MD DATE m SIGNATURE 0 Addressee 0 Authorized agent p SHO:f TO L:HO'1 q�; 0 ES DtLIVEREDV.ITHRESTR'CTED 0 , '` d DELIVERY @S 2 i , f. r \ \/ a �n SHCW TO LSHO'1,DATE MD C 4. o M ADDRESS OF DELIVERY WITH 0 RESTR.CTED DELIVERY DATE OF,DELIVERY iT7AR __ d. _ i 1 V/✓/ h` TOTAL POSTACS AND FEES---co $ -- S L. ��` ,/ \\N 2 POSTMARK OR DATE ~ ■ C 5. ADDRESS (Complete only it requeste�y,Illlll �` \ o r) l l �� a rn \\ tk6 f Q tJ G 6. UNABLE TO DELIVER BECAUSE: , y CZAR 'S, / m \�\�� ' I N MACS o 3 P.- D 0 sr GOP 1976—O-203-456 V A t o* Att. FC Jepre COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 4210 EAST 11TH AVENUE DENVER,COLORADO 80220 PHONE 320-8333 Anthony Robbins, N.D., H.P.A. Executive Director September 6, 1978 CERTIFIED MAIL NO. 714989 Flatiron Pre-Mix Concrete Company P. 0. Box 229 Boulder, 'Colorado 80309 Attention: Bob Gibson, President Gentlemen: Because of the time constraints that are imposed on us by the statute, and given the fact that concerns have been raised by local residents , we must deny your application dated June 22, 1978 for an Emission Permit for oneeyortable concrete plant to be located SEl4 of the NE14 of Section 30 and the SWli, of the NW4; oC Section 29, Township 2 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M. Accordingly, we are returning herein your check No. 01856 dated August 31, 1978 for $59.00 payable to the Colorado Department of Health. You have the right to appeal this denial to the Air Pollution Control Commission according to our State Statute 25-7-112(4) (e) . Yours very truly, A. C. Bishard, P.E. , Chief Stationary Sources Section ACB/md ' Air Pollution Control Division Enclosure cc: Weld County Health Department, Air Pollution Control Daily amera/ unday Camera Aug. 22 LAURENCE T.PADDOCK Editor Dear Mr. Honn, You are absolutely right--we goofed. Marilyn Webb, our reporter on that story, has explained the circumstances of the story's production and her confusion of the planning and county commissions. She adds that she knew she should have been there for better understanding but our city desk vetoed the idea at the time. Please accept my apolgies. . .and hopeful assurance that it will not happen again. Yours z2 23 Opp co AUG 1978 CCZ RECEIvED Weld County FfaR g Comass!9 P.O.BOX 591,BOULDER,COLORADO. '.K I • 2 •de 303 442-1202 F R 7A I CI I'/vH ; I 1 )1 I'I ANNIN(; `.;I-IiVICI PHONE (.303) 356-4000 EXT 404 915 101H STREET GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 V 4 bil 4 COLORADO August 11, 1978 Laurence. Paddock, Editor Boulder Daily Camera P.O. Box 591 Boulder, Colorado 80301 RE: Article titled "Weld County to OK Concrete Plant Site" in the Tuesday, July 18, 1978, edition on Page 8 Dear Mr. Paddock: I received a copy of the above referenced article on August 1, 1978. I was disappointed with the inaccuracy of the article. I spoke with one of your reporters regarding the Flatiron Special Use Permit application over the telephone and I believe explained procedures quite adequately. My explanation was quite clear that the recommendation of the staff was for approval and the Planning Commission, at their hearing, would consider evidence presented and staff comments to formulate a recommendation. The article, however, made it appear that the Planning Commission would be approving the matter rather than hearing evidence and making a decision. Additionally, in the second column the article indicated the Board of County Commissioners were hearing the matter on the date of the article. In fact , the Planning Commission was to hear the matter on July 18 , 1978. I did explain to your reporter that based on the staff recommendations , if the Special Use Permit was finally approved, a condition of approval would have the applicant and the Board of County Commissioners agree on a traffic routing and maintenance plan. My greatest concern regarding the article, however, is that it gave an appearance that the Department of Planning Services staff has a controlling role in land use matters of this nature. This, however, 3 Laurence Paddock • Page 2 August 11, 1978 is not the case. It is the staff ' s function to process the cases and prepare a recommendation based on its review. The Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners hold independent hearings , review all information, and make decisions based on such hearings. It is misleading to represent the land use decision process in Weld County any other way. I would hope that in the future more care will be taken when writing articles such as referenced above. I would encourage your reporters to cover the meetings rather than relying on telephone information to develop a story. Thank you for your attention to this matter. /-1 Verj truly yo rs% .7. -11,( ''(;16,-; 1 \ '',7 l 1,-t Thomas E. IIonn Zoning Administrator TEH: sap 'I , , 'i i ' , , ,I i'l ‘i•fl'Hkl(; :,I HVICP, ['limn ,303)356.1000 E Xf 404 915 1011-I STRE E-1 GRCELEY,COLORADO 80631 g Ft ,,,ipr, N a ki • ,,,./ i ,„,.. ., ,,. ,, , „.,.. ,,,, , ; (Lip kr ?• COLORADO August 8, 1978 John Houtchens 1007 9th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Mr. Houtchens : As per your request of August 2 , 1978, please find enclosed a copy of the verbatim comments of the Planning Commission members for the recommendation for approval for the application of Flatiron Paving Company for a Special Use Permit at the Planning Commission hearing on August 1, 1978. If we can be of any further help to you, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Respectfully , %,\":•-\.1%.—‘...\S%C . MR• likil Shirley A. Phillips Planning Commission Secretary /sap Enclosure F StaPhte aPABIM s ' Mr & Mrs. Ferman Ansel Rt. 2- Box 318- Al (303) 772-4204 Longmont, Colorado 80501 (303) 429-0352 July 19 , 1978 Ben Nix Route 2 Box 161 Eaton , CO 80615 Dear Hr . Nix : I want to take this opportunity to thank you for the intelligent manner in which you handled the hearing yester- day concerning the Flatiron , Nelson special use permit request . This problem does take some thought because of its complexity , the intense pressure and involvement of the peo- ple from both sides of the issue and because there are real issues concerning safety , health , economic impact , etc. , that have to be dealt with . I was sincere when I offered the help of myself and the help of our residents to assist you in any way to provide the information necessary to help all of the parties concerned in reaching an intelligent decision . There are several property owners in the river bottom area that own gravel deposits and we do not want to go through this again every time one of them wants to mine their resources . You could conceivably have several of the proposed plants within a relatively small area if it is not planned properly from the outset . Again thanks and please consider the resources we are offering . Sincerely , i .i v . r- t Ferman and Nancy Ansel FA/hr 1r. y� , t\s K^`/ 4 CP Jf AEG1g78 ` ��+� 1,-! July 18 , 1978 Mr. Chuck Cunliffe Assistant Zoning Administrator Weld County 915 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Special Use Permit amending SUP-260:74 :23 Dear Mr. Cunliffe: Please accept this letter as written confirmation of my verbal agreement with Flatiron Paving Company to supply Flatiron with water as needed for the operation of the concrete and asphalt plants as described in SUP-260 :74 :23 . The water is to come from registered well No. 15958. It is the intention of myself and Flatiron to formalize this agree- ment once Weld County has approved said S.U.P. I shall be happy to provide your office with a copy of the agreement as soon as it is available. Sincerely,a?ild4 4 . .4i ' 0-.1-44) Milton H. Nelson .z eau eze4a-446, �/ ti ,i, . ,, „* ,, ,. ®card of county c® i��ion rf ° . 0 ,,_, =,5,-,;,,,,,,, p o box 471 13th and spruce street boulder,colorado 80302 441-3500 O 71:i-',1-' June 27 , 197 y"`"` ': JUN 197$ tP Boai-cl of (;oursty f o,imi stoners RECEIVE® (.5-1 'T c 1 d County pbuMg Comsitil t (11 P. 0. Bow; 758 v.7 c0 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Qs,I.IvLti Dear Co . :1_._si.oru •s: I would be rem in my responsibility as Comaissione of District II, Boulder County, if I did not fora 1_d to you the attached letLc:_ '7ro1: concerned citizens of ou County who live within a short distance of the pj oposed Flatirons Paving Company' s installation of an aspkalt batch plant and a ready- mir concrete plant. Their letter to us was the first information we have -_eceived from any source concerning this facility. .:c have -contacted both our Land Usc Department as well as our Engineering Department, and neither of these departments have been contacted by your County as referral agencies . 50 have requested the Department Heads of Land Use' and ' Engineering to contact your similar departments to obtain complete information about the proposed facility. Intercounty cooperation in such a procedure would be most r helpful to all t ont ernr'd because ue have a number of most distressed Boulder County residents calling us about Cie matte,- anti le pos ,css no 'reformation \'1iatsocvcr concerning the proposed facility. r.re would npprccia -e hearing fror, you relative to the latter, and your Land Use nd Engineerinn Departments will be rc._eiving calls and correspon _once from bur -'besper•ti_ve departments . \ '\, _, Sii'cc r - y, ,mot^c ,-I,��--- i r ___�ack''i:u4:p1 y 1 JPII: ad County C'omIli ssione walden d. toevs• John p. murpfi'y nmq‘tr( l I, roar i'y district #1 district #2 di•Ir a t .; Encl. • TEY SAND AND GRAVEL COMPANY POST OFFICE BOX 229, BOULDER, COLORADO 80306 • PHONE : (303) 444-2151 June 26 , 1978 Mr. Chuck Cunliffe Assistant Zoning Administrator Weld County 915 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 RE : Special Use Permit amending SUP-260 :74 :23 Dear Mr. Cunliffe: Regarding your request for a copy of the water agree- ment between Mr. Milton Nelson and Flatiron; at this time there exists no written agreement between Mr. Nelson and Flatiron. Mr. Nelson has verbally confirmed our request to use water from his land for the operation of our plant facilities. The water to be used will be provided by re- gistered well No. 15958. Mr. Nelson is a member of G.A.S.P . and the above mentioned well is registered with that agency under No. 10458-F. If it will benefit your office I will be happy to ask Mr. Nelson to supply you with written confirmation of our verbal agreement. Please call if you have any questions. ' y, Sincerely, A ‘ Mike Hart cc: Mr. and Mrs. Milton H. Nelson 2040 Longspeak Avenue Longmont, CO 80501 111O930311� co _14 11. ore l a o0 I °. ?FL -a: Ti __,. SAND AND GRAVEL COMPANY POST OFFICE BOX 229, BOULDER, COLORADO 80306 • PHONE : (303) 444-2151 June 12 , 1978 Mr. Tom Honn Weld County Department of Planning Services 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Re: Nelson Special Use Permit Dear Tom: A count of homes along Weld County Road 162 and 34 was made last week. Each road has 4 homes with an additional mobile home located just east of the intersection of 162 and County Line Road. Using County Road 162 Flatiron would travel approximately 1 mile to and from the plant. Using County Road 34 we would travel approximately 12 miles plus 4 mile on 162. In either event only 4 homes exist along each road. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Mike Hart 0 \121314/S JUN 1978 CC RECEIVED N Weld Calmly `�' Pla°Rin ti g Co��isslam titi <no�'628Z1Z9Z�'��L 4 .. (i.e(.41,e „Per As 6'(.4, t. C 117-V1 .— ' RECEIVED COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE JUN 1 4 1972 / / 7075 1\4.t” l.Ollult}I Line Rd. READ QY: - -`�;'j - - --. -• Longmont, CO 80501 -►- - ---...-.... June 9, .O78 Boulder County Commissioners P. 0. Box 471 Boulder, CO 80306 Gentlemen: We are writing to you regarding a proposal by the Flatirons Paving Co. to get industrial u:e out of some property on Road 16 , one-half mile east of County Line Road. (Please see enclosed map showing the pro- posed sight.) The Rlritiron Company wants to build a ready-mix concrete plant, plus an asphalt batch plant. All of the traffic from these industries will be routed down Road l& and County Line Road. Flatirons intends to use County Line Road as an egress route. l:e would like to bring the following points to ;your attention: I. The road condition of County Line Road is in bad snape. There will be 320 multi-ton trucks per day using this road. Flatirons has no intention or helping maintain this road. We want to know who \Ali . 2. There are 18 private residences on County Line Road between Road 162 and Hwy. 52. There are another 8 one-half mile north of this junction. There are up- wards of 50 children on their egress route. Please recommend to the Weld Co. Commissioners that the routing of truck traffic be on a less i es id'n.tial route. .e know that this will cost Flatirons more money, but what is more important--the expenditure for a bridge or the life of a child? 3. :1any of us in Boulder County just h'ld our taxes in- creased, and we now learn that we may be forced to live on a freeway for Flatirons multi-ton trucks. We paid a premium price for our homes in the country--Please don't let the Weld Co. Commissioners permit this. Tne names that are marked with an asteric ar0 the people who are resi- dents of Boulder County. e appreciate your concern and hope this will receive our prompt attention. A reply is requested. Respectfully, Boulder County Residents Enc. : Map of proposed sight cc: Engineering Dept. Denver M.Wiggins Sanctity of Contr c. President STEWART E WART TITLE (303) 352-4571 Cleona M. Nelson Executive Vice President OF GREELEY Greeley,Colorado 80631 June 6, 1978 To Whom It May Concern: After searching our records, I find that the record ownership of the property in question( the SEQ of the NE4 of Section 30, Township 2 North, Range 68 West and the SW4 of the NW4 of Section 29, Township 2 North, Range 68 West of the Sixth Principle Meridian) to be in the name of Milton H. Nelson and Helen C. Nelson, That ownership is subject to an Agreement for Purchase and Sale of sand and gravel , recorded January 10, 1975, reception No. 1651755, to Short & Milne. Denver M. Wiggins President Stewart Title Guaranty_Co. Security Abstract/Co: s5-77 DMW/dlr J Ti R PAVING COMPANY POST OFFICE BOX 229, BOULDER, COLORADO 80302 • PHONE : (303) 444-2151 June 6, 1978 Mr. Ray C. Nelson 6028 Weld County Rd. 34 Longmont, CO 80501 Dear Mr. Nelson: Please pass this by your neighbors who signed the May 31 , 1978 letter. I apologize for not sending each a letter, however, I was unable to locate a mailing address for them. In response to your letter dated May 31 , 1978, at this time we do not plan to use County Road 3+ for our haul trucks. If we do decide to use this road at some future date we will certainly look into appropriate dust control measures. If you have any questions regarding this or other matters, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Mike Hart May 28 , 1978 - Boulder Camera Safety Award Presented The Flatiron Paving Company of Boulder won the first Milne Safety award presented by the Flatiron Companies. Paving company employees last year completed 300 ,000 work hours with 2. 2 million miles of driving and 107, 000 hours of heavy equipment operation without lost time or liability accident. Mitch Simmons is the paving company president and Bob Peppler is the safety officer. The award is named for James and Mildred Milne, who founded Flatiron Companies 30 years ago. There are now associated companies in Boulder, Longmont, Loveland, Greeley and Fort Collins. WI 31, ic SEC.' 194 cy, CN,J O0 c0 FLATIRON COMPANIES POST OFFICE BOX 229, BOULDER, COLORADO 80302 • PHONE : (303) 444-2151 May 24 , 1978 Dear I would like to take this time to invite you to a neighborhood meeting on Thursday evening, June 1st at 7: 00 P.M. at Rinn United Methodist Church. At this meeting we would like to discuss with you our plans for an asphalt plant and pre-mix concrete plant to be operated near the intersection of Boulder Creek and County Road 161/2. In order to best address your questions and concerns we ask that you please send or bring your questions to Flatiron Paving Company, 17 Sunset Street, Longmont, Colorado 80501 before the meeting. However, if you are unable to do so just jot down your questions and bring them along Thursday night. As a neighbor we look forward _to_this meeting .as an opportunity _to _worir_wsth youu-_in-order- =to -answer-your-questions-- and -concerns. Sincerely, Mike Hart i FLATI ' PAVING COMPANY POST OFFICE BOX 229. BOULDER, COLORADO 80306 • PHONE: (303) 443-9400 May 5 , 1978 A fr (N t EYefg 6640'�`® c_,-) et Is46 Dear 2 �?`GQ f� G��. As you recall Bill Kobobel recently discussed with you our desire to locate an asphalt plant on property owned by Milt Nelson. Your signature in support of our request for industrial use on Milt' s property is appreciated. At the time Bill was visiting with you on this matter the question was raised by management as to the possibility of locating a pre-mix concrete plant, in addition to the asphalt plant, at the site . It is now felt that it would be advantageous to our operation to place a pre-mix plant at this site. Had Bill known about this beforehand he would have discussed the matter with you before obtaining your signature. Because we intend to include the pre-mix plant along with the asphalt plant in our permit application we feel that it would be improper to use your signature without your approval. The pre-mix plant like the asphalt plant will operate at this site during the life of the mining operation. The mining of sand and gravel has been approved by the Weld County Commiss- ioners and the State of Colorado. The pre-mix plant will have to meet the state and local requirements governing this type of operation. The bulk of the truck traffic to and from the plant will use County Road 162 to County Line Road. The operation of a pre-mix plant along with an asphalt plant will result in little if any change from the original proposal for an asphalt plant only. The most visible change will occur in the increased volume of truck traffic . Your support for our revised plant will be appreciated. If you feel you can continue to do so we will leave your signature on the list. However, if you feel that our proposed changes would prevent you from signing we will remove your signature from the list. Please let me know how you feel about this matter at your earliest convenience. If I do not hear from you by the middle of May I will give you a call. If you have any questions I will be happy to try to answer them for you. Please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, Michael J. Hart F1ELI) CHECK FILING NUMBER: SUP - 'Ur,S DATE OF INSPECTION : CO tte 11 NAME: r\MOW ), q C-+6� REQUEST: Iyo , , `gg LEGAL DESCRIPTION: V1 Vk;'V; ' *1::,c, Q, 11 :!,x-�4'V') A�!A`a' Zo_c, 2, �T' ,M"i 4 ir.,iti`�W LAND USE : N D % li C-J 0 l� 0 % S W 1\,-N%1 -it-A10.1-1,..V.,CO\ t 3 ZONING: N (\..:+ fl'‘,2 Lk t a lre , a LOCATION: � a„'�Q ,4., V\e,s '� E ��, ',1'k e,! -W r, A ex, ,,(c---,), D '4,,.-7,-\\\,,Q.,-, (Mk,f_.•-,'‘1-' CI S ii_r\ v:,),L,.. 4,Nr%.4.% (I telyv—. COMMENTS : Q, i A-, (CAr+-- ai :�L `1i --+ • ti-4,e.>)% ,'�� %%;=-,r,' ( (& t) ��CA.O, Va P,�-4 , b.0:44,\&04, c v.e Y K�T A, '-- 4'%- ‘1-Q Ce ‘g it-C-, /sir,n \tsf-eiArg (.-- _, '' --�• _ fi4 1 CO nnN 40,,c,x, v v_ , -). %,, e k1 044.1 '' , ..,4$A c\cam &/iv:k.(c-i-)' !-1 Q4. \F '`n�f, ./. ,��'-. - ; `N k,,V 1, r` `.,_, ,) �✓ > k .\ �J 4, . C3`;y-- = d al,Ntk.� -q e �(:s�,�.�4� '`,'-A,, �(�:'1 r'1'-4 ' ,=r - -' NIYl 1 CE Pursuant to the zoning laws of the State of Colorado and the Weld County Land Use Code, a public hearing will be held in the Chambers of the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado, at the time specified. All persons in any manner interested in the Special Use Permit are requested to attend and may be heard. BE IT ALSO KNOWN that the text and maps so certified by the Weld County Planning Commission may be examined in the Office of the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners, located in the Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Third Floor, Greeley, Colorado. Docket No. 78-56 Flatiron Paving Company c/o Michael J. Hart ` P.O. Box 229 Boulder, Colorado 80301 Date: September 13, 1978 Time: 2: 00 P.M. Request: Special Use Permit for an Asphalt Plant and Concrete Batch Plant LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 30 , and the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 2 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M. Weld County, Colorado more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the East one-quarter corner of Section 30, thence _ South 88°18 ' 05" West 1288. 10 feet to the Southwest corner of the SE4 of the NE4 of said Section 30; thence North 01°21' 13"i''est 1314. 76 feet to the Northwest corner of said SE4 of the NE4 of Section 30; thence North 88°44 ' 54" East 1329. 01 feet to the Northeast corner of said SE4 of the NE4 of Section 30; thence South 89°45 ' 19"East 1331. 60 feet to the Northeast corner of the Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 29; thence South 00°25 ' 56" West 1307. 19 feet to the Southeast corner of said SWa of the NW4 of Section 29; thence North 89°40 ' 23" West 1331. 86 feet to the point of beginning, containing 79. 274 acres more or less. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO BY: MARY ANN FEUERSTEIN WELD COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER F AND CLERK TO THE BOARD ` /f� BY: Jeannette Ordway, Deputy / 1/DATED: August 9, 1978 PUBLISHED: August 10, 1978 and August 31, 1978 in the Johnstown Breeze September 13 , 1978 I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated August 9, 1978, duly published August 10, 1978 and August 31, 1978 in the Johnstown Breeze, a public hearing was held on the request of Flatiron Paving Co. for a special use permit for an asphalt plant and cement plant. Mr. Ed McDowell and Mr. Mike Hart of Flatiron made the request for the firm. Attorney John Houtchens, representing Ken Neuens, presented testimony opposing the granting of the SUP. Testimony and evidence was received from both the proponents and those opponents attending the hearing. After discussion, Commissioner Roe made a motion to close testimony and to take the matter under advisement with a decision to be made during the regularly scheduled Board meeting of Monday, September 18, 1978. Commissioner Jacobucci seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. All five commissioners were present for the hearing. Chairman Board of County Commissioners Weld County, Colorado ATTEST: ‘IftlaAviaAA:jr-fitA2A0tfryt) Weld County Clerk and Recorder and Clerk to the Board By: De uut&(2--ck__C nt lerk PZ Y Y Docket #78-56 Tape #78-101, 102, 103, & 104 •////e 4/O ABEL BROYLES 4 �+ CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER •••;r�ii� October 10 , 1978 • .� 24$8 SOUTH 12TH AVENUE µ BRIGHTON. COLORADO 80601 659-1130 Invoice No. 188 TO: Steve Briggs RE: Flatiron Special Use Permit John Purvis 1227 Spruce Street P.O. Box 1170 Boulder, Colorado 80306 Hearing 9/13/78 Original and one, one hundred forty-five pages at $1. 95 $282. 75 ` Copy at . 85 123 . 25 TOTAL $406 . 00 Thanks in advance. , I t f A AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLICNOTI THE JOHNSTOWN BREEZE CE STATE OF COLORADO ) NOTICE ) 55 ft Pursuant to the zoning laws of the COUNTY OF WELD ) State of Colorado and the Weld i County Land Use Code, a public I, Eugene Thomas, do solemnly swe, i, hearing will be held in the that I am publisher of The Johnstov. jiF Chambers of the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County Breeze; that the same is a week t Colorado,Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Greeley newspaper printed, in whole or in part,an Colorado,at the time specified.All published in the County of Weld, State i persons in any manner interested in the Special Use Permit are Colorado, and has a general circulatic requested to attend and may be therein, that said newspaper has bet heard. ' BE IT ALSO KNOWN that the text published continuously and uninterruptec and maps so certified by the Weld ly in said County of Weld for a period 1 County Planning Commission may be examined in the Office of more than fifty-two consecutive weel the Clerk to the Board of County prior to the firs publication of the annexe Commissioners, located in the Weld County Centennial Center, legal notice or advertisement, that sa 915 10th Street, Third Floor, Greeley, Colorado newspaper has been admitted to tl a+ Docket No.78.56 United States mails as second-class matte Flatiron PavingComp any under the provisions of the Act of March c-o Michael B Bart 1879,or any amendments thereof,and th P.O. Boulder,Colorado 80301 said newspaper is a weekly newspab+ Date: September 13, 1978 duly qualified for publishing legal notic( and advertisements within the meaning Time: 2'00 p.m. the laws of the State of Colorado Request• Special Use Permit for That the annexed legal notice c an Asphalt p Plant and Concrete g Batch Plant advertisement was published in tl • LEGAL DESCRIPTION' regular and entire issue of every numbe' + 1 The Southeast Quarter of the said weekly newspaper for the period i Northeast Quarter of Section 30 and the Southwest Quarter of the n cc €ec-trt+ve insertions, and that ti Northwest Quarter of Section 29 Township 2 North,Range 68 West first publication of said notice was in tl ' of the 8th P.M. Weld County, ♦ Colorado more particularly de- issue of said newspaper dated ' '' ,1 •'`' scribed as follows: Beginning at the East one-quarter A D 19 ''' , and that the last publicatic corner of Section 30,thence South of said notice was in the issue of sa'-j 88 degrees 18'05"West 1288.10 feet to the Southwest corner of the SE of the NE1/ of said Section newspaper dated `'"-:- ,A D 19 7`' 30;thence North a1 degrees 21'13" West 1314 76 feet to the Northwest In witness whereof I have hereunto si corner of said SE%of the NE%of d Section 30; thence North 88 degrees 44'54"East 1329.01 feet to my hand this day of - . i the Northeast corner of said SE'h 7✓ of the NE' of Section 30• thence A D 19 South 89 degrees 45' 19" East 1331.60 feet to the Northeast + , 1 corner of the Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section `-f I� )-- r 1' 29;thence South 00 degrees 25'56" ,r 7 t .t: West 1307.19 feet to the Southeast J corner of said S W%of the NW% of Publisher Section 29; thence North 89 ` degrees 40'23"West 1331.88 feet to the point of beginning containing Subscribed and sworn to before me 79.274 acres more or less Notary Public in and for the County THE BOARD OF COUNTY 2 COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY,COLORADO Weld Sidle of C OlOl,ldo, Um-, / '/ (I /1 •'1+ BY:MARY ANN FEUERSTEIN o f ( !r< ��A D 19 < 1 WELD COUNTY CLERK t t AND RECORDER AND f s- CLERK TO THE BOARD ` I !' -r ; J ) BY.Jeannette Ordway,Deputy ` Notary Pu, 'lc DATED: August 9, 1978 I PUBLISHED: August 10,1978 and My commission expires -/'7 ic 0/ ", August 31, 1978 in the Johnstown Breeze Co Legal 78-163-Clerk to Bd i a , FLOW iIiil ti' 4 I' ` , / R Nr . , r- ;11'1'I I ('ANT: `*" • '�r1, 01R n`�+ VM ('l1;; '; , i1�,QU l�,s'f: ar ,c , u - . ,C00 4ft \o Ni :( � ®•fin Lo cAlti€ .. 'A, Y�e'1/4.e,s Y§05 AP 4-‘..% coN.a. 1 I,1 .e, 9,6.$ V Eereve, , DATE I BY Application Received (Of q !lel I _ Application Fee - Receipt # g1,9 k 41111 +' gre' Recording Fee 4 il 1ovel antEIA _ Application Complete 1 l a - P.C. Hearing Date : � ,A\ 1 93t 141122 kt2 ( ' iib --, Letter to Applicant Drafted co ir 4 4 q -1 Alk,„, Referrals Listed 11 /it) C-IN (_'_ Field Check by D.P.S . Staff W7-q:q`,Y';, , - l''' .'= - 4 File Assembled , ., , , , Referrals Mailed , Chaindexed ' : , Notification of Applicant Surrounding Property Owners Researched �% ' 1 I • 7& -6 Airphoto/Vicinity Map Preapred 6 - 1q- 7g-; tiz• Property Owners Notified by : , , -1 �� II r Agendas Mailed by : 7 a 1 iij•• � t �,e / B . � o- Legal Approved by County Attorney ''O' 0E '1 Referrals - Complete -1 k'I '1V 0= , Preliminary D.P .S . Staff Comments Ifilb -v ;A Staff Conference 11 OS D.P.S . Comments ` '1 b �' G P.C. Hearing Action : �-\ -N3,�`R, a\., `-i\ .\_:"\'S c._ . P.C. Resolution `O - - a - Case Sent to Clerk to Board yl li 1.t =A -H C.C. Hear ing�\\�---\% Act ion : � ,; ,,,3, \ C C.C. Resolution Received Ci'\- �% %. 4a History Card Complete �'I-\S % - - C.C. Resolution Sent to Drafting N.1 .\ _ Drafted on Mylar N\‘ , Document Sent to Clerk and Recorder Vi\ P.C. Minutes % Av-\: , ,,5L rfe , . , A. APPLICATION MATERIALS Includes application form and materials submitted by the applicant. B. REFERRALS Includes recommendations and information submitted by various county and state agencies. C. SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS' INFORMATION 1. Includes letters and other information submitted by surrounding property owners prior to the Planning Commission Hearing. 2. Includes information submitted by sur- rounding property owners after the Planning Commission Hearing and prior to the Board of County Commissioners' Hearing. D. PLANNING COMMISSION Includes action taken by Planning Commis- sion and recommendations to the Board o€_ County Commissioners. E. LEGAL NOTICES Includes published notice and notices mailed to surrounding property owners. F. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Includes action taken by Board of County Commissioners. I I I ,i I' .I I'I I ' ' I i I i l I I . ' I I I l 1,1 , ', I, , , .. I I , I ',It I . /11;'; Ii; , 1JI_I ,,it I"'i '1l '1'-1 ,;I (. r P, ,I "Ilk : ,i r-. 1,.f' RA!: ' hll' , r ! •• ,Ili'; I 1 • ' l.. -- - ,!!I 1 I t;! . } ,:Y. IS! r I Ir Ir'. i , 1'' 11 I 1 I _ i�� '�� ^C�+(Iti 1� - I,+ lL_: - - Al P. f: ltl �'! , I,Y• --/-2;/4 - — IA II:: — -- It! 'I LI'I ;!''. ‘12gl i1 'x,11 --- - Llrs�l III ,. /11'i'R'dl . 1% 1l' • . , t i 'r I) ' ( Ar l ( di'A'If I VII HI l'r t;[ 1! r ,II 1 I;l -'i11I;1�'•,, ! I . I ' 0 1 JI; �1- i U ' � 'I-' , r l t�t'r' IL A I !j jl,r: 1Jf1'JP1 1 ;flr'd, IheIf'l " 1O(11_1OS a I1,-J7 rl•. I r 1 ' , J Tr' .I�r? ",r 1'I f-�I L'l t" ['I;�IL'1 nl , prr,I' , r.-1 GI,rr I .", L 11.;n Pormit 1 ''I tllr' , 1 '•'1 'minc )1 !`' 1II .ir I rl r kill! ' I'."�'1 lr, 1,r,rJ '1rO.1 "'J, irll ilf', I )1 1 Pi iit See attached exhibit A I i ';[ 11. I!" L- FII:"..If ALl_A : The SE 4 of the NE 4 of Section 30 and the SW 4 of the NW 4 of Section 29 , all within T2N, R68W of the 6th PM in Weld County, Colorado 1 r : r { r' ,' 1 {Li 1 ; County Road 161/2 at County Road 3 , NW corner A L11 'I ' , ;1=U I'",i=: asphalt plan -site , and concrete batch plant site I;1 A -'I! : process sand and gravelfor _asphalt and concrete manufacturing. I I1 :1','ILI,:; r)I API/' I'i;'JiJ ;.I' 1 ('1: I,1)1:( Ir11. 111,;.'I : Milton H. Nelson 2040 W. Longs Peak Ave,; : 776-1258 i!/t1'' : Helen C. Nelson ;m)i)Lf ; : 2040 W. Longs Peak Aver! : 776-1258 -- - -- — ---- /tDU!fL : l ;_` I IIr.I^l,', ric'i ')^r J11J ;tILL' I1nnfrr IIJC' pencl1ties of Cr7 �_l7 r' Il,r, i d11 .,t,i1 'fl toll! ≥t !�rrll' ,c,r71i Vl 'ill + tr-,rd with or (- )ntained within this t1,'1I rile true di-, i ^.IICCt tc, tll ' be';t of I:I, knovir.,d in. CO'it I I ( CIF ' 111. FL- 1— et 3natu1 e; ,..flc'r ,`1 ,, .".!,''Z ., i A )t'„t is Ci. 14 uI, ril)i'd and sworn t7 ticinn? me tll' S ` ` day of J I!f),All Y ['l I I I. jr; (^,1 �� '� ��. H J� Ply C'I'lll A t_ _ '� E9 101/4 ti JUN 1978 m RECEIVED 3-1 o Weld Couetty Planning Cotenissio® bZ£Z I -'- ,, �'" ,u,Cs+cr,��.F,ro.^.,,xC'-+t'l'._ .e ;> "`'-.+q'`-'.✓r.'�,��r`+�'i d_� ae�__ ./r'Z�K. E „_. . ----►- POWER OF ATTORNEY KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that I , Milton H. Nelson (name) , the undersigned, of 2040 West Longs Peak Ave. , Longmont, Colorado _(address) , County of Boulder , State of — Colorado , here- by constitute, make and appointEdwin C. McDowell, Jr. — (name) , of Flatiron Sand and Gravel_ Company — 2344 Spruce Street, Boulder, CO (address) , County of Boulder , State of Colorado my true and lawful attorney- in-fact, for the following purpose : To represent me in the matter of the foregoing attached application for a Special Use Permit (variance, recorded exemption, etc . ) , in regard to and only in regard to the particular property described in said ap- plication, before the _Boa d_o f County Cnmmiss±oners__ (Board of County Commissioners , Board of Adjustment, etc. ) and to present evidence on my behalf before said Board. draer4f . Subscribed and sworn to before me this ` 7-2I day of (�''S �...-- 197g. / ' /„. c_ Fl- _ ---- li t L._l.^-_______ Notary Public M 1 C7 My commission expires :_ %�'� : z I J J Y N 3 a c CU > u, me > f—i? c, > (Si 4.1 a co f0 V CC i ► ,.1 'r'4 .w �. 1:•. 4;L3ir -o C Li a) 4... p a) O +, (1i m a) a) C c + _C -0 ci C C C N y C (n a) m 0 0 O Q N co co C E U 73 a) u -0 1- O COc a) CL) O _0 O _ m o E L +' +-' y . 4c C C O CD> �O a ?� + O N O C C U Li O Co m a) U c ++ i -C .(13 � ca. I— C - O L m 7 A u) a) +., ,.- L _C a CO— a 7 o a) a -O a, m Q m �-+ a) CO .0 (D E a) t � C 0 . 4- E a; a a L ti co cn m C= Li, +� a) O t .y •— t O . m 4, co n) "C .� cu CO m CO co - a•5i Nn cc E 4O cu -0 O U C V)a) +_' .y a) C a cn ca 4-' a) 'p 03 C y O 4- C O - N V m t m Cp E aa)i c-).... y z 0 " ccoo co L' .E +, O m O _c +., L cn C O U Z7 ?� "7 vi m m O -a '5 C m 4- a) C L a O. >. CO u- Q a) cn 4_ a) m f° 2 t co 4O 0 Ca > -p O -C m m O a;— > +, a y +C' , c a) 0 O N i••' ) O +, p C i t co O +•' vi O m t = 00 y_o O O cn a) a) Q •- O p m • a) a .- +, U p S U a) +, N cn T E O a) E E C CO O O f4D J 4) S m > •4c co a) cco C) y O y d ,.,co_ O U J a) U C +, c- co a) — N " t O d a) a) E UL C ° CO CI) L m 4- >� c� +�, L m +, a E CU C m m N o 7 O C O m : 5 p ? Z D U a) c '+� E Hccc o as c -a m O a) >,.E 5 L O a) 3 ti = — O co t C O 'p O ;F C O m L m 8- a) •- O 0 TO LL ' -O O O 4- E a) O `c- O .C t O 0 +2 a) .- 0 •- _ Ear •- L E r > m '4, +r +_, O a) a p +' CO y O > • v 0 O O O O 0 •- -0 Q v co N CO C C +'' _ o a a a) U LE E >,4- L L c c • a) L.L.> _p •- O > C C p Q U) O X _� a 00 co 0 C CL) N .CU E ..O CO L m a) C C co cu co _c 3 `~ +•' m c c '. v, O a) O E a) o � : O p O LU CO 0 - E . — Q 7 > L 0 L (n 0 CO CO L ? CD .Q O ,� a) ice-' ..C O L m to a) ++ O co 4-' co � o � m L4- cE � � c a o co O o a) +>, co COC O O co 'C co s .° a) L 0U H O- O O .cn +>, ++ •E - E H 0 -a -0 E •'m 0 - L (a C a = to W CO D E C co 0 i m C 0 co +, d c1 C L c6 co N a) m .- s -C i,. E a -0 0.) -O co - O 4 •V7 d -C _a N CO i L .C � L N CO +-' N > O -� y 'S a) O C a) ai ai v, t c co a' > t > U J _ HCO m E a +r o +' o � > y cc c ccn Cs a) • O co co > — 0 o co aa)) o a) o -O = a. f_ •y 0 a)a) `� s . r H co t W !0 .> a) N p >_ G) C ..C U fC d aCi p cn C7 c t m c m a, a) t 7 +' N 7:JU CE d C cp CD • p •y U C co N 4.... •+-, = I.- � _cCC1 To � C � 0 co ° — c J c 7 Wo, -p U + O c L @ ..C 4-, •_ .N 01 7 \ �d N a) C -0 4,, C L C N 4- OO "� +, CD a> > a� 0 CD cm- m �� m = p 6 7 co c O .- CO CD p ;_ U c L •- -0 y4._ L 4., L a) CO L • CO y a '- Q O -O .O m 'a7 ++ c Cl) .- 4-' > 00 0 a y a) 0 c co c O = c L y- 7 .4- 00C▪ OO F- c a N Q ' "O c 4., o 'N° � 4' t >- T CCO N .0 U 0 c > ++ e- a) a) C v) C t 4, d L Nom _ p -C > L co N +, O • 01 c +, '- c II--- c ° o ° FF- .� II-- oco i-- m � • OP tpsillii)ifons)P/ all 4J4-'= >• CO O U) p a a) m a Ca) c >. m 2 a) -p •p co a) c o a) j, u) O a a) a) a) C O O O O C U O a .L 4, a = O p = O ca _ > +, 0 a) .C a) > ca aj = a c L c p = a C t t9 t rn L O co a O c .°' i s coo to a E y C C O co a Q- } y f° a Cl) = *' a s CO p o i c °- C E > — s en i� a a a 4- G N .� `—° a a) i 'C 4)) a) ca = a) — 4' V -— ^ _c +, c >' `° c O m N y U Q y aLi rn O N y ,V y `F -p �' ,m co .� T. „O p c..) co c oo > > y = Q +�' rn `�- o coo c.) p co = a) co o a,f- _U •U '7, aa)i CD ' i-, O O_ L. 4-, L 4,•, p- 0 N — ;o L 17 co +' Q O • y CUcca (, o O 4) a7 y CD y la-C a) N 6 4J C 173 C O •}' C d C -O Q >.U CCI) a) y 4O 46 a -p 4' o oC co 'co -p m a, y O cLa >,�- ++O 'V 'Cn N Y • 4 `- Q co co c t cU a +�, y O cao = O a) p co — c C +a)+ ._ O s C O L "C ma) a) •`� O co ,y O_LO .O Lis 0 co aai C `+- +� y co 13 Cl)i C O co +' y O a 4' C '5 O E C +, C L Q N DI .C O C a) O O a O L Gnats.- _ co C L o -a F-' A-p H Z O O a o ca = co co -= t c +, U ' c Cn 4- U .= c1 O m a; C ,� m L W O (..) C ''' = a > o � � �' ' a y � c O O a) C - .- CO= " a a C CIQ LL p a) co c y "C a) O O CD LO •O p co O a C y i) N c -p Q O .0 y coL .� p > s Qo ci � a 3 6, y a .� O. 1-- -O a) C O a; _ > c c ea c o J ,� •e- co N y C d (moo N C OL +a+) C a) O O Q w O SO co N OL ca U O c. O O O O C 7 LL. as- N Q N CO H _ ._ > C •:J y C C N a) w Ccn U CC w c� a+3 0 o -c o C p- f, _C ai � a V = — °c.c ac) Y a) c m o y c0)CC L = 0 a) p N C a) a) ~ Q a y t y a) co L i-' c9 y a) a7 L L -O p r O _E E c U c • a) N N V a) i Oa) vii a c p a `- +, a) a a..- C C V '++ a) +' C a) +' C C +"C L y +, +' O > +, C o y _ O Q O y O i •- cD C t �J 4,' p = ., co f0 a3 N y fo y `F- O 5 c 0 '9C as Q) O ' A CO Q. +, co a) fo N_ " •" Cc U y -� — a O Q O O I- a a)C 11 _ a s > co o a) ~ = C L N t C v 'y o c) -O N ` > N +, +-' +, O CO) y Q'y O Q) L +' O_ O _ •cC t +, C C N L a) L +, C y +, • CO O a) = O L. y _ a••, = a) = C +, O +, J ° — U) cccHaf°i -oa) m occa; H -C oomC) c �-° a) t +�' cco � ,� � 'v N = a) y a) a c N L ca O as . -p y ca C C L = mU ++ C n•'Cco ai U g O• U 'p _C +' a) y CO o co c Q+L, U +-, LO ++ f—CO p a y C C = a) 4. *' C) C Cl.) L - a) °. N W a) CO a) U Q 0 o. aa)) cco -. CO co) cps F— �n cao t a o .- :, 0 co,) F-- 'm 5 w ►cl y a E `.,_° & k • ■ • r: r CZ );7. ■ i %;UI a ■ 1,,,,,e, ,/ `r, rte. Cl.)� 5 0 z v CO :c c a� o a=i Cn •- CO r .4J 0 O c6 •y ,C d O a 'O CA Q) N Cr) ��O/ t � C O o a) -p +., C U = Ha CU � -o O N C � y a C 0 —O p C Icn U .C C U N C V +� a1 a) Q) O 'O •`,-1 u ++ 7 d •C C y +r > > O O c9 a) 4- +J O 0'41 Or 0c a) 00 O E a) '�O a cn .- >0 o co ) C c ° .= E rnm a m- c + cx) � /� +� a) tC a) L W C0 oY cow ° ° `" To 12 a� wit c0 t i-' O u ++ L ° a) a) L. C m a) > . O +� _ Jo co a) Q C ° •- co 7 r •- a) CU a) +, 'a a ,' ?. of X 4- N , '— CU is.) cri — 1,.. CA 4-, ti) co ?..,. > 113 .C C. niv 0 = 8 - ++ H C C c6 a) 4•4 CC W •L -CCU >,y O '.'' >` O O a) .C "0 a) c� m m ° - a-0 O 40 0 0 0 a C .E I- y . +� y H C 03 ++ O j ac) > 13 +, E :0 3oOaa .rIlliii:/.'. m y m z CO + a>) C O O .0 o o O Q a) :a co cu .,-; a) � � .c m p cuEg �3 a s coo T40 € � LO i > i c cm c .Y a Us >, . Y .F •U p O _U 0 c.)u CU O a) a) + E o a) co t y O a) a) a) a) a) < i Z .. C +_+ W .y F" O ccoo a>) 4- 4-' I-" ay) +t+ +L., 4L-, ≥ 4, M 9 ell it*e) ,`f 4—, C L NC a) >.++ • fD 4.., L — a) a) 0) Q a) N O _ O D a) Lid C J 'L a) O7 4- '� N +, C Z a U 4— • ++ CO 4— J U 4.., N J a) a) N 4— J N N '� co C N 7 Q co N +, O L J co a) J J C 'Q N _N ++ C ca > E L J 'p L L c) p co c.) ' � +' .� ;o To _E a) O mL Ocr) 4— a) N N cu — C U 3 N N C a) O t CO a) a) Q' C — y L y a) 13 •i �-Q " gym �; a�ic>a � p°p � +sa) Q 7, c .- '- -0 U � cf°i � a) 3 c = a) `c° 5 aC°i 'y -OQ " s °) '�C co —°>) °) y °) `° 'c—) o — a) o_o ai W N Q O U O C .c C U cocf.) e .y ° 4- y CO ° U E , ° Js � ° � ca ae'i �-, aL� -Q C °- c J e 3 +, -a L O ° o J C .C >,CU cU) -0 'C 'O ca OC 5-; Q y 0 *—' .= vii C7 Q C -° .-, J Q- M -° r T > ` C N N O C m e co �G co C — L O L a) c a) . D .x C O C co N co L Q c C a O C >' a - co O c—�o @ a m 'O N fa a) a) - . '> a) co O C -Q 'L O O N 4-, O co J a) L O a) N a) C - a) N J a) O > ea cfl ca }+ .N N N t y a-, y U co a) U C Q — ._ L CO > N 4 L C O U a) C > L co E t G) J C L L' L 4-, co — U a UE N •O L 13 > co O a t ++ C D a) y s a) S "O s J C (o N C L a co ., co C Q C a) •D C yi _Q +, C O N ++ E C _s_ N L L °. co C W C co ca "O O 4- X v v c`+- co N of -Q .— 7 " .O ,�, +• +�, U L N J L a O o) O E U C co N r C C C> a c6 _ O co >.O _ — H 'L :—'4)— O Oa") 73 co -C L C • co "— x C -o .� L 4- +, a) Q. a) 4. .co .C co 4- y co rn C Y +•r t .c) c ++ N C '� C O• m CA > O O a) C O a) O m +� •C O O a) ° +' a) L O O @ C ` J ° V!N CU CU -C3 y a LO '+., •C y N' +' •U +-' "CS U .}' C .C L •L f° J y i- O .co � L U C NO X °L.= 'f'' „C, _O d .� J (fl C ° O "O N "O a) O.•V C '+"' U U a U L U cn y •L .� (o ti U N ►- C ,� 'N C O C ° J Q-c c E C N a) >'.C Q t co c V O J O C C J J " 0 O co in U U co H Cr v) > Q ._ ._ 4- 3 = -0H c +•, V- •— co C -O .C co - -o -o n- 4- U 4-, o_ ., rs• p c . . C O O > C co L . Ca a) U Ca L >J -C /�� > 4. > N C -C :p C y H } E — a) 'p R 0 0 a) _ a) O 3 C a) N E 0 `� > O C t _ Q a-, N 4, C O N p \ U > O a) J 3 O ,O > U +, Q >. O O y Q OCO 7 U _0 H O p II O ,, +� a) i � a � Cco za _0Co • 0 a)• - as y- > i N .4 7, +U+ C N U a"' co CO ?� co O W O.4- a) 4- C o `La E Cy 4- CO - a) co — > co L a) N U O' CO p0-'Oa aai C C CD a) C• '` ca CO Y -p a) p a) ._ Ca ca 4- a a) 0 = ;°', +.' cam EC � y °- - C c� E L — `-0 E ° C co E '7, a) 03 — Q}, 4- �' Q O. C a'o +-, OL E y n" co D N i v, a) N ? O .� •> T 0 E s- c ti U .Qx CD y • N .N .03 C -0 CO •4N., — L N O C _c ca Q >` - > C C CO co a••, O co C O C • 4- a) t • L a) = O Q U C C' — CO 4, c E C W • 4- "a co +' coco co 4-- Q cD 0 L y N C a) • co � Co Y 4-, ,C O O4-7,,, a) E > 'a 4- N . CO U) •C 7 �, U i = V E N N •N O sa03 coO_ -OUUr a) Qm a) 0- a, p Iii H •y O F- t I- CO ` SIP... Alling , ,...... di lliCIIIPc: 'DIIIIIIIIIII- . illa iiiii `, t 'INI . • 1 ♦'' ,� Q o °; m e -4.7, vs cu coo 4... c w a) (, +� y s c .0 c Ca .5 . ' co E c 7 aoi _ }' ,H CO a) 4 H y cn CD (O 03 . +-J a) -C C cry •a) ++ +-+ ,to O f° CO O H N ti O N > a) E E d y a \ _ p U cyi • C O o 47, CO O +� 3 O C a) - 40 v O O C) C __ a O y •i E cD4- 4- a) L > a) a) m a) c�D O rn- C O co a O CO a) L a) co• a) CD CC E 4-''.- CO m .4- co = ``- cn3. O w m y C � 4r a) > o c t _ > L -o o- =_ m o c"' ..E cD 7 N -O ,y .-0 C co> cc c a) O + co -p a > N O E ycp co a) s y U) ca ,C C O +-+ - c° C O 'aco +-+ ,C O a w C N y. Cu Toa) "---- O O t CO ? t ;j.,. „.. L � w . <> % 1 ire„1 i • ,r i AlA AI r , ,o ::.,p,0 p . , ,, is - ... so r 9 r,-: leihi ., ( . .... 9 _, - _ .j b ilirill?;IIIP 11 ,. . 1 . c4 - A. dmi+44444+• •Adirli.I 1 4 v •. . . o e a "c44441 de► l 1 4— C N -O a) C •• i "O N N N d a) C C } a) d aJ H >. L to Lam ._ a +' .C ..C ++ t - t C +-.c d .F, cti L •• `- C m a� .� m co ° a� O O , Q f° •C .� O 'E c an ° O .. "O } O_ CD O 4- E it a) CO,_ ET) L ca C ° ▪ ai C co CD C° t O CO o C -a ai +� c ?� +� ++ to C E • C) L CC•C O - 13 a) CDQ 4— N H 'O U " Tz, ._ c C L Q O O O "E 0 0 = E 4- c9 CC O "moo O c Ca) ti O s L O 4- O cc, co a Q ....>.c N C L ° 7 Q N +' O 0 O c9 > > ° •— C 0 C C ° L •N N J ° — J ° C 7 C t i C +' -0 W i E Q V J O f° a s co y L a) o C co cn rn a) y v ca L m UN ai E c }' C)= o J CL) }J' y co a m +' c m aaa) a o O ,c CO J EO .y C•> ++ m N `-- s c a) +�' CO—C a) o C +J-' >Dm C) ?' — E• ° 6, EE ° CD CO c °' oo L.m ° ° `° co_ c Z47:. U 'y CO i-• p) 0) -' y m 4- C 15 2, V CO Li- Q_ ++ c L m m .Lo- 4- CDC C C ,C +J N 'Om t L >` O . C f0 .C -C .I.., � a •� o acv a, o = mom co c CD 0 CO a � E `° � C). }' U O L c a cot c "' c t co c f 4- ° Q ° o a) m c c c y t y _c m m m 4- v, c m f— a ca : O 4— co U E CO O_ CO ca •- Q .- co +J . CO D :-7.-: Q. Ivz )loilor Mr: ii ppm.' iall r r -poi 1 if /lir /' I srCY , -- irilii ----- f .,,I / f 6,ZIIIIP:.CliCri )filiall011167 ` ' pp -I /� L L t y t L _c ..C a) 6 C 'C >as C cUD = U C= E ('JF a) O 4-�-+� 0 +� a) cD c a) O co •> O C p /. +� CU '+., CD N CD CD CD CD co _CD 4-, 4—J co(o p L -p C ++ < a) a)as co la a) a) O 2 f° a� U a o 0 a s_ cD 0 —a) 76p4 • a) C a) ° a CD tv a) "O n• a) _c a > a) (n ° `13 co '� ++ a) W C ++ '(n C ++ U U U a) O NN W O W " U -C C - 0 5 '- a a) Q _ N C •C N C0 > CO O U U C ° O U > — a) � Q ? � � � E � o � _°c ° p ? � ono � � +' (0 C 'CM C t (D CO y L a) v- N 'L_ 4", s_ TO O . .CT) n a O co CD "a a) a) m = ++ L a) cD C -0C C cn C co ° N ° ..C 7 ++ 4-' co O C p O E a) cD a) 4 p en i as c +N+ t '+_, 'O C. - cn N "O > C N O ?� CO N '+- CD C +., co a) a) 'N co +, C E a) C '. a) O -1- LLgyp p c°n C -0 CO C - p 0 Oca cn cU O u N • ca C +>+ .C vs j 0 = co cn ca c73D 4- a) 4F co CC ++ > 'WcDCf) f— N CO 0 L 0 •7N O us a) N CN co a) ° n' .- d NO a) a) O c co o E E �, cu t vi l.[) — • U � E a) .> � (ND u) • p_ a) C co CJ) y -p 4 ice) C co N — - a) Q) ++ O O (>9 O t '� cD C c0.2 cND a) cp`- a a) .? U C Q a T J 2 J I— E 1 2 CDD = s C O - +�., a c a IM N:a N Lco Id• >- t : AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF PROPOSED ASPHALT AND CONCRETE PLANTS AT FLATIRON COMPANIES' NELSON SAND AND GRAVEL MINE `19- '6 92 3031 t op George E. McVehil �h s qU Certified Consulting Meteorologist n," /* ZQ rn C. AaB � July 27, 1978 G2 s4w 0 1. Introduction The purpose of this discussion is to describe the air quality impacts of proposed Flatiron operations at the Nelson sand and gravel mine. In particular, the incremental impacts of on-site asphalt and concrete plants are analyzed. Flatiron Companies currently hold a Special Use Permit for mining sand and gravel at the property; they now seek a permit amendment for asphalt and concrete production at the site. This paper attempts to define the air quality implications of adding those operations. First, it will be useful to review existing air quality and the expected impacts of mining alone. 2. Existing Air Quality The Nelson property is included in the Larimer-Weld County designated air quality control area which the State and EPA have classified as "nonattain- ment" with regard to particulate air pollution. The nonattainment classifi- cation implies that particulate air quality standards are exceeded. In fact, it is doubtful that standards are normally exceeded on the property. The nonattainment classification results from proximity to the Denver metro- politan area, some isolated point sources near Greeley and Fort Collins, and wind-raised dust during periods of high winds. ��. 2 Ball Brothers Research Corporation has monitored particulate concentrations since 1973 at Flatiron's Cannon-Ertl mine five miles southwest of the Nelson property. That site is representative of the Boulder Creek airshed and Nelson property. Long-term particulate concentrations have been in the range of 35 to 55 ug/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter) compared to a Federal Standard of 60 ug/m3 and a Colorado Standard of 55 ug/m3 . Short-term (24-hour) con- centrations for the highest days have been 80 to 150 pg/m3. The Federal and Colorado 24-hr Standards are 150 and 180 pg/m3, respectively. Four years of monitoring data show that standards are exceeded very rarely. When they are exceeded, it is invariably a result of high winds and dry weather, causing "fugitive dust" from open fields, dirt roads, etc. Most important, it has been shown that high particulate concentrations are not caused by the mining operation, since they occur upwind as well as downwind of the mine site. There are a number of present sources of air contaminants in the area of the Nelson property. The most important of these are agricultural fields and tilling operations, and unpaved roads. Other sources include general urban pollution transported from the Denver area, crop spraying with pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers, highway pollution from Interstate Highway 25 to the east, and fugitive emissions from oil and gas wells in the vicinity. None of these latter are frequent or large contributors to area pollution. In summary, present air quality at the Nelson property is generally good, but certainly not what could be considered "unpolluted". The only pollu- tant found in concentrations that approach Air Quality Standards is par- ticulate matter; the sources of present airborne particulate are mainly wind-raised dust, agricultural operations, and traffic on unpaved roads. r , 3 3. Impact of Sand and Gravel Mining Sand and gravel mining results in release of some particulate matter to the atmosphere. Actual emissions are highly variable, depending upon weather conditions, soil moisture, and dust suppression methods which are applied. EPA estimates, (1)for a typical operation without controls, that 0.1 lb of particulate is released per ton of sand and gravel produced. This translates into 12.5 tons of particulate per year for the Nelson mine. However, since Flatiron will apply various control methods including spray bars on the crusher and dust suppressant on in-plant roadways, actual emissions will be less than one-half the uncontrolled rate, or approximately 6 tons per year. It is useful to compare the emissions from mining to those from other sources. As a result of the mining activities, approximately 100 acres of cultivated farm land will be taken out of production. Again using reference (1) , typical emission of particulate from 100 acres of agricultural land due to normal tilling is about 6 tons per year. To this emission should be added additional particulate from wind when high winds occur during dry weather. Thus, present farming of the mine property produces at least as much airborne particulate as will sand and gravel mining, in this case 6 tons per year. Another important existing dust source is unpaved roads. Particulate emis- sions,at present vehicle use, along the one-mile segment of County Road 161/2 from the Nelson property to County Line Road can be estimated at 37 tons per year. (1'2) For County Road 34 from the property to Highway 52 (14 mi) , (1) United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1973: Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors. Report AP-42. J `• 4 current annual emissions total approximately 46 tons. Therefore, it is evident that dust emissions from mining will be considerably less than now occur from farming and traffic on unpaved roads. An air quality modeling study by Ball Brothers Research Corporation(2) has investigated the impacts of mining. It was found that annual average particulate concentrations at the site boundaries will show negligible change due to mining. Twenty-four hour concentrations from mining, during the worst weather and operating conditions, could reach 50 to 150 pg/m3 at the downwind site boundary. These levels are comparable to those already existing on dry windy days, and to those expected downwind of tilled agricultural land. These comparisons and analyses indicate that the impact of sand and gravel mining on particulate pollution will not be significant. Air pollution levels around the site will be similar to those now experienced. Total dust emissions will be comparable to those of existing dust sources. Indeed, the overall effect of mining, combined with removal of land from agricultural uses, should be little net change in area particulate emissions. 4. Permit Status A number of State and County permits are required for operation of the pro- posed mining, asphalt and concrete facilities. As already stated, Flatiron Companies has been granted Weld County and State of Colorado permits for sand and gravel mining at the Nelson property. This paper has been prepared in support of the request to Weld County for a permit amendment allowing asphalt and concrete production. (2) Ball Brothers Research Corp. , 1978: Air Quality Analysis of Flatiron Companies' Nelson Sand and Gravel Mine. 5 Both the crusher, to be used as part of the sand and gravel mining operation, and the proposed asphalt plant, already have permits granted by the State of Colorado Department of Health. This means that the facilities comply with all applicable State air pollution regulations and requirements. Notice of relocation to the Nelson site will have to be filed with the Department. The proposed concrete batch plant will also require a State emission permit, application for which has been made. Approval by the State will ensure that all dust emission requirements will be satisfied. 5. Impacts of Asphalt Plant The planned asphalt plant produces asphalt paving material by mixing aggre- gates (rock, gravel, sand) with hot asphaltic oil. Aggregate is fed by conveyor to a gas or oil-fired rotary dryer. The hot, dry, aggregate after leaving the dryer is classified by size and then enters the mixing operation. It is mixed with hot asphalt in a mixer, from which the finished product is dropped into a truck or transferred to a surge tank. Air pollution sources include the rotary dryer, transfer points, conveyors, screens, weighing and mixing operations, and fuel combustion for heating. Contaminated air from all of these sources (except loading and conveying of raw aggregate into the dryer) is collected and passed through a baghouse air pollution control system before discharge to the atmosphere. EPA New Source Performance Standards for new asphalt plants require that particulate concentration in the exhaust air be less than 0.04 grains/dry standard cubic foot of air. Though the Flatiron asphalt plant to be used . 6 at the Nelson site is not subject to the new source requirements, it is anticipated that it will meet this Standard. Reference (1) gives particulate emission factors for a baghouse-equipped asphalt plant ranging from 0.005 to 0.1 lb per ton, (The EPA emission standard is roughly equivalent to an emission factor of 0.08) . For the projected annual production of 80,000 tons per year, these emission factors estimate particulate emission for the Nelson plant as 0.2 to 4 tons per year. Therefore, particulate emissions from the asphalt plant will not exceed 4 tons per year, and may in fact be substantially lower. This emission is substantially less than that from mining. Also, asphalt plant emissions will tend to have less ground-level impact than mining, since the escaping particles tend to be very small and are released above ground- level in a heated plume. They are thus dispersed more effectively in the atmosphere. Additional sources of air pollution related to the asphalt plant are minor. Fuel combustion in the rotary dryer will involve either natural gas or #2 fuel oil, both of which are relatively clean fuels. Exhaust gases pass through the baghouse where most of the particulates from combustion are removed. Only extremely small quantities of sulfur dioxide and oxides of nitrogen will be emitted. There is usually a slight odor of hot asphalt released at the plant from heating of asphalt and mixing of the finished product. This odor is due to a small quantity of released hydrocarbons from the hot oil, and is 7 similar to the hydrocarbon odor that exists near producing oil wells. The odor is rapidly dispersed in the ambient air and should not be detect- able beyond the site boundaries. (This statement is based upon experience at similar Flatiron installations elsewhere) . Motorized vehicles attributable to the asphalt plant will include one front- loader to load aggregate into the bins from which it will be conveyed to the dryer, and asphalt trucks. According to the Flatiron estimates of truck volume, there will be an increase of approximately six round-trips per day to and from the mine attributable to asphalt and concrete production, comnarPd ta rrurk traffic associated with sand and gravel mining alone. Assuming that one-half (three) of these trips are associated with asphalt production, incremental daily emissions from all asphalt-related vehicles, on-site and within one mile of the site, are 250 grams of carbon monoxide and 425 grams of nitrogen oxides. All other pollutants are emitted in negligible amounts. When it is considered that a typical passenger car in 1978 emits 43 grams of carbon monoxide per mile and 4.3 grams of nitrogen oxides per mile, it is clear that vehicle emissions associated with the asphalt operation are insignificant in relation to existing emissions along any Weld County roadway. The incremental truck traffic would, of course, slightly increase particulate emissions in the area if the heavy trucks were to use unpaved roads for plant access. Paving of the main plant access route will eliminate that concern, as well as considerable present particulate pollution. 8 6. Impact of Concrete Pre-Mix Plant The concrete plant is relatively simple compared to the asphalt plant, con- sisting only of facilities for proportioning of sand, gravel, and cement into a mixing receiver (the transit mix truck) . The only air pollution source is fugitive dust from cement and aggregates, which escapes during loading, conveying, and mixing. Control techniques include enclosure of dumping and loading areas and conveyors, water sprays, and filters on storage bin vents. Some or all of these will be used as appropriate. EPA(1) gives particulate emissions from a concrete batch plant as ranging from a high of 0.2 lb per cubic yard of concrete produced for an operation without pollution controls, to 0.02 lb per yard with good pollution control. Use of an intermediate factor of 0.1 lb/cubic yard with Flatiron's projected production of 36,000 tons per year yields an estimated particulate emission of one ton per year. It will be recalled that emissions from mining, or those from farming 100 acres, are about 6 tons per year. Clearly the incremental emissions from the concrete plant are very small. Other associated pollution sources are similar to those for the asphalt plant; i.e. , operation of vehicles for loading aggregate and cement, and approximately three additional heavy truck round-trips per day to and from the site. Conclusions are also the same. Air pollution from these vehicles, traveling almost entirely on paved roads, will be very slight. 9 7. Summary of Incremental Impacts We can now summarize the effects of adding an asphalt and concrete plant to the presently permitted sand and gravel operation. • The additional particulate emissions from asphalt and concrete plants at the Nelson property have been conser- vatively estimated as 5 tons per year (4 tons from the asphalt plant and one ton from the concrete plant) . An additional 6 tons over present emissions are expected from sand and gravel mining. These increases are much more than offset by an anticipated reduction in emissions of 43 to 52 tons. (6 tons by removal of land from agricultural production, and 37 to 46 tons by paving of a County road) . ▪ The incremental effect on particulate concentration in ambient air at site boundaries will be proportional to emissions and therefore small. On a yearly average, any change will be too small to measure compared to background. A worst-case 24-hour period could produce an increase at the site boundary of 50 ug/m3 (compared to a State Standard of 180 ug/m3) . This theoretical increase does not consider reductions due to road paving or removal of open agricultural land. ▪ There will be no significant other air pollutants. ▪ Location of plants at the mining site results in lowest regional pollutant emission and energy consumption through minimization of raw material transportation. 10 In conclusion, it can be stated that the plants will have only small, highly local incremental impacts on particulate pollution. The operation will comply with all Federal and State emission regulations. It will not produce violations of Ambient Air Quality Standards, which have been set to ensure protection of health and welfare against air pollution effects. The expected short-term impact of the total mining/production operation is an improvement in area air quality; the long-term effect after mining is completed will certainly be beneficial to air quality. These conclusions are based not only on calculations and modeling studies, but on experience and monitoring data from similar Flatiron projects at other plant sites. 193031 1_;4,\'- s 0 kr? 400 C\JHIV m Ay_ B Copbei k® RELATIVE SOUND PRESSURE LEVELS AND ANNOYANCE FACTORS : I?' 8`1191901)Cd\v The "A" weighted scale (dBA) , which approximates the human auditory capabilities, is used throughout this report to measure the sound pressure levels (SPL) . Relative sound pressure levels represented by this "A" weighted scale are given below. dBA Activity 0 threshold of hearing 20 quiet whisper 30 very soft music, a house in the country 45 average residence, minimum street noise 55 quiet residential street 58 average office 60 background music 65 a conversation at three feet 70 average automobile 80 very loud music 90 10 HP outboard motor at 50 feet 100 riveting machine at 35 feet Noise consists of many interrelated parameters such as amplitude , general frequency content, tonal frequency content, length of duration of average and peak levels , and the time related order in which all of the sounds occur. Generally speaking, the least and most annoying combinations of the parameters are as follows : least annoying most annoying low amplitude (less than 70 dBA) high amplitude (greater than 70 dBA) wide band frequency content narrow band (tonal) frequency content continuous , non fluctuating levels fluctuating levels low frequency content high frequency content intermittent high peak levels The existence and effects of these parameters were considered in estimating the acoustical impact on the nearby residential areas. The SPL reported are the maximum levels expected and, with the exception of the crusher operations , are generally of short duration. The crusher generated noise is continuous and broad band in frequency content, thus less annoying than most people expect. DIVISIONS: 0.7=9 DENEX CORPORATION 733.5207 `i APPLIED RESEARCH 733-5634 • Testing Consultants Inc. LABORATORY. 525 E. MISSISSIPPI AVE. • DENVER, COLO. 80210 • PHONE. 303-733-3033 REPORT: Sound Pressure Level Measure- May 2 , 1972 ments of a Gravel Crushing Unit. TCI job No. 2062 CLIENT: FLATIRONS SAND & GRAVEL COMPANY P. O. Box 229 Boulder, Colorado 80302 Attention: Mr. Bruce Hanna TEST DATE: April 29 , 1972 LOCATION: Greeley, Colorado PROJECT: Sound pressure level (SPL) measurements on a portable gravel crushing unit operated by the Plains Aggregate Co. of Boulder, Colorado. The object of this study was to determine the general environmental noise levels produced l by the crushing unit and its associated machinery and equipment. Recommendations are made relative to future crushing sites. The majority of the noise measured was produced by the following equipment: 1 . Caterpillar Model 398, 500 KW generator, 2 . Caterpillar Model 333, 100 KW generator, 3. Caterpillar 988 end loader, 4 . Caterpillar 988 Pusher, 5 . Two Telsmith crushers with 6 x 16 triple deck screens and an adjoining 66 FC cone. PROCEDURE: Sound pressure level measurements were taken under normal operating conditions at locations 50 , 100 and 200 feet from the crushing operation, measured from the conveyor belt system. A B&K 2203 sound level meter and 1613 octave filter set was used to measure the noise levels. • ENCLOSURE (3b) i( . . : i STnucTunAL t.'OCEI_ ANALYSIS • �=xrcp ..tENTAL STRESS Attq, SIS STRUCTURAL Tt JTING • E_NVIF;rif17.F,,1'\L tl SIMULATION • NON DESTRI,CTIVE 1 ;T'',t' • Pf;OL'UCT DEVEL t,1:-NT • Tr'; FIBEUH ;11:;"•t1 • C ' I. ," ' : Flatirons Sand & Gray ;o. Page Two May 2 , 1972 TCI Job No. 2062 1 PROCEDURE: (con't) During normal operation the end loader (3) and the 1 pusher (4) are traveling back and forth, both unloaded and under load , therefore their noise output varies in accordance to their engine loads. The same is true (variable noise output) for the 500 KW generator (1) . Because of this variable noise output, it is necessary 1 to assign time durations to the noise level output. Three time increments were chosen to model the noise spectrum. These levels are L80, L15 and L5: the L80 I indicates the noise level present 80 percent of the time, L15 occurs 15 percent of the time and L5 is the level present 5 percent of the time. Only the L15 sound pressure i levels are reported . The L80 values may be obtained by subtracting 7 db from the L15 values, i.e. , L80 = L15 - 7 db. The L5 values are obtained by adding 4 db to the L15 values, i.e. , L5 = L15 + 4 db. Although a statistical analysis was not made the values J reported are accurate to ± 3 db. Background sound level measurements were also taken when Ionly the two generators were operating under minimum load conditions . These measurements , when compared to the normal operating noise levels, give a measure of the Iincrease in noise output. These measurements are reported as the "ambient" condition. 1 Because of the distribution of the machinery and sand and gravel piles , the noise levels are a function of the pile locations and size. This can be seen in the levels taken at the 200 foot locations (See Table 1) where the area between the S.L. meter and the 500 KW generator and end loader was unobstructed. At 50' and 100' distances a gravel pile which absorbs and reflects sound, was located between the S.L. meter and the generators and end loader, (see Conclusions and Recommendations) . RESULTS: See Table 1 , Sound Pressure Levels. i a RECOMMENDA- Gravel crushing operations are naturally noisy. Thus unit TIONS & CON- location, orientation and time of operation are the three CLUSIONS: variables which can be utilized to reduce environmental impact. I • Flatirons Sand & Gravel • Page Three May 2, 1972 • TCI Job No. 2062 Recommendations & Conclusions (con't) The crushing units can be oriented so that their own mass obstructs sound transmission. Sand and gravel piles can be located between crushers and local noise sensitive areas. Wind carries sound, hence downwind locations from adjacent housing is advantageous. Work can be scheduled during normal working hours when ambient background noise is higher and people are more often away from home. It is recognized that a compromise must be made with practicality. However the following recommendations apply to the proposed site. 1 . The unit should be located at least 800 feet from the nearest housing (preferable 1 , 000 or more feet) . 2 . The placement of sand and gravel piles should be between the unit and the cliffs and housing area. Figure 1 shows the recommended location and orientation of the unit with respect to the environment and existing conditions. 3. Working hours should be between 7:00 a .m. and 6:00 p.m. If the above recommendations are utilized the average sound level at the housing site will be between 55 - 65 dbA, which is a normally acceptable daytime noise level. TESTING CONSULTANTS, INC. Respectfully submitted: Approved by: Toby S. Nelson Dr. Albert W. Knott /" Project Engineer Vice President { 1 7747,44- / ..5-c)4/VG �,ES5 c/2Cr .1,4-v4r:4 S ' A/�' ,'ENT GcN /T/cNS / / ,CA�i�iC (�i�E.�.�T/w G oN0/T/oiv.s L,E/vTE,e OcTA�/� g .Z/3- a 1/..f- ( 'e/..,- a (--O i / ✓�"D i /DO - ,e5 F.E'EQG/L�NcY lycT� ,J /GD r 6 3 8s" 9e 9z 8S ,FO' / z's" 8 s- 8/ 9z 84 87 z.s-o 7g 73 8z 78 79 ,s-o o 7s- 70 7G 73 72 /oo0 7/ 6G 76 7/f 73 Z000 G6 6Z 73 7/ 70 000 S9 SB 70 6 66 8000 s-z so G-4 6G d9 ,Z4v6-,4,e 8'9 8B 9, 9c fG d6.4 7r 7/ 8u' 80 79 Ls- - ,2/s- 14 4Z s6 ExflrCTdd SO4/NO T.PANSA1/SS/o Ai �L cps S AS A FVHGT/oN of O,s744NCE A:4er F/zG� SO4II'GE S P. ,C. ..6,-- (d6.4) .S-o B4 /Bo l0 aa0 7. Sao 7z Boo 18 ,/rio 0 6* . t, • • a e W P a • l 1 I \ -__ .... ' /. \ X \I 1 ' f b o ti k N UO h , iCiS„129303• 4°6'� s ,cv Fc 49 Ls 2 O co INTRODUCTION GP s. 44,7 cep In the southwest portion of Weld County the highest quali�!ll19 °�� sand and gravel deposits are found along the historic flood plains of Boulder Creek and St. Vrain Creek. The Nelson property contains substantial deposits of high quality sand and gravel. The area of the Nelson property presently under permit will yield approximately 2 ,000 ,000 tons of sand and gravel. Two factors have played a dominate role in the decision to locate an asphalt plant and pre-mix plant at this site . First, as mentioned above the quantity and quality of the sand and gravel at this site is substantial. Second, the handling and transportation of sand and gravel products is the most costly area of the operation. The cost of transporting gravel 10 miles is approximately equal to all costs of processing, which nearly doubles the cost of gravel to the customer. Typically sand and gravel producers will operate either an asphalt or pre-mix plant or both at the mining site . This is done because it is much more economical for the producer and, therefore, the customer. Thus, the plant site offers a large gravel resource in an advantageous location. Once operational, finished products rather than raw material will leave the plant site. Today well over 80% of our work is paid for with public dollars. The best way to provide the public with a cost efficient product is to manufacture the finished product at the site of the mining operation thereby reducing the cost of handling the raw material. COMPATIBILITY We are seeking to amend our existing Special Use Permit approved for the extraction of sand and gravel at this site. The operation of a pre-mix plant and an asphalt plant at the site of a sand and gravel mine is considered to be an accessory use which is defined as "a use naturally and normally incidental to, subordinate to, and devoted exclusively to the main use of the premises. " Thus, the operation of these plants, at this site, are well within the scope and intent of the official zoning resolution of Weld County. Furthermore, land located immediately south of the proposed plant site is presently zoned industrial. We believe that the proposed Special Use Permit before you is compatible with the Weld County zoning resolution and the approved land uses of the area. Economic Impacts The monetary value of real estate is , to a certain extent, determined by the uses to which it can be put. Supply and demand in connection with land use will determine the value of real estate in this area. For example, agricultural land is plentiful and therefore some of the least expensive. On the other hand, residential, commercial and industrial land is scarce, in demand and very expensive. To date, no evidence exists to indicate that the presence of an asphalt plant or a concrete plant has had a negative impact on nearby property values. Flatiron plant operations in Boulder, Weld and Larimer counties have coexisted with agricultural, residential, commercial and industrial land uses for many years without impact to property values. HAUL VEHICLES As presently approved the sand and gravel operation will generate 90 vehicle round trips during a typical day. The operation of the asphalt and pre-mix plants will generate 96 vehicle round trips during a typical day. Also, one load of cement, if and when available, and one load of oil would be trucked to the plant daily. The sand and gravel haul is unnecessary if the asphalt and concrete plants are in operation at this site. On the other hand, if sand and gravel had to be hauled to the Longmont plant and the asphalt from the plant to Firestone the cost of 12 additional haul miles would have to be added to the product, not to mention the increased impact to public roadways , and increased fuel consumption. The Flatiron Paving Company of Boulder won the first Milne Safety award presented by the Flatiron Companies. Paving company employees last year completed 300 ,000 work hours with 2. 2 million miles of driving and 107 , 000 hours of heavy equip- ment operation without lost time or liability accident. Mitch Simmons is the Paving Company president and Bob Peppler is the safety officer. The award is named for James and Mildred Milne, who founded Flatiron Companies 30 years ago. There are now associated companies in Boulder, Longmont, Love- land, Greeley and Fort Collins. ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS Air Quality Plant operations will meet both State and Federal air quality standards. The asphalt plant will be equipped with air cleaning devices such as scrubbers and bag houses to insure that air quality standards are met. The only visible emission from the asphalt plant will be a plume of steam from the scrubber. In order to prevent any violation of air quality standards, the concrete plant will be operated with similar equipment. Noise Pollution Colorado state law limits allowable noise levels in order to protect the citizens of the state. Noise in excess of the limits provided in the state statutes are considered to be a public nuisance. Flatiron has conducted extensive tests on the sound pressure levels generated by various plant operations. These tests indicate that the plant operations at the Nelson site will be within state limits. The noise generated at the plant site will be mitigated in the following ways : 1. Distance, sound transmission loss is a function of distance . The plant site will be located approx- imately ? mile from the nearest residence. 2 . Wind carries sound, most housing is located to the west of the plant site. 3. Stockpiles will be oriented in such a manner that they will act as noise buffers. In order to operate this plant site many local , state and federal statutes must be satisfied. The rules and regulations governing environmental quality assume that if the operator meets them the quality of the environment has not been de- graded. All plant operations will be permitted according to the various state and federal laws. • • • R69W BOULDER CO COUNTY BOUNDARY R�h V • WELD CO COUNTY RD 1 �T FM ill. ""m+�`"~ I u� •M "z - ., Airy . // I ,� ••-•,,,I6 \N,, N• L . . . . : c . . . . . . . • . A z 7 / I. . „5 ........ .„,,, ch . • .... . . • ''' -'-\.0. L____ "1 COUNTY PD 3 m 'N,,s'.. ...y_ O• i.E . q—•------4.1.1. Z. 1` COUNTY RD 9'. ... k --"'N SSS ti • 0 )-s.--.) (z4., ,.. , o l \S1.3-;-:-; • . ° -1- ' ... n � (kFf4. ,ti O `f L icP/a, r_,22 1 p cn I ` COUNTY RD 5 \ ' 1 • N.--.1 .(:),...vi... Ll, 0,. II \_ 1J g I I o A 1/W O,f()5 N D �++ 2 Su/kvN \ Qp OD O — C� jui rrirTi O 6a�h � �7 z 7C I ° m II COUNTY RD 7 ) \ H i C; II o i D To Co n II 0 � Ilw a I Ditch N • N / - i / �-, ) 1 - Introduction ' " .In the Front Range area of Colorado, demand for construction aggregates dictates the need for extraction procedures. His- torically, such extraction has been regarded as a necessary evil with regard to the destruction of productive land in order to obtain the valuable aggregates beneath its surface . Graveling companies are proving that this need not be the case. Mined land is being restored to productive uses within a very short time as reclamation proceeds concurrently with mining. New technology may eventually decrease the need for gravel products. To date, recycling of waste products appears to be the only economically comparable substitute for gravel extraction to obtain construction materials. However, none of the products are available in large quantities. In this area the highest quality sand and gravel deposits are found along the historic flood plains of Boulder Creek and St. Vrain Creek. The Nelson property contains substantial deposits of high quality sand and gravel. The area of the Nelson pro- perty presently under permit will yield approximately 2 ,000 ,000 tons of sand and gravel to be used over a period of 10 to 15 years. Two factors have played a dominate role in the decision to locate an asphalt plant and pre-mix plant at this site. First, z: as mentioned above the quantity and quality of the sand and gravel at this site is substantial. Second, the handling and transportation of sand and gravel products is the most costly area of the operation. The cost of transporting gravel 10 miles is approximately equal to all costs of processing, which nearly doubles the cost of gravel to the customer. Typically sand and gravel producers will operate either an asphalt or pre-mix plant or both at the mining site. This is done because / it is much more economical for the producer and, therefore, the customer. Thus, the plant site offers a large gravel resource in an advantageous location. Once operational, finished products rather than raw material will leave the plant site . 2 Access Plant access will take advantage of an existing haul road and gate located north of Weld County Road 162 and west of Boulder Creek. The intersection of the existing haul road with County Road 162 will be upgraded. Stop signs will be placed prior to Road 162. The proposed access provides adequate sight distances both east and west to afford safe entry onto County Road 162. Once on County Road 162 the majority of the truck traffic will travel west to Countyline Road. It is estimated that maximum plant operations will generate approximately 160 haul truck trips per day. This figure includes both concrete and asphalt hauls. It should be noted that haul vehicle traffic will exist regardless of any plant activity. Flatiron has been granted both county and state mining permits for this location. Therefore, processed sand and gravel products will be hauled via the routes outlined above with the same volume of traffic. Current traffic volumes on County Line Road will be little affected by haul vehicles. According to the Boulder County Engineering staff, County Line Road north of Colorado Highway 52 is designed to carry 9000 vehicles per day (VPD) . Current traffic volume along this section of County Line Road is 800 VPD. Assuming that 50% of the haul vehicles entering County Line Road at County Road 162 turn south and 50% turn north 3 there will be an estimated increase of 80 trucks per day in either direction. The volume of traffic on County Line Road will not be a public hazard or inconvenience. Presently this road is operating at 9% of its design capacity. The addition of haul trucks in either direction along County Line Road would raise traffic levels to 11% of design capacity for either section of road. Highway impact caused by truck traffic from the Nelson site will not occur on a year around basis. Truck traffic from this site will reflect the seasonal nature of the construction business. 4 Environmental Concerns Water Quality Water used in the washing process during the mining operation and for plant operations will be settled in ponds on the site and recirculated, thus having no impact on Boulder Creek. The decrease in the acreage of irrigated pastures during the mining phase will have a beneficial impact on the water quality of the creek by reducing the discharge of irrigation return flows high in nitrates , phosphates , suspended solids , and other characteristics of fertilizer and animal waste. The only water to be discharged into Boulder Creek will be ground water. The discharge of ground water at this site will be monitored under the requirements of the N.P.D.E.S. Permit issued by the Colorado Department of Health, Water Quality Control Division. Air Quality The impact the proposed project may have on the air quality in the area has been evaluated by mathematical modeling of pollutant emission and distribution and by analyzing data acquired during similar operations at other sites. The conclusion was that the impact will be a temporary increase in dustfall and suspended particulate within the area of gravel mining operations. Air quality in adjacent areas will be within state air quality standard requirements, except on rare occasions when atmospheric conditions do not allow normal disbursement of pollutants. Monitoring data from Flatiron mining operations in Boulder 5 County indicate that when mining activities are carried out with normal pollution controls they do not produce any serious adverse effects. On the basis of mathematical projections and monitoring data, it is estimated that particulate concen- trations in the air would, during times of maximum effect, be increased by 50 to 150 micrograms per cubic meter at the site boundaries. The Colorado Ambient Air Standard for particulate matter, effective in the Metro Air Quality Control Region is 180 micrograms per cubic meter. Plant operations will meet both State and Federal environmental requirements. The asphalt plant will be equipped with air cleaning devices such as scrubbers and bag houses to insure that air quality standards are met. The only visible emission from the asphalt plant will be a plume of steam from the scrubber. In order to prevent any violation of air quality standards, the concrete plant will be operated with similar equipment. Noise ) 721' Colorado State Law (Senate Bill No. 197 C.R.S . 1971) limits the allowable daytime noise level for industrial sites (including construction sites and railroad rights-of-way) to 85 dBA allowed for 15 minutes of any 60 minute time period. These levels are to be measured 25 feet from the property line . To date extensive tests conducted at other sites indicate that the dBA levels at the Nelson site will be within state limits. 6 Economic Impacts The monetary value of real estate is, to a certain extent, determined by the uses to which it can be put. Supply and demand in connection with land use will determine the value of real estate in this area. For example, agricultural land is plentiful and therefore some of the least expensive. On the other hand, residential, commercial and industrial land is scarce, in demand and very expensive. Flatiron Paving Company has operated an asphalt plant on the south side of Longmont since 1965 . To date there is no indication that the presence of this plant has had an adverse effect on the value of the real estate in the area. Recently $100 ,000 plus houses have been built north of this plant site. In Loveland, land adjacent to a Flatiron mining site is on the market today for $40, 000 per acre. In Ft. Collins acreage within 3/4 ' s of a mile of a Flatiron asphalt plant sold two years ago for $12 ,500 per acre. To date, no evidence exists to indicate that the presence of an asphalt plant or a concrete plant will have a negative impact on nearby property values. Flatiron plant operations in Boulder, Weld and Larimer counties have coexisted with agricultural, residential, commercial and industrial land uses for many years without impact to property values. 7 RECLAMATION PLAN General Our company provides a basic level of reclamation of mined lands. This includes grading, drainage and grass seeding. Improvements beyond this level depend on the ultimate land use, ownership and economics. The aim of this reclamation plan is to create a private re- creation area with fish and water fowl habitat. The land will be mined, banks and islands will be shaped to give a natural appearance, and lakes will be allowed to fill. Land surfaces will be reseeded and trees will be planted. The reclamation plan has been approved by the land owner. Land Use Surrounding land is primarily agricultural. The reclamation plan with its wildlife habitat and natural appearance will be appropriate to this rural setting. Grading The major feature of the reclamation plan is the creation of three lakes. Total water surface will be about 92 acres, less island surface . Two of the lakes will have one island each, the third will have two islands. Lake elevations are planned so that overflow of each lake will drain to another. Overflow will 8 k drain from the northeast into Boulder Creek above Rural Ditch. Banks of the lakes and other slopes will be graded to conform with Rule 6 of the Mined Land Regulations. No slope will be greater than 4 : 1. Grading and reclamation will proceed in conjunction with mining. About 43 acres of disturbed land will be backfilled to create land surface, topsoiled to a depth of 6 to 8 inches and seeded. 9 , Mr ,11 :.----- , ______-_, I C" lit'' 4 1 / — 1, JJ X11 II, �I „ = - '�1' -i� - -- -=' _ _- _ — 5 �' -- - - om`•;' 4992 Pleasant View Ridge ,\J z r vel Pd1 li C) . r t • ii- 25 a -`__-'t-r� /( PLANT-49,5S k i o • 50i2 =X - — — _— — ____ _ _ _== = if -- (� — 4927 -----) . . „,I• P `n f` �_.� II -4 4986 _._ \ l 0 - - - - - - ` - ` - -- -- -— =_ 'I — __— ( 4954 / / Radio Towers` �, / ___)I (--::-=''f: I. /\ \ p 0`/ �\A____ I I `Li 0 o )1ii ( I`' Q -=-1r ,/ 44 7 ro i ); Ad ' w j' o _ _ / \ • �\ r flit,' GP (HH .1)\___ � 'I �pJ \ N \ �r/_ - -a Plumbs 982E 'kt ,� - 4957 - __ - ,, ,_-\\-___as MINERAL „'I'I _ __ _ -I � / ��' - - 49 i- (G\'� I� ,'';'(r- ----'''..----''''(.'I ' i 0' HT \.. 1 / ,, \ 1.ii \ O(r \\ 0 O // \, �, 5047 • i\ I „° J �;' )I ��.EWS/ON j - -- -J- ---In —_ ---- --- 1•--•-- t' ;..___ .-h,--- `1-- -•/---•-- -•- L__%,=_-_ -- ----_ - ---- -'1504_ -- ,, / 1 - ll 1 �1 II J o+roy/ o�� ( il \� �l po77pN 11 _ -/-__ ,-1 49861 / ) 5086 ' �i �/ I. i. '4,___ //t• .5 /�?l • I;, I jl I ,I , tn. View 12 __ _ + __ 10 — _ 5045' _ -----------8 M , .� :n Safety'Award.Presented. The Flatiron Paving-Company of Boulder.won'the first Milne•Safety' award'presented by the Flatiron' i' Companies.' Paving' company employees last year: 'completed 300,000 work'hours with 2.2 million miles of t'driving and 107,000 hours of heavy equipment operation 'without lost time or liability accident. ' • I a Mitch Simmons is the paving company president and'Bob Peppier is the safety officer. The award is named' LI for James .and Mildred Milne, who founded Flaitorn Companies,30. years' ago. There are now associated' (')•companies in Boulder,'Longmont, Loveland, Greeley and Fort Collins. 11 yy� e., - • , OFpAIi 1 ',111 Nl OE PLANNING SERVICES 1r1ELD COUNT Y CENTENNIAL CENTER 915 10th STREET GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 GARY Z. FORTNER DIRECTOR OF PLANNING 4F^4�3 • ; PHONE 13031 356 4000. EXT 400 • COLORADO June 13, 1978 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Enclosed is an application from Flatiron Paving Company for a Special Use Permit to Amend SUP-260:74:23 by the addition of an asphalt plant and a concrete batch plant This item will be heard before the Weld County Planning Commission on July 18, 1978 . If you have any comments or suggestions, may we please hear from you before June 30, 1978 . The loca- tion of the parcel of land for which this application has been submit- ted is SEII4 NE1,, Section 30, T2N, R68W and SW;4 NW34, Section 29, T2N, R68W Thank you. Oncf,„\I ja,00, ev.4 .+ Assistant Zoning Administrate Enclosures I I I I ( ( II H I Y 1 1 '.ih,ll',',I 'I11 1{', 1.I I NN I, WI I IN+,', VIA IIII( I.+1 'MIA I I Ili)1 1.11';.1 If It''IIrIAlt 'IH '.III1 mcmoRAnDuni IID€ To Tom Haun Date July 14 , 1978 COLORADO From Rodney H . Hutchinson , Engineering Department subject: Flatiron ' s SUP Application to Ammend SUP-260: 74 : 23 As per your request , I offer the following comments on two alternative haul routes from the proposed asphalt and concrete batch plants on Weld County Road 162: ALTERNATIVE #1 A private Boulder Creek crossing on subject property for access to Weld County Road 3 . 1 . Proper cover should be constructed over the culvert on Weld County Road 3 to handle the expected heavy truck traffic . 2 . Weld County Road 3 should be upgraded to Weld County standards , including asphalt , to support the anticipated loads and to relieve the expected maintenance and dust problems . ALTERNATIVE #2 Access on Weld County Road 162 west of Boulder Creek and establishment of haul route south on Weld County Road 3 . 1 . The requirements for Alternative #1 should be followed . 2 . Weld County Bridge 162/1B is rapidly deteriorating . This is a 122 foot structure which is presently limited to 10 ton and will not support the anticipated heavy loads . The structure would require replacement. 3 . No assurances that trucks will not proceed west on Weld County Road 162 can be achieved . .0,J,031, / ---/ /-6 " 2-::.;--,X.,7.-?, Rodney ( Hutchinson �(�p111213'�,S, Weld County Department of Engineering 6� RHH : sar ,co "TECH 19?8 2' c, pie/woe), 'an�i�c e �® ,• u L l �6�8 ��Ltiti 6'642/Z_ ac, mcmoRnnDuni 111(:11111k To Chuck Cunliffe Date June 28 , 1978 COLORADO From Rodney H . Hutchinson , Engineering Department subject, Special Use Permit to Ammend SUP-260 : 74 : 23 Gil Olson and I have reviewed the application from Flatiron Paving Company for an asphalt plant and a concrete batch plant on Weld County Road 162. Considering the general condition of the roads and bridges in the area , I recommend the following : 1 . Applicant should bear the responsibility of completely upgrading Weld County Road 162 from the proposed access to Weld County Road 1 . More specifically : a . Replace and extend the existing culverts to allow for adequate raodway width . b . Provide an adequate structural base to support the expected axle loads . c . Construct an asphalt pavement to relieve the expected increase in maintenance requirements , to eliminate anticipated dust hazards and to reduce the dust inconveniences to adjacent residents that is caused by heavy truck traffic . d . Remove or relocate the tree at Weld County Road 1 which would create sight distance hazards for drivers seated in high truck cabs . 2 . Applicant should be required to route truck traffic to the south on Weld County Road 1 to State Highway 52 . Should Flatiron require routing trucks north on Weld County Road 1 , an impact study should be supplied for further consideration . I do not feel that Weld County Road 1 between Weld County Road 202 and State Highway 119 is sound enough to support this type of operation . 3 . Written approval to route trucks alor9the County Line Road should be obtained from the Boulder County Engineering Department . 4 . Weld County Bridge 161/2/18 which lies east of the proposed access shall not be used due to the low structural capacity . 4� /U1 ' ' �` � JUN 1978 110-4 Ro,ine H . HutchinsonF2ECEIVED Weld Comity ca Planning Commission Gilman E . Olson p° 1Y! /_I BOARD OF HEALTH W elciCounty Health Department DAVID WERKING, DDS Greeley FRANKLIN D YODER, MD, MPH RALPH MB Greeley Director 1516 HOSPITAL ROAD WILLIAM SLICK Roggen GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 DORIS DEFFKE Greeley (303)353-0540 DONALD HERGERT, Windsor ANNETTE M LOPEZ Greeley HERSCHEL PHELPS JR M D Greeley KATHLEEN SHAUGHNESSY Ault JOE STOCKTON Gilcrest September 6, 1978 TO: Gary Fortner FROM: John G. Hall SUBJECT: Permissible N se Level for Flatiron Paving Co. The following interpretation of 25-12-103, C.R.S. 1973 is submitted by this department as it applies to the Special Use Permit requested by Flatiron Paving Company: 1 . The land area surrounding the proposed SUP can be considered residential since the definition of such in 25-12-102(6) is ". . . an area of single-family or multifamily dwellings. . ." 2. The maximum noise level that is permitted in a • residential area is 55 db(A) from 7:00 a.m. to the next 7:00 p.m. and 50 db(A) from 7:00 p.m. to the next 7:00 a.m. Therefore, Flatiron will be in violation of 25-12-103 if noise originating from its property at a distance greater than 25 feet exceeds those levels listed above. 3. The noise levels stated in paragrpah two above, may be increased by ten db(A) for a period not to exceed fifteen minutes in any one-hour period, during the hours of 7:00 a.m. and the next 7:00 p.m. 4. Periodic, impulsive or shrill noises shall be con- sidered a violation of 25-12-103 when such noises are at a sound level of 5 db(A) less than those listed in paragraph two above. If you have further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact this office. 23456789 w4-Pi rJ 9 I �CCC 4 8 04, c gas�t oc°"� ® Weld BOARD OF HEALTH County Health Department DAVID WERKING, DDS,Greeley FRANKLIN D YODER, MD, MPH RALPH AAB,Greeley Director 1516 HOSPITAL ROAD WILLIAM BLICK, Roggen GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 DORIS DEFFKE, Greeley DONALD HERGERT, Windsor (303)353-0540 ANNETTE M LOPEZ, Greeley HERSCHEL PHELPS,JR, M D Greeley KATHLEEN SHAUGHNESSY,Ault June 28, 1978 JOE STOCKTON,Gilcrest Gary Fortner, Director Planning Commission 915-10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The Special Use Permit as requested by Flatiron Paving Company has been reviewed by staff of the Environmental Health Section and the following comments are submitted: 1 . An emission permit shall be obtained for the concrete plant. 2. Noise levels shall comply with those standards as listed in 25-12-103, C.R.S. 1973. 3. An individual sewage disposal system permit shall be obtained for any permanent sewage 'disposal system. 4. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit shall be obtained for any • , anticipated discharge of effluent. 5. The applicant's comments on Page 6, Section E, regarding Ambient Air Standards of particulate matter are somewhat misleading. The Colorado Ambient Air Standard for suspended particulate matter is 180 micrograms per cubic meter. However, this is only for a 24 hour period and must not be exceeded more than once in a 12 month period. The long term standard for suspended particulate matter is 55 micrograms per cubic meter. Sincerely, �,/j 08293,93 Y rf! JUN 1978 �a L...0/ohn Environmental Health Services c� RECEIVED rn Weld Coin JGH:dr H:d r C51 Piannint CoDIeissiea c Loncnt Soil Conservation District 1 228 MAIN STREET LONGMONT,COLORADO 80501 June 20, 1978 Mr. Chuck Cunliffe, Assistant Zoning Administrator Weld County Department of Planning Services 915 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 Re: Flatiron Paving Company Dear Chuck: Special Use Permit Amend SUP-260:74:23 In the original application we could find no conflict with our interests since the land has a land use capability of class VI and certainly not prime agricultural land. Sand and gravel mining is a recognized use in the agricultural zone. The plant, as mentioned, will be located in a 100 year flood- ' plain, but since this type of activity is not permanent there should be no real danger to living persons as this type of flooding gives considerable advance warning. There are no major irrigation systems in the project area that will be affected by this permit. The Flatiron Company has been most cooperative in previous recla- mation projects and the bank sloping, seeding, etc. , mentioned in the plan appears adequate. Sincerely, eaej cMato Robert Schlagel President RS: r r rQ7'1?2a2, JUN 1978 ,"2 RECEIVED Cr Cu Cr, Weld County c , Planning Con ilasioi L9 CONSERVATION - DEVELOPMENT - SELF-GOVERNMENT Ni" board Of c u commissioner/ boulder p.o.box 471 13th and cpruco otrcat boulder,colorado 80308 441.3800 counEy July 13, 1978 XO2OZIZ2(7 57 Board of County Commissioners '` ' cup, CP Weld County a JUL1g78 `c�,� Weld County Centennial Center c RECEIVED ; 915 - 10th Street c� toulitv Greeley, CO 80631 O Pinning Cotes sirs wo 6�'‘95 G�1\� • Dear Commissioners: The proposed Flatiron Paving Company asphalt and concrete plant, an amendment to Weld County Special Use Permit SUP-260:74:23, has recently been brought to the Commissioners' attention through letters received from area residents in opposition to the application. A referral was received by the Land Use Department from the Weld County Department of Planning Services on June 23rd, and the matter was discussed before the Board on July 10th. The Commissioners have two basic concerns with the application as submitted The first concern is the impact of the proposed industrial use and ensuing haul truck traffic upon residents of both counties along County Line Road. It is felt that the proposed use is not compatible with surrounding land uses in an agricultural zone and would be more appropriately located in an industrial zone. Attached are copies of letters from area residents received to date. The second concern is for the heavy haul truck traffic proposed on County Line Road, not only carrying the finished products from the site, but also carrying additional raw materials required in the manufacturing process from other areas to the site. This road is maintained by Boulder County under a maintenance agreement with Weld County. The road is not designed to carry the type and amount of traffic it is carrying today. Studies by the Public Works Department show that hauling operations such as the one proposed lead to premature deterioration of roads and usually do not contribute enough taxes to offset the additional damage. In summary, it is felt that the impact on area residents and lack of adequate transportation networks in the area indicate that this is not an appropriate location for the proposed facilities. In the event that this site is approved, the use of alternate routes, such as Weld County Road 3, is suggested. Approval of County Line Road as a specific haul route, as proposed, would require the negotiation of an amendment to the maintenance agreement for County Line Road. walden d. toevs John p. murphy margaret b. markey district#1 district#2 district#3 0' 46. Board of County Commissioners July 13, 1978 Page 2 A copy of the Boulder County Land Use Department's referral response to the Weld County Department of Planning Services which addresses Boulder County's concerns in more detail is attached. Very truly yours, D en; E. To-evs District #1 Chairman t ,,e / iP7 John P. Murphy_.: District #2 Arfrigg/del B. Markey District #3 WDT/mgp Enclosures L p o box 471 13in and sprLce t bauldar cob 80306 441-3930 ,��I 11u�1� 111 1 v iJ v July 12, 1978 C`Uf M 7J` edcyard a tops planning director Mr. Chuck Cunliffe Department of Planning Services Weld County Centennial Center 915 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 Re: Flatiron Paving Company applica- tion, amendment to SUP-260:74:23 Dear Mr. Cunliffe: The Planning Staff received a referral on this application on June 23, 1978. Due to the fact that the Boulder County Commissioners had re- ceived numerous letters from residents on County Line Road in opposition to this proposal , it was felt that it should be put on the Commissioners' agenda for discussion. The earliest date available was Monday, July 10. It is hoped that this response will be received in time for your Staff to consider it in their recommendations to the Weld County Planning Commission. The Staff has the following comments on the application: 1. It is felt that the proposed asphalt plant and concrete batch plant are highly questionable as customary and incidental accessory uses to a sand and gravel mining operation on agriculturally zoned land. Additional raw materials, such as cement, oil and fuel would need to be transported onto the site in order to manufacture the finished product. Property zoned for heavy industrial uses would be a more appropriate location for the plant facilities. 2. The actual plant site is located entirely within the 100-Year Flood Plain of Boulder Creek. If approval is given for this site, very stringent safeguards against contamination of Boulder Creek, both under normal and flood situations, should be a condition of approval . 3. Due to the concerns of area residents, an alternate haul route is suggested which would not impact as many residents as the County Road 162/County Line Road route proposed. One alternative might be for traffic to proceed east on Road 162 to County Road 3 and then south to Highway 52. Mr. Chuck Cunliffi July 12, 1978 Page 2 4. The Boulder County Public Works Department feels that County Line Road is neither designed for nor in condition to handle the pro- posed haul truck traffic. Boulder County maintains County Line Road under the terms of a maintenance agreement with Weld County. It is felt that premature deterioration of the road surface would be significant enough to require renegotiation of the maintenance agreement. The Public Works Department also recommends an alter- nate route. In summary, the Planning Staff cannot support the proposed operation at this particular location due to incompatibility with surrounding land uses, location in the flood plain, and the lack of adequate roads in the area. If this site were to be approved, it is suggested that the most stringent engineering standards be applied and an alternate haul route designated as conditions of approval . A copy of a memo from the Boulder County Public Works Department is attached. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal . If you should need additional information, please feel free to contact me. Very truly o r , Gary R. o dell Planner GRG/ps ��.�p�Sl2 1S Enclosures \ a� 1O „O.,., Ig'8 rn d. C4I Vkezi � a cu Ate_ 4 moo® <oocr,'l�l LZ, c,2'�ti4, f' public =r ' s depat tmen�i r p.o.box 471 2045-13th st. boulder,coiorado 80306 441-3900 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners - FROM: Bing Barstow, Public Works Director BY: Alex Ariniello, Transportation Engineer Z2,_`Z DATE: July 6, 1978 RE: Flatiron Special Use Application in Weld County The Flatiron Paving Company is applying to Weld County for a Special Use Permit to construct and operate an asphalt plant and a concrete batch plant on part of the site known as the Nelson Pit, which is located about one mile north of SH 52 and about 2 mile east of East County Line Road. The haul traffic of about 160 trucks per day will utilize Weld County Road 162 and E. County Line Road. Flatiron has already been granted both county and state mining permits for this location so that even if the plants are not operated, haul vehicle traffic will still use this haul route. The Boulder County Commissioners have been petitioned (attached) by residents along the haul route to appeal to the Weld County Commissioners to require a haul route other than the one outlined by Flatirons. The Public 1lorks staff has the following comments: 1 ) East County Line Road, split by the County boundary, is main- tained by Boulder County under a maintenance agreement worked out with Weld County. The road is structurally in poor condition and not designed to carry the type of traffic it is carrying today. 2) Analysis of other hauling operations indicates that heavy users such as Flatirons, generally do not contribute enough taxes to recover the cost of additional damage to County roads. Although no analysis has been done in this particular case, the staff feels that the hauling operations will significantly contribute to deterioration of E. County Line Road and there will be minimal increase in revenues to repair this facility. I.- • " Flatiron Special Use Application in Weld County July 6, 1978 Page two 3) Due to the residental nature of the area concerned, it should be noted that E. County Line Road is classified in the Comprehensive Plan as a minor arterial and is projected to serve through trip traffic at moderate speeds. The haul traffic will make it even more mandatory for the residents of the area to be cautioned against letting their children play on or near the road. In summary, this special use application will result in the deterior- ation of E. County Line Road and an increased hazard to the residents in the area. We reccommend that Weld County designate alternate, less ob- jectionable haul routes as a condition of approval ,if such alterate routes are available. WBB:AA/tmvn OFCpO JOHN W. ROLD RICHARD D. LAMM GOVERNOR * , ,r- * Director 1876 COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 715 STATE CENTENNIAL BUILDING-1313 SHERMAN STREET DENVER,COLORADO 80203 PHONE (303)839-2611 June 27, 1978 Mr. Chuck Cunliffe Weld County Department of Planning Services 915 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Mr. Cunliffe: RE: NELSON ASPHALT AND CONCRETE PLANT, SUP-260: 74-23, AMENDED This application is for the construction of an asphalt plant and a ready- mix concrete plant in parts of secs. 29 and 30, T2N, R68W, Weld County. Mining permits on this property were obtained by Flatirons Paving Company in 1974. This 80-acre tract lies on high-quality flood-plain gravels along Boulder Creek, as shown on the gravel resources map of the Erie quadrangle. Concrete-mix and asphalt-mix plants are normal attendant operations in many gravel pits. As stated in Flatiron's report, it is economically advantageous to both the company and the consumer to locate both plants at a former mining site that is within convenient transport distance of principal markets. This practice represents both efficient and economical industrial siting and desirable utilization of resource land. Regarding increases in truck traffic on Countyline Road and County Road 162, the company has shown that current traffic volumes are less than 10 percent of design capacity and that anticipated traffic from the plant site will increase the total volume by only 2 percent of design capacity. Based on the other information presented, I have no objections to this amended special-use permit. Sincerely, Stephen D. Schwochow Engineering Geologist 15.16 6_ )D SDS/vt �' �. �, P N 1978 w cc: Land Use Commission E7V laid ED P' f�larrn� Cozy,. (xi C Coraa�i �� 4110, GEOLOGY STORY OF THE PAST . . . KEY TO THE FUTURE BENJAMIN F.STAPLETON FELIX L. SPARKS Chairman,Denver Director Co FREDERICK V.KROEGER iSoF °P LAREN D. MORRILL Vice-Chairman,Durango Ntr— - o Deputy Director 14 JOHN H. BROWNELL *L Hooper J876 JOHN R.FETCHER RICHARD D. LAMM Steamboat Springs Governor C.M.FURNEAUX DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Walden PATRICK A.GORMLEY COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD Grand Junction 823 STATE CENTENNIAL BUILDING ROBERT A.JACKSON 1313 SHERMAN ST R E E T Pueblo DAVID LEINSDORF DENVER, COLORADO 80203 Crested Butte TELEPHONE HERBERT H.VANDEMOER June 27, 1978 (303)839-3441 Sterling Mr. Chuck Cunliffe Assistant Zoning Administrator Department of Planning Services 915-10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Mr. Cunliffe: We have made a flood hazard review of Flatiron Paving Company' s application, dated May, 1978, as requested by your June 13, 1978, letter. We have been in communication with their hydraulic engineer for this project--Leonard Rice Consulting Water Engineers, Inc.-- and feel his flood hazard determinations are reasonable and accept- able. His findings are shown by letter, dated June 7, 1978, and are made a part of the application. Because the proposed use is located in the Boulder Creek channel and floodplain, we recommend that any future operation of the plant not obstruct flood flows. A discharge of 18, 000 cfs has been estimated for the 100-year flood event. Should obstructions be allowed to occur, damage to others could occur during times of flood. If you have any questions, we will be happy to respond. Ver truly your ,, LARRY F. LANG, . E. Chief, Flood Control and Conservation Section LFL:tam (Cdl`�' U +.0 z3 C�'�19�8 w cb I _a• Yi L J � . 1 r �• a N L Vr Le NM., Yq ry�A -�' M,,....._--11 6i I " 's I II' ., i,'I1(II I11I'IWII �I`lti� 1 ' �N'3 .. * J .-..-y.:. • U4a . 'l 1-?------ �V .',3a.i'sd.-.... 1 a 0" s C' �` 10 9 qq `II 2 1 ` - �� T '� 7. R;fN .. a I •. L��. B. MME' E.' SPA - `i� 2 1 ` �� i_ �► - a•s ! !till— O.Z /eFFJn: _ YY�i�� '— G� 8 2 •6 3 4 W w,.._ w 2 •�'D I tor �$kJ8 * 2, 1 • - I _sue^ [r 1 `—'C 0 1 18 6 VA' L I �- c T E 9 2 ' —'� 'Hi I `t P�I T I ..� •`= \ I 'RISC r, , , , ,78 10 I I 1 '�_ '26 , gnu®sa��-7t Sa . • 'rV e� �1 - ,. ! 9 ".1-."1 ,{� --77,-- -1---4,-.4 EIACON SUB —— �` . I Z 3 7 — yu> E E ST •,- . _ �� lip. i.. =. - _ •��. NOVA ST.,,,.\\.,i �+^. cam' 0 34 _3..,.., . . t..., 0, . ...z , _. .. ___ _ .. ' �- i � •e• _ FIRST \- --.„_, _ ,r_ .,_ L'' _, -.. ---=:-7724, . NI, N.. N\ _- • :,-.! -\••.•....... ' \\Nir - \ \ . r a. \SN, - * _ ----...,.... . Ns W-4, 4. ALASKA t-, -. . Ankle, .ti + �' Y a � rryjsFca ^rt ,F,:::: -�3 C 1 3 r 1 ` ` oa. .N. Zi x ,'�.• r'4 4:v4.•, --r',,,,Ni ... '' "-'1;. ,p;-,..-,,,,,,"p= ''Ltw.:.-� ff\///// ‘, -, , •. ,t -#,;\ .,4kk..s.w.i, _ ..- -....‘,,,ssik\\\\\\1/4.t ..\\--%,...-,- I --.-----...1,.-::.1.: ::,^-#1,'-.-'.':::._1%....=:::::..T.-.i..-:.k\\Nk\\X\NN ' \\\\\\ \\*\\\\\11 \ \ ..,-/-,.._ .,k,,,S,N:\ .1/4 __ I 4 . !,\ ,,,,,:it, \ NV:\,N,,\N:c:,'‘,Zt\::':i N s \\\N :''' St. ' - '' \\ 1 \\*\''\\\ 7 t-5 ' ¢,\\ _\.\\\\ \ ----- ----1 IS I V 4 iti E. is ''..::\ ..„1,,, ,r.. —- . ,-r: \\, \\\ ,,,, ri. __ 1 li A SUNSET i VI LL AGE ---1 4 // ] <iff: <N.-*/ l'i, ‘%.4','\\,t,\.\, i„ . NN‘L,. ,t,N,,\, :-.-1 r,r c,r.r,r,t �t v S Wt 4.4474,�+ 4 io. "WiaElini---- NELSON ROa!✓ r3�: �., -- w -- §�� • It . = T IA eL *r E , .,..ty LONG MONT. ri 1 N E 14• 1° 'r3 N PARK z' !N 't, 13t UNITI�V.2 Lw I -'%\. .. -ms's „ �1 t , /7( 0 c Y ---;-,7%------- k 1.,ik, . z ......---_- -. P �: I ii +►\ ''.\,.'1 �s -� /....� / Lfl'�'� ��i�17 iN�U�TRIL �; 0 '1 M W ■ at pt. l'•E6' L f i /tPL"..?�sAFJ7 'd`: .•! -, �I . tI 11] N ' f t & ' I i 1] IN 6 L'; . Q \O I QS 00 rj ., ;% - I I `+ u t CI X t.' II - t,! ,- r I / ,. [`.i r Qtr :,- ti - r •1 a c ce •, I. ,, 2 I g ti f ~. 1piliI* 1I * AAS S w I NI Witt, sl it N 4••?,I , MI ` '`•}IC,`..... -1-Nrr i r wry" ►c'f.i CJ`s Tr‘1=,". 1' 1 i) i JCC L k.p;, ct -ti f\ s t.. (.,r) p . dk, IV , ./i ,...„ . , rS.-7)5165 IL, t( ' (7 04 Z 4- -4-r V \;5 O ., \ 4\-----s1,---- .\-----------' E.-i 7 =--- __LiTe,.....) , n soy .47 viz WeLeo. � . 1 D 01 #.,---.0- ii, D . 49 C.) A ql : f- . ..."-- 47-----., c) 0 . P.-- , K '- --______: , 37 _ ---f--\ /,,„,, 4.,.... ,„ , 7i, . \\\\}..•+...•.... .... .... 173 \ NI 11-1 ) Jul , ,,,.._ 1 - - �''�- ir DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES r"-. , _}1�: ' fr' ;,,.-, ' Mi PHONE (303) 356-4000 EXT 400 ;.` 4, .st•n f, r �. • i 915 10TH STREET } i a` �; ® GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 , fit' s\, COLORADO June 20, 1978 . To Whom It May Concern : You are receiving a copy of this notification because your name appears as a surrounding property owner owning property within 500 feet of the proposed use. The Weld County Planning Commission will review a request from Flatiron Paving Cnmpnny for Special Use Permit to Amend SUP-260 : 74 :23 by ndrling an asphalt plant and a concrete batch plant Sr NE4j Sec. 30, T2N, R68W and on property described as follows : SW* NW*, Sec. 29 , T2N, R68W , location : 31i miles north and 1 mile east of Erie If you have any suggestions or objections , will you kindly notify us in writing before June 30, 1978 . The meeting by the Weld County Planning Commission is scheduled for July 18, 1978 This meeting will take place in the County Commissioners Hearing Room, first floor, Weld County Centennial Center , 915 10th Street, Greeley , Colorado, at 1 : 30 p.m. If you , have any questions concerning this matter or if you would like additional information , please contact the Department of' Planning Service:- office at 356-41OOO, F'xt . 404 .0 Ckik.,a_)_,. (---,\A„ .-A�:; 1 ';tnnI ZonIng Athninist ►•�1tIf, • W► ,.�M-'- ..ire" ��d'+imt'� _ _ ., i...,firy* .ii L .., ._ _ • September 8, 1978 Weld County Commissioners 915 10th St. Greeley, CO 80631 (par Commissioners: I am writing this letter today to discuss with you several items which I believe are immgortant for clarification and have been incorrectly under- stood by both the planning staff and the planning commission. First of all, in discussing the first page of staff recommendation, they address the fact that industrial land use in rural areas of the county should be limited to those industries which cannot suitably be located within a municipality. I would like to remind you that this phrase is uGnd throughout thu staff recommendation when in fact, all of the present rlatiron locations are very suitably located in industrial areas within municipalities. Therefore, I feel that the general premise on which staff recommendation is based is incorrect and the conclusions are also incorrect. I would also like to point out that throughout our booklet we have shown that the proposed development of an asphalt and concrete industrial site is not compatible with the surrounding area, not in harmony with the character of the neighborhood, and would have an adverse effect upon the future development of the area in regards to health, safety, and welfare of the present and future. Furthermore, nowhere in Flatirons presentation have they made a conclusive argument for the need of an additional plant. I feel that several members of the planning commission voted in favor of this industrialization of agricultural land on the basis that they felt this was economically the best way to develop the product. First of all, Flatiron has not factually shown that this is the case. They state that over eighty percent of their product is sold to the state, county, and city buyers. It has been brought to my attention that both the city and the county do not use Flatiron vehicles for acquisition of asphalt. In fact, the city of Longmont and the county use anywhere from two to ten dump truck loads of asphalt daily for patchwork crews that work continuously. There is no way that Flatiron can justify how savings can be passed on to the taxpayers if one considers that city and county trucks will have to drive out in the country to get Lhpi r asphalt products as opposed to going to the plant that is suitably located in the industrial zoned area of south Longmont. That is to say that the time of two men driving the truck from the city out to our area and back, far offsets in cost the very small percentage of savings that they can sell the asphalt for if they do not transfer the gravel as a raw product into their central distribution center. Flatiron may then argue that they would be happy to keep the Longmont plant open in addition. Then I would ask you to refer back to their application where they are talking about between twelve and nineteen men to operate the two proposed plants that they have applied for in the Nelson project. I would simply state that the overhead of nineteen men and all the equipment has to far offset the savings of taking the gravel back into a central distribution area. I would also like to remind you that central distribution areas where raw products are brought in and then distributed, are not a particularly new concept in 1 planning. I would be more than happy for us to observe the last two to three years of Flatirons records and discover where the majority of the concrete and asphalt has gone. I feel quite safe in saying that it has been distributed in and around the cities of Innclnrcrnl , Iiivnl,nu1, Itc'r I hoNrct, and I'unrlder. I would also, venture to say that less than one lxer cant of their total product has entered into Weld County in the last two years. In summary, I do not feel that we can assume that their project in the Nelson proposal will result in an ultimate savings to the taxpayers. I believe it will be financially beneficial for Flatiron Company alone and no one else. I would also like to briefly address their application for a concrete plant. There is no justification for this. From their own statements, they have told us that approximately five yards of material is the average load for a concrete truck. They have also told us that they can carry at least fifteen yards of gravel in their large gravel trucks. Assume, (and I feel quite safe to assume) , that the majority of the concrete will be delivered to the Boulder-Longmont development areas. If someone were to order fifteen yards of concrete, it would then require three trips from our area into either Boulder or Lonyiiint, as opposed to one trip of a fifteen yard gravel truck dispersing that gravel into a central plant and then dispersing it r1 em there .r r'uch shorter distance in thee smaller- concrete trucks. i f_, at the hearing, you would like me to mathematically set up an equation to show that the greater number of miles would be incurred by having three concrete trucks deliver concrete into the Ionguont area from the Nelson property as opposed to delivering one truck of gravel to the central area in Lonypont to be processed there and then delivered by three smaller trucks, I would be happy to do this for you. It seems quite obvious to me that there can be no economic advantage to the consumer in this, and in fact, the consumer is the one that pays for extra mileage and extra time at the job. The product price is always the same. In addition, the nature of a concrete plant would require its trucks to be parked at the site. It is quite inconceivable and totally uneconomical to have drivers go to Ionyitunt or Boulder to pick up their heavy-duty Mac concrete trucks and drive them at five o'clock in the morning out of the plant. It would obviously be appropriate to have their thirty-eight trucks parked out in the field. That would mean thirty-eight men coming to work, picking up their concrete trucks and driving for the day, leaving the trucks lxick ,it the site and doing lunnv. The concrete plant itself cicx-s have a bag house for dust protect ion when (-anent trucks deliver raw cement to the plant. This bag house protects dust dispersion during the transfer of raw cement. However, there is no bag house to prevent dust dispersion when the concrete is dumped into a concrete truck. All one has to do is visit a concrete plant site to observe a typical concrete truck being loaded with this product. There is a great deal of dust that develops. 1 1- 'l that- Flatiron cannot justi fy the noise, du:,t , mess, the parking of their vehicles, or the economics of having a concrete plant at the Nelson site. The asphalt plant- that they pro'o se also r)roduces xeri shatrle product. ,111O1 Incle(NI, ,r cer-lO111 f )rlion Of ihr:c will hi' rc'nrwc'cl hemp till' ,7itc' in the' :,,rnr` brig(` I I uc•I::, l hot wi I I renrwe I ho clr uvc•I . IlowovI'r , I rncc'II I I'inr rut you whether you move the gravel or the asphalt , somcuonc' has to pay the mileage from the Nelson site to whichever project it is delivered. Again, roving this into a central distribution center has made sense for many similar projects. I have also discussed the possibility and the reality of city, county, and state trucks, coming out, not in large fifteen-to-eighteen yard carrying vehicles, but rather in small dump trucks. So the traffic counts that Flatirons gives us of 160 loads is only the traffic count for their vehicles. They have not counted these other trucks coming into the plant to recieve the asphalt product, nor have they included their employee traffic to and from work. I would now like to briefly address the differences between a gravel operation alone and a gravel operation plus an asphalt and concrete plant. This is what the issue boils down to at the present time. A gravel pit would incorporate a bulldozer and a couple of front loaders scraping gravel off. Approximately one to three months a year, a crusher will come and crush gravel into usually three different aggretage sizes, depositing them in basically three large piles. Then the crusher moves on and that is the end of the gravel operation. For the remainder of the year gravel trucks come in and take fifteen to eighteen yards of gravel out in single loads. If an additional asphalt plant is added, this asphalt plant will run approximately nine to ten months a year and the other two months of the year a great deal of activity will be done on tearing equiprrlent down, re-working the equioiii nt, servicing the equipment, and building it back up. So now instead of having one crusher at the site for 2-3 months and then gone, we have one crusher working 2-3 months with the addition of an asphalt plant working ten months plus an additional 2 months of maintanence. Now if we add a concrete plant to this operation, this would require a second crusher. The second crusher would be working 12 months of the year to produce as m,nny ns seven different types of aggregates. These aggregates have to be “v,ci Illy designed for the concrete mixes. Alcti_t_iolially, there is a concrete batch plant that would work almost 12 months of the year. With this second crusher, we now have three different plants that are operating twelve months a year as opposed to one crusher working two to three months per year if it were only a gravel pit. Another spinoff then emerges because the second crusher develops multiple sizes of aggregates such as sand products. Now they have another separate product to sell, thus bringing pick-up trucks and dump trucks in to load. I might add that I am only an outsider looking at the business and I am sure there are other repugnent aspects to the addition of these two industrial plants at this site. All these would further deteroriate our quality of living by increasing site pollution, noise, dust pollution, and water pollution, not to mention the tremendously increased traffic load. F'urthezriure, an important concept in the traffic area would be that gravel is not a particularly perishable product. Both concrete and asphalt are perishable, and on government jobs, (which 80% of the work does include) , government contractors will not accept these products if they are over an hour and a half old frail the time of being loaded. That implies to me that the nature of traffic will be more rushed and more scurried than if gravel can be sold and moved at a more leisurely pace to be stockpiled in central distribution areas along the front range. All of this in my mind means that there is a greater danger to my family and to families that live in the Pleasant View area. In surimiry, these are only a few additional ideas as to why it is totally inappropriate to have this industrial sire in the Pleasant View area. I would appreciate any questions you nugllt have re(I,lydln(I I Ills letter Ix' brought out in the hearing on Sept. 13. I Icx)k forward to seeing you at that. t rne. 'Iil(' comprehensive plan on page 61, the second paia(Irapll, states that: "an industry, regardless of how attractive from a Lax base or economic outlook, must be not be allowed to prosper at the expense of the environmental well-being of the present arid future residents of the county." On the basis of this, and of all the data that you have accumulated from us, I feel that the law mandates that this site is not appropriate for the addition of an industrial product such as asphalt and concrete. I feel that if this was to occur, Flatiron would prosper at the expense of not only the residents of Pleasant View, but also at the expense o1 all of its custonurs. • y Tina]ly, I appreciate the time you have spent in reading this letter and also the time that you have spent researching this project and viewing our neighborhood. I would like to think that somehaow 'Veld County could come up with a comprehensive plan so that a plant like this, if needed (and the need I do question) , would be placed in a location close to federally funded highways that could accept the vast amount of increased traffic and would not be offensive to its surrounding neighbors. This could be only an industrial site where there are other simi]nr industrial businesses. It should be placed in a site that would be accessible to gravel, not for the next five or ten years, but for perhaps the next one hundred years-- a site like on Highway 119, in land already zoned industrial. This seems appropriate for a long range comprehensive plan. The benefits would not only be to a situation that is in harmony and incompatibility, but also the benefit would be in the time the neighbors like ourselves would have to spend in defending our neighborhood. If a comprehensive plan was developed, perhaps no other neighborhood would have to go through the ordeal that we have entered in to. It would also allow the commdssioners to get on with other work and they would not be faced with the same problem every three to five years each tine a new site was proposed by a new company. 'Ihaik you again for your attention. Sincerely, a i 2 / . Dale S: Johnson, M.D. A Mathematics to demonstrate mileage of gravel vs. gravel with concrete batch plant. Growth plans of Longmont is northwest. Nelson Site Site A Site B,existing plant X Site C Northwest Southeast X X X 7 (projected growtl 8.5 miles 3 miles of Longmont) If plant in Longmont: 'DOTAL One gravel truck 15 yds. 8.5 miles x 2 (R1') = 17 Delivers 15 yds. Job Site A (3 miles southeast) RT -= 6 X 3 ('Trunks) = 18 35 in 3' cemcnt j',l, ;;itr I; (.-ft plant) 0 0 17 trucks. ,iuh Site C (3 miles northwest) (RP) 6, X 3 ('Trucks) - 18 35 If plant centered at Nelson site: Gravel truck 15 yds No mileage 0 3 t. ucks for Job site A 8.5 - 3.0 = 5.5 x 2 (R'I') = 33 '5 yds. of cement. Job Site B 8.5 x 2 (RT) = 17 x 3 = 51 Job Site C 8.5 x 3.00 = 11.5 x 2 (►T) - 23 x 3 = 69 Note: At best plant site at Nelson site ends up at about same milage, at worst it results in twice the mileage to deliver a product, not to mention extra hours. This extra cost ill not result in a saving to the consumer. * Round Trip Sept. 7, 1978 Dear Weld County Commissioner Dunbar: With only a few days left until the haring, I felt I wanted to again stress my concern for the proposed Flatrion Asphalt and Concrete Batch plant at the Nelson sight north of Erie. (1) You observed the proposed sight for our yard -- directly to the East of the plant sight. As you perhaps noticed, the yard and surroundings weren't in the best of condition. We are in the process of purchasing a portion of this ranch from my father, Mr. Nelson. (We geld a lovely house in town -- in a neighborhood of homes averaging over $100,000 to have the money for the down payment on this ranch) . As stressed before, it is essential that we main- tain a good cattle operation here to make our payments on the place, and we f,el that an industrial permit for a plant located so close to cattle will do them more harm than good. (Already we have noticed the operator of a Flatirons scraper honking his horn at some cattle causing them to run -- as well as driving at a very fast speed.) , (2) If you permit this operation to go into effect , what are your guide lines for issuing additional industrial sights to others in the area for future construction? Once the permit has been issued , will it be easy to get other such permits in the area? (3)Do you have any long-range goals to keep agriculture areas for agriculture in this county? Or do you intend for it to become a highly industrialized area? (4) After the area is completed and if there are plans for commercializing the lake area (such as Barbor Ponds , or other type of recreational area) , what do you intend to do? We realize that we as farmers and cattle people cannot "pat you on the back" with favors such as that of what a large corporation can do, but here again, where are your guidelines? The people of the Pleasant View area are an unordinary bunch of people -- and not to be underestimated. They are an intelligent, concentious & concerned group of people who do not want a good agricultural area destroyed to industrialization. (I strongly feel that if my Dad were 35 years younger, he too would be in opposition to such a plant) . I ask each of you to give it very serious consideration -- and invite you to come out at any tine to ride horseback down the river and view the wildlife as it exists today. Consider, also that no one living adjacent to the sight is in favor of it , (with the possible exception of Stromquist and Olsons to the north -- both of whom do not live in visual contact of the plant , nor viii they be affected the the traffic , noise and pollution from the plant. Please give it your utmost consideration -- and do not allow the industrial permit for this area of Weld County. I tha you f r your time - 1/fic.ec( 4 cc,) irgin' Nelson Shaw Rt. #4 , ox 66 A-1 (Phone: 772-1297) Longmont, Colorado 80501 A-', n , ,N 1711—,> 91,_1/ 7 r/ DR. AND MRS. DIAAN E. McDONA F ► lace 1.44.146 -23 7075 N. EAS1 l ,"rJTY LINE Rom-) LONGMONT, COLORADO 80501 September 7, 1978 Mr. Ed Dunbar, Chairman Weld County Commissioner Weld County Centennial Center 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Mr. Dunbar: You have been given much information concerning the proposed Flatirons Company Asphalt and Concrete plant on a gravel lease on Weld County Road 16Z near Weld County Road 1. May we please urge you to consider the citizens in this agricultural/ residential area? There is no "industry" other than agriculture within many miles of the site in question. It seems a shame to intrude a noisy, smelly and high volume traffic industry into a quiet residential/agricultural neigh- borhood presently limited to the pursuit of raising farm products and children. This incursion would only lead to more industry and the total deterioration of an excellent neighborhood and a life style "hard-bought" and greatly cherished by the residents of Pleasant View. There are sites available, already industrial in nature, adjacent to major highways and remote from any residential area which should be utilized for the proposed asphalt/concrete operation. In the interests of protecting the environment, protecting residents' invest- ments, protecting the lives and safety of the neighborhood children and protecting the integrity and credibility of Weld County (Weld County guidelines dictate that industry must be "compatible" with the surrounding neighborhood. By no stretch of the imagination can an asphalt and concrete plant be considered compatible with green pastures, grazing cattle, laughing children, etc.) , may we please encourage you to deny the Flatirons Company application for an asphalt and concrete operation at the gravel excavation site near the intersection of Weld County Roads 1 and 16Z? Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Dr. Dean E. Mc onald DEM:pr f, 1' i r / ) ,/' rfc-D II I r 9 XI '�� 1 C 354 1 old ;u; I'd. 1G.', J.,auj' IOnt, .''! i'uj01 eptember 6, 1911 1 yi. June Le Inniark is. 1,d 1J;1fb.ar kir. Vic Jaccobucct 13r. is orm Carlson . r. Icon•T.rc9 I oe Si'; l )L l .tract , C , ,;! 31 Dear '%0nin1issioncr3: lease note the enclosed newspaper clil pin;; ;. If the sand and „ravel trucks alone do almost , 13,0..)0 da :a�,t� E.e..E year to county roads, can you, imai,ine how much ,zlo11cy it will coca, eld Couity taxpayers to maintain our rotul3 i! Sou were to permit Flatirons industry which ienoratcs four Li.rio a3 much traffic fro:n multi-ton trucks e Cots industry oolongs on a major state hiE'nt ay, n,..t on 1'LLT1L1J.J_].y used cc.;lnty roans. Our group has filed formal oupocitl.on to the is;;,uance of water and air pollution permits by the state Hoard of ';ealth. .:e ha7c i'eque3Lea a "naxinurn load" dc11uLi..n zLu':y LO cuu- ducted on Boulder Creek, as .,latiron alread, has six of the thirteen water roilution discharl;e remits now i^e,u 1, ..e thank ,ou for visiting our neiLB d:tarhood last week, and hope that you now understand i:liy Le believe so strongly in preserving : lea,sant View as al;riculJural land. . . (2eL{ " 1 L I °preserltative I ic''l; tnt. 1,.,-w t ('E;1 owl L'1 1/3/2 r� " �*, 06(Acy i'i,I' 1,(1I11tvb« 9.9 ` Flatiron Co . AA . .IninoKd . By SHARON MASSINGILL Camera Staff Writer The Boulder County Planning Commission Wednesday unanimously approved a request by Flatiron Sand and Gravel Co. to mine sand and gravel on a 97-acre site owned by Boulder Valley Farm west of North 95th Street. No opposition to the request was voiced at the commis- siRs public hearing, despite controversy surrenndiarg 4th nnriping operatic Uri munti,, —The�coommission's approval carries with it several conditions, including requirements that Flatiron meet air, water and noise standards,monitor the effects of the mine on nearby wildlife, and keep night lighting within a certain level. Mining would be completed in 1990,. and the land, currently pasture land, would be restored with two lakes created on the property. Reclamation would be complete by 1992,or 1995 at the latest. Public Hearings Set ' The mining permit must still be approved by the Boulder County Commissioners who will hold a public hearing on the request in the next month. The mine would be located just to the east of the company's White Rocks mine which sparked a lawsuit against the County Commissioners when it was approved. -• Located near Boulder Creek, the proposed mining operation initially drew concerns from'environmentalists because the site contains a critical wildlife habitat, with a heron rookery only one-half mile from the proposed mine. But the Colorado Division of Wildlife and the county Parks and Open Space staff determined that the mining operations, following the mandated conditions, "will have '. no significant, permanentimpact" on the wildlife habitat in the area. . Barbara Bryan of the planning staff outlined the staff's recommendations, that were accepted by the commission, saying that Flatiron had agreed to monitor the wildlife in the area throughout the mining and take necessary steps to remedy any adverse effects. • Noise Limits Stressed She said the noise level will also have to be kept within ' lire Lts ao ar not to he damaging to the heron population. Ed McDowell, president of Flatiron, said the company will"do our darnedest to mitigate it" if any hazards occur • to the wildlife habitat. Martha Weiser, whose property adjoins the mining site, said she generally supported the request, but suggested that if the mining is found to be detrimental to the wildlife, "the operations stop" until the problems can be solved. _„Mitigating measures and studies are not enough.__.., Lapproved by the commissioners, the mining operation remove 1.5 million tons of sand and gravel from the in stages to be completed in 1990. Jdinfnst. that will h six to 13 feet deep, would be done from October ugh February eachear`' bou r rcent ofthe hauling from the mine would be ng the summer and fall. ryan said a study bey the Public Works Department elpded.tbat."n „datriaae to_couu�roads (from the: ks haulipg,sagd,and gravel) will-beI12,,9a�er yearthe next 11 years." .,x..0,1 • CA v ,� I.B¢ t3 p. ,i,' 'cwt..f.°.7 d�.�v�•wYs + Y 0 M'it-i. -•64 b 411 f fin•. - tit �a78' ,O „ ggTi,. .25 V " [ . $53r� . o 3 O to G t WO e , 1Tr'r 4rftle c79 t'tt1. i t`k?Pligli4d4� �, o4) C �N w+• G CA 7.14 .3-. Q. -O as • Vm ...2.191.1 k� arol • ° v U° . III � • e;4, i s: .,;r�� L, r' ' r deiw'�+. rtl ,� t 00 p O O..Z.YC. '., '`e, 'a' ,i wk=s: iw"•,r.�._a,td1144,' :fir,,+^•11"4 14 ZI Cl 4Pi4;1 w+-� A .t 1O. iii, o m.. O al ma b >' 1 WWII .41.12 Atige4iftli] ifht° O I C INN* zaoca ono ;'mil imm4 CWIRgStgc18° I*O ,, . A f`: R,• , `1 . _ __ ______ ___ 17.— _ "d,7't`� • -+; .� r ,�,. ° t , .o. �B •F •r•x _ `.4 - r ),1?y,4 {{ t1.•.` y 9 '.r. , . .rtw • . , • ` , , 1". �, ,: -,5 • '� .. .'� j I '1 ' e•. • ,4r, ,.1 [ '~'y '.',sY.. €ry r.a t,,,r ,I„ ;v s 'e'�•'- r i e ' . -•�•, 'dr ;d k r ..e, +r - M ,d: •'r --crn' -- o• ?;+Sti._ s• -f- u .," ?'vr ov ..e,„, _ t`.. . .,r a ry i,i, i'1,• �,1 m .4, �y1 oepteei'ier 5, 1976 +eld County Com-!issioners \ eld Co . Centennial Center 915 10th btreet Greeley, Color-do 80631 Commissi oncr� : be are very much against your `ranting Flatirons special use permits for concrete and asphalt plants on the iJelaon property in our i.rea. We feel that Flatirons have not explained to the residents the need for another plant. be understand that they are closing an asphalt plant in Loveland and are O Ve r turning their LonKmont plantAto Goldens . If they can close two plants why the need for another in the area. thlso if Flatirons is to get the special use permits shat is to stop other companies from lining the river bottom? Is it County plans to industrialize all the sand and gravel areas? Accnrding to newspaper articles eld County ' s ; and and gravel pits have been closed because they don' t meet state standards . Will Flatirons be required to meet county or state regulations? Flatirons is going to meet their competitors price whether or not they mix their product on the spot or haul it. Unless the county plans to put asphalt un the county ' s roads west of Interstate ',25 and south of hiwuy 119, we see nothing that the county or Flatirons is doing for our area. '_ur tax base will be spent patching the hiwa;, that Flatiro .s tires . be will be Fettin heavy track traffic that our roads are not made for. Also it will incrases our noise pollution. With two areas already zoned industrial , we don' t see need for more . Riles and regulations are of no use if they are ,iot enf,.rced. be are the forgotten part of the county. 'incercly • ai/J/e2c?,> qc rt�t JO, A.-r-C4--"-'1/ " J;4-1 /QCsL Ce � 11, "' . \l J 1, ?t r L 197 Route 2, PDX 325 Longmont, Colorado 80501 GFiuELLY• coLo. September 4, 1978 Weld County Commissioners 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Commissioners, As landowners bordering the proposed asphalt and concrete plant by Flatiron Paving and Gravel Company we are seriously concerned. Throughout the long hearings and proposals pertaining to this industrial construction, Flatirons has stressed that they are requesting a special use Permit, not industrial zoning. Special use signifies to our understanding a special permit for use during a limited amount of time. Yet Ed McDowell, vice president of Flatiron Co. , states in the enclosed article that "Flatiron had made an effort to negotiate with Mrs. John Lamar, who owns industrially zoned land in Pleasant View area, but had had no success." Flatiron has publically stated in this' article that their intention is not a special use permit, but a large industrial complex. Ed McDowell also states that this area is ideal because it is away from sub- divisions. This is rural, agriculture land with rural dirt roads and secondary paved roads. These roans have no shoulders and no place for children to go for safety to get away from the dozens of trucks that will pass by. We hope it will not take the death of one of our precious children for someone to admit that these roads are not designed for industrial use. These roads get the min- imum of maintenance year round, if any, and we have not seen any county plans or Flatiron plans to upgrade these roads to carry this industrial traffic and safe- guard the local residents and especially these children. Flatiron Company has stated that they plan on mining the gravel all along Boulder Creek, north to Highway 119. Therefore, it seems logical that the best place for this industrial complex is along a State owned and maintained 4 lane highway near the city dump and rendering plant. Flatiron says that this land is not suitable. Since Flatirons plans to eventually mine the gravel up to Highway 119, we teel that that location is very suitable for the industrial com- plex they have planned. It seems obvious to us that Flatiron Co. wants this special use permit now to gain access to the industrial zoned land in Pleasant View to build a large, permanent industrial complex. Please consider these points when you make this very important decision on September 13th. We understand that Flatirons has a permit to mine the gravel from this area, but they have also agreed to reclaim this land back to the precious farm land that it is now. America cannot continue to be the strong country that it is now if all our farm land becomes highways, subdivisions., and asphalt plants, Sincerely, ( K('' -I/41,47 Mr. & Mrs. Ronald F. Hankins R ugut.;t 270 i'Y/ ' did County Commisui:mars 915 ". 1lth n.truet fM1i.At en tiE d Es, •rtsiama z ,4e 100k toreara to your vtesing Jvr neighbrh, d this T urd de-40 44e also feel the nes4 to share J ur teeling4 Lhout who sill ACC0n944%$ 1A10 la b4,1 then we 1.1'4104 from a seitohbor of the latent ci7 z'l.a tirqxs. we contacted hr. }Iona tJ tiad out where to etart. I i Own* cJsV nation with inn Johni4no he toll us to 1e4.nt until. Flatiron's 41:411C 4i34 e:er r+w t 1y 01ed. g . suggeut- ed that organizingcur neighborhood and informing neighbors wools be unduly *raing ev.- -ane. If we h fz114weil hi u directions, es 'e ad AAlt hmmre had tiM to lire,are our presentation for the a-i.s 3ewtiesiux ZecomAlysi we delacited over 5* h. urer or Aixties and ;a cons .derible amountot a iney tc put together our vent- ed booklet 4f kleastant "Jtew. tiva ?io1 n told us to have Coiiea 4f it to him by the morning of July 3'1 for dintributionA�s y t rls� m*ion asabsri, �e lido Mat 11f the On me - bezt lid not receive. tit until the morning of the hearing (July 16). but we enticed that rIsttrca re-ore+eent .tives het theca la thikir VD04*0410As Thirdly 4AriAS 001ftral meetings with lir. :ism, we requested cil.re*tiJn tn Jur -opi eit an attempts He atx s we d thnt cur a jor eftf rt eh u1' atteck the e .r ,te tram tht zoning ran: lotion that ham reference to "a a,utibi.lit ' zind r'h;reuse, :yid. 44eovers we wore tremea#zJu&y *hocked to hear Tom HQaxz rend ekppr val 1,00 04 OA CObl li ae 'with the ti ct ;:Jutlty tea• v rehen, ,vw a Commissioners, se hod never he'ri ,,of the .old d :;.aunty mprehanelve Alen. L1e out told uit t .v.t it +exi rated ; r le c oiilrs : in the issues** 4 ' ,+aaica V' .`ermit. L'ecause 9f these facts, is feel th .t ter eons reAso Tom ,c1Jun is blasted i:s thla tees and we hope th=lt you will kee.4; this: in mind when he s 3eeeiia two hours with ,you during y:aur trie to .'1 &5a+*y is View, K 1v s :ae note the 4.T.'tt�%ched nd.�Y. , e ti u s' L thzit��; eluded tii their ';r@aeuti3,tto$ �, �1��ihyi�in�dlt�{Ant �! *� ► Yae ve ar'e 7!w7 here Ant ,..;Ay '�uA e+� wL� lias �Thee* mire. entetives It flotirqu o : 1"r ey tinviy sit tQ ingrown., their ,ire ti.t t the expense or , tztid i;Quaty realism end we Awl t,b. t totaly unutees lt; ble. =lads a.t View r*rxia+*ftl ;.41C. August 23, 1978 Ms. June dteinmark ' ' � r'1!Itrna,c�� r. Vic Jaccobucci � .-'r_ • Hr. Leonard Roe _ • Mr. t;orm Carlson Mr. 10th�Street r; J i9i8' 11 J 95J Greely, Co. 80501 G rL�t�,r coin. Commissioners: Please read the enclosed newspaper clippings from our local paper. The proposed industrialization of our neighborhood by Flatiorn would be for the benefit of Boulder County and its residents. The permit to extract gravel from Boulder Valley Farm is just southwest of our area. At that site, there does not exist a rural residential neighborhood such as ours, and the tonage of minerals is great. WHY DOESN'T FLATIORN PUT THEIR ASPHALT AND CONCRETE PLANTS THERE? The Planning Commission recommends against a sewage treatment plant at the junction of Highway 52 and County Line Road. How can they then say that heavy industry is compatible one mile north , in as populated an area? This is SPOT ZONING, and it has no more place here than it does in a subdivision of Greely. The Weld County Comprehensive Plan states (p. 63), "An industry, REGARDLESS of how attractive from a tax base and economic outlook, MU5r NOT be allowed to prosper at the expense of the enviornriental well being of the present and future residents of the county." The only part of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan that the Planning Commission referred to in their recommendation is that which states "rural industrial devel- opment should be encouraged only when the industry is agriculturally oriented or requires a physical enviornment that cannot reasonably be furnished in a munici- pality." These proposed plants, though we don't feel Flatiorn has shown a NEED for them (as required in the zoning resolution), can very well be built in the municipality of Longmont near state highways. Please consider the industrial zoned sites along Highway 119 just east of town, not to mention those available sites south, west, and north of Longmont. Thank You. Respectfully, Pleasant View Residents LONGMONT DAILY TIMES.CALL' THURSDAY,AUG 17,197 5 ®aPy`irl-rizs ,Ale.aertel,,-r •.-..zt1��e.w3,, ..t69.43tat 041iv "vr: .ti;g Cou panel ,. over) 19 prcposec. , �' avet mine By TIM ALGER "I'm still trying to figure out what they BOULDER—Unanimous approval was (plaintiffs)want." granted Wednesday by the Boulder County" The mining proposal approved by the Planning Commission for a proposed sand planning commission Wednesday calls for and gravel mining operation which has the creation of two permanent lakes on the been the belle fa-a laweuit over t::c c:, 'y C^o,;srty by 1..., ,:;s,n ,..11—'1 :,f comprehensive plan. gravel and sand is completed. After lengthy discussion, the commis- Actual mining would take place from Oc- sion sent the application bi(latiroji:Sand tober to February each year, when a • , and Gravel Cu. for a mine on the Boulder crusher would be located at the site. Dur- ::- Valley Farm property_west of 95th Street ing the spring and summer months, the •• to the county commissioners for con- natural water level would be allowed to '• sideration. , rise,creating temporary ponds in the min- ' The company hopes to strip mine a 99- ing pits. acre parcel on Boulder Creek between 1978 After each stage of the mining process is • and 1990, removing approximately complete, reclamation will begin, in- I,535,000 tom of sand and graveL eluding land contouring and seeding. On May 5, Flatiron, Boulder Valley According to the county planning staff, Farm Inc. and Boulder Valley Farm's the Colorado Division of Wildlife feels owners, Donald and Rosalie Culver, filed "there should be no permanent damage to • suit against the county board of commis- wildlife habitat ... and the• reclamation sinners because the mine site was included plan may very well increase the value of • in an area marked "critical wildlife the site as a wildlife area." ' habitat" on the Boulder County' Com- Flatiron, planner Barbara Bryan told prehensive Plan. the planning commission, has agreed to preserve all mature trees on the property Flatiron had already signed a contract with the exception of two. to mine the property and applied for a Bryan said Flatiron will monitor ground special use permit before the commis- water levels to avoid removing ground stoners approved the comprehensive plan water from trees and grass when the min- April 6. lag site Is drained and provide aerial According to the plan, a heron breeding photographs showing the progress of the •' area exists on Boulder Creek one-half mile raining operation at the end of each mining east of the proposed main(t,perations. season. The complaint filed by f latiron,Bc ulti,e Each year Flatiron will also provide the Valley Farm and the Culvers claims the county with a report on the status of the . commissioners improperly failed to in- heron population,Bryan said. "Should the elude the known gravel reserves in the heron population be adversely affected,in area in the plan's mineral resource map. the opinion of Boulder County,"she added, • Meanwhile, the complaint adds, "the "additional investigation will be im- ' record (of the plan hearings) reflects no mediately initiated by the applicant to • evidence introduced before the commis- determine probable cause and appropriate stoners showing that mining activities on mitigating measure:,to be instituted." the property .could endanger significant Although there was some discussion • 'dlife habilot or a wildlife species." over whether Flatiron should halt opera- [he county attorney's office has since Lions if the herons were found "affected," filed for dismissal of the suit,but no action the commission did not include such a pro- has been taken by the sour is According to vision in the proposal when it was approv- Assistant County Attorney Ann Itaisch, ed with a 4-to-0 vote. m sr - - . . — - lI:.'i•j',' , i i4,'"M At ,;„,,40,,t,.^ --, ,.Y,..ti , .r ', % a I(leYf) T, ;,l"`C ,ry1 nR,-. t _ .1 ._ cA-4 ' ' ''' K l ' "Il i t.,rd 1 '' ''''''''' i4'""=°� 4 �; " ., E" ',Wit' .LC' + u�,° t9u rs ''lry .:f; ti f ?--I--1 4tt I G J `j Lea.31 01 , -6 O p 14- 1:vit,Ile t" s '1 ti 1 .,' gfl' ilH11dil1w- ---Lv • ogE ..., . _, -p, ..rw.. .4 ;7J.>!4 l'.g 0 VA , 1.--1-c' N'§ qhfu) i4°. ,'" ,s.T. ; fl; s ty t, y T1'g c)S; u•v W F' is V 44 �q? O tj C �7{ cr, 4 ! flR1 c7 ri W b Lbw 2 .a ' 2 O Ig t 6:O '8' - Li 0 _ O -O1 i° cqtr' +e at .L''' t.. Q. a�.�s a+ :� ;,, co OD 00.5. 4,ZA2 ar i O O •O 1; N Ctl$17 w >,s L, v r w u! y ud l q �p �.� W� G7 CCU � 8 � O � � Fn � p�� y E = J. L J CM[G y C7. N t2i rK ;;I p � o � row -s'5 g Fi- x, HU 3 '"a ii o aU 341 N 2 61io, �, m is ® _`— . e ro 14�w -2 ayS4 2 .m a a� r�" QJ o E. 3 u co', . ... o'3r B il 2 Ca: a N. ' •n �. o[ ,, s aai u,w c;co co1rn z 1 = w .O Z.'> W a c.„, p 8 co Mtn ba� o a, 3: QpalQl5 6 a' 5 j ,�C^ a u 00 It � 1 lI� '11'x,' ` l!%,, ,%r _,,..) A.2:i ilic i �n 1 J, ,.›.------ -CO-" �y tti August 21, 197E Ers. June Steinmark i.r. Leonard hoe lir. Vic J:iccobucci iur. Ed Dunbar Ur. Norm Carlson 915 10th Street Greeley, CJ 60631 Gentlemen and is. Steinmark: I am hichly concerned about your views of allowing heavy industry to intrude upon riral residential ne i dhborhoods and agricultural land. flowing Flatiron to encroach upon the neighborhood of pleasant View is setting a horrible precedent for held County. The Veld County /oning Resolution states that "zoning makes pos- sible the safeguarding of residential areas." please remember that you have limited the density of our neighborhood by the 35 acre and 60 acre minimum p.,rchaso. The zoning resolution further states that cur "property values are protected since uses which would lessen values are not allowed in areas where conflict would occur." Real estate peple and appraisers have told me that our present value will decrease 5-15/t with industry next door. When peonle spend ,,150,0U0, they don't want to live in Commerce City. This proposal by Flatiron is a serious threat to the public health, safety, and welfare of our neighborhood. Furthermore, it is a test case for Weld County. If heavy industry is compatible here, where isn't it compatible? Respectfully, B-7)- Li 1tE qt.-Let K3e1)1,____- Lynn Jo1Lisun /9. n A hh;-, 01.79/(2r) r' .� 4 , Itugu$t 16, 19711 ,`'ire. Juno ,atainra:►rk hr. Leonard hoe ..r. Vic J.iccobucci ir. ,..d Junbttr r. hora Carlson }15 10th .jircot Urceley, t„) 8')631 wontle, n utit3 . *Ai I.ould like you to know taint we appreciate the concerns of the Plannin tm Li cion ira their desire to fight inflation, oispscially in held County. what guarantee do we nave that flatiron would lower their prices it you ,Ive twat the tronandous eccrto is advantaeo of processing their product ut the site? nbsolut elx none. iron a ' business standpoint, u) taut:Lost to you Out 'latiren trL11 ronai.' coirc- petit;ive with the rest of Lice: asphalt raa1d concrete companies its the area—if trtoy didn't, they would put them out of business. "o allow- ing theta to industa•ialitua our nci'hburtiood would sirvly be increasing, it tiran t'I f--ut the exptns a az 1,Yis.: oualit_ of li i e if' h:t<ndredu of 4,eld 4uuntti residents. 1'urthcsrmore, ,latiron is, and has boon, h uliut; tt,c:ir x-4u Yiutorial to plants f.n Longiamt. .n.i doLd lee. tthi.ti to en a.ct;c,)Ler1 p. t of the tracs, because Larimer and tlouldor Cauntiau do not peri.d t asphalt and concrete plants on ai •icultarally l.+a,sd• it is 1th .V IT and bulon,;:a in en industrial zone. ;Alen you view our net thborhood on tutu 3101, rde.esc:--won't you take an extra 15 minutes to view the two available otter a1orltb Wit. ,ruin and boulder Jrueko that are zoned induatriali' ereanontly in tnuwe areas you'll finds Ate I - .Loncpont hhende ing Wait 6uid the i.aajt ont :,unitary Landfill aitc 2 - Longmont .iOwage Treatment 4•uto :'ai.vac;o lard, i'oundry, t.o-Up, eugar r.ictory at theoe eit o, haptha1t ..)atch and heady-4,1.x ,:encreto i'1ants are: 1. Coipatible wittt the surrounding area. 2. In harnony with tns character of the not t hborttood. 3. bo not advuruly affect the itulidiate arca. L. 1)o not advureuly of teot the future dovelopn.ens of the emu. 5. be not jeopardize titu heath, safety, and i.elf4re of the in- habitants (because there are no homes in these indurtrial zones except at Lcng ont isendorintr, wi,sre the people ch„hoeo to live there. 4)Z) �%c d/44y _ Z _ }ono of us at t'leauant View clause to live next to industry-- rather the opposaitu is true. +,o *curated luny; and t4=ird fur our country news, and paid ,s i,rcau.um price for tram. :•BpItLal.t end cc:oruto p1:xnte Ore no mono c),i) t1hlo with our homes them they *re with your*. ileopectf'u11y'', t leasunt View LoLi(icnts 7 f /;v14 -4,,o .4)/174-1 -1-?" ,k/t- /9 v- Pa_ve. a- gvx ,wnitii . i.e6,,raeetz 0.-76e4d , /t4 a"-1-6/ -& (z,L /-u.-66)ta /Y'1 0 „aAtA-- rs Q At6 idLe,i_E rynze4-;, 16/7L-45-ye-e--n- pra--/--;4;)t Ve.„7//kaiya, JUL 1978 (,) RECEIVED T Weld Canny Planning Camplt w A �`1` Lam Ot 6 July 23, 1978 Dear Weld County Planning Commission Members: The residents of Pleasant View would like to clarify a few things pertinent to the hearing July 18th. 1. TRAFFIC - The average traffic on Road 16₹ during an eight hour weekday is 51 vehicles. Flatiron' s daily estimates include 160 haul trips (which is 320 trucks) . Then consider asphalt/concrete industry employees, truck drivers coming to and from work, oil and cement trucks, other gravel company trucks and we see 400 vehicles as a conservative estimate. This is a 900% increase and surely not "compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and in harmony with existing agricul- tural uses". 2. SAND/GRAVI T, OPERATION VS. ASPHALT/CONCRETE - We were a reasonable community in 1974 and although concerned about a gravel permit, did not oppose it because of the need for the extraction of minerals. Now we feel that because of our agree- able nature, Mr. Nelson and Flatiron are taking advantage of us by trying to impose their heavy industry upon us. We request that you make unplanned visits to Flatiron plants. Ft. Collins offers a perfect example of the difference between gravel extrac- tion and the industry because the operations are seated on oppo- site sides of the road. We have seen the sand/gravel operation as fairly low-keyed with the majority of the work done in winter months when we spend most of our time indoors. The asphalt/conc- rete plants, on the other hand, are bustling with activity from dawn to dusk during spring, summer and fall - exactly when we' re enjoying our peaceful, quiet, non-polluted environment. 3. ALTERNATIVE SITES - Although Ms. Norton indicated that this was not a present concern, we feel that it warrants considera- tion since a refusal of a special use permit here might cause Commission members to feel that they' ve left Flatiron "up in the air". This is not the case. Flatiron is presently working to acquire Mr. Olsen' s land just north of Mr. Nelson' s site. They tried to buy John Lamar' s land south of the site two weeks before his death in June. We have heard that they might buy the Turnpike gravel operation at the junction of Highway 52 and County Line. They have just signed leases with Boulder Valley Farm southwest of the site. They are simply folLowing the gravel up Boulder Creek and St. \Train Creek. A couple of miles up Moulder Creek, at the junction with Highway 119, sits the Longmont Sanitary Landfill and the Longmont Rendering plant. de feel that the concrete and asphalt plants would be much more "compatible and in harmony with the character of these areas" than in our rural residential neighborhood. Also, a few miles northwest of the pronosed site, along St. Vrain Creek, sits the Longmont City Sewage Plant, the Great Vlestern Sugar Factory Weld County Planning -2- July 23, 1978 Commission Members and several auto salvage yards. This land is zoned industrial and acreage exists for future use. These places are much more in harmony with the nature of an asphalt and concrete plant. 4. PRESENT SITES - We question the need for additional plants and we don' t think that Flatiron has proven one. Flatiron has operations in Greeley, Ft. Collins, Loveland, Longmont and Boulder which serve the front range nicely. We understand that if permitted to use the Nelson property for industry, they plan to close down the Longmont plant and move here. Please note that NONE of these other plants is in the center of an agricul- tural area. They co-exist much better with like industries, as exampled: Ft. Collins - Teledyne, feed lots, commercial nursery. Greeley - Of course, you' re aware of the environment there. Loveland - Radio' tower, fairgrounds, Hewlett Packard, junkyard. Longmont - Golden Concrete, industrial park. Boulder - City waste water treatment plant, Colorado Brick, Boulder Ready-Mix, Public Service Company. 5. POLLUTION - Our figures are from the Colorado State Health Department in Denver. A. Hydrocarbons: Cars 4 gr./mi. , diesel trucks 8.1 gr./mi. From the plant site down County Line Road to Highway 52 (3 miles) they are increasing the level 1700%. B. Carbon monoxide: Car 50 gr./mi. , diesel truck 11G gr./mi . For the same distance, the additional truck traffic increases the level approximately 400%. C. Noise: Flatiron would adhere only to those levels for heavy industry. But this is not on industrial area--it is an area full of wildlife and we highly value hearing nothing. Flatiron' s interpretation of the Colorado State Noise Act is incorrect as noted in the July 18 hearing. D. There is nothing you can do to take away the ugliness of an asphalt and concrete plant or the unsightliness of diesel smoke spewing from hundreds of trucks. Please feel free to stand in any of our yards and try to imagine what we would be forced to view. Would any of you Commission members choose to live next to this industry? Neither Mr. Nelson nor the Flatiron staff do. 'Why, then, do they think that it would be appropriate for us? E. The smell of heavy industry and the fumes of their trucks is nauseous and there is no way to remove it or buffer it. Please remember Dr. Johnson' s remarks on health and his reference to the Report on Pollution made to the Governor. 6. We feel that it is important to state that there are numer- ous families in the area that feel that they would be forced out if this industry were permitted. We do not want to leave Pleasant View, but if you take away 90% of our reasons for living here, we would be forced to. Our appraisers have told us that we could expect a decrease in price from 5 to 12% and the "marketability" (number of people who would even consider living next to industry) will decrease drastically. Planning Commission Members: This type of journalism is very discouraging to us as individuals. 8 DAILY CAMERA Tuesday, July 18, 1978 Boulder County Log , We o V my t 1. Does the planning staff have the P g Concrete Plant Site authority to tell newspapers what the commission will do? "¢ Honn said that, should Commission will recommend plant approval be granted by 2- The Boulder County Commissioners not approval today of a proposed the Weld County Commis- only have opposed the traffic route \gasphal1-and a concrete batch stoners after a public hear- but they also oppose the industrial- plant to be built by the Flati- ing today, Flatirons and the iazation of agricultural land and spot rons Co. just north of High- county planning staff would zoning--concrete and asphalt plants way 52 on Boulder's east' "identify the most favorable County Lai Road. constitute HEAVY INDUSTRY and they don `"Tom none,zoning adminis- traffic patterns" and then belong in agricultural areas. trator for the planning coin- work out agreements with the Boulder commissioners if conditional upon mission, said p�Flatirons truck traffic uses the Boul-roval is 3. We feel that Mr. Honn's attitude is wa and the Weld County Com- der road. out of line. We have dedicated a missioners-developing a sep- tremendous amount of time and effort i „ grate agreement on road I would have to assume," the last few months, and we don't feel "construction and mainte- H°� said, in answer to who that sanet g hin like this should be ++ • would pay for road construe- n Wear and tear on the roads tion and maintenance, "that railroaded throught by Flatirons, Honn concerned the Boulder Coun- (Flatirons) probably will or anyone else. ty Commissioners, because; (pick up some of the costs). the county maintains the It could be as much as 100 east County Line Road by percent and as little as 50 agreement with Weld Coun- percent." ty. Last week the Boulder commissioners told Weld County they would ose the Flatiron plant oad agreements co no a re- negotiated. 1 , , ' pz,;, G -,z « ,r / /& / fg‘ tt 61/7.6y,„:7 7f-4 , r7/ 9-Lezei /.4z &m v � C,ou 3- /6 , A 4 - E 2°4 7,Zd/ laet /*z a-y," zt/LA,2_efe, - ya-4 Yv,e4/e .d.6e,y-11 izaj. -e-e-r- LZcl 270-;LI -(=i1 / 4 g-w-1 ,f-ea 41:71 •Yr/e' Z/7/e"5 i2-1/157Gif � ,v2e4 -z% Ce ‘ C C: eWS__ '`,6g'tdr/4, h JUL 1978 5'�, c71-) RECE1VED N lNeld CHM i Rowing Cometissioe �sQ64?2 Z��,�titi LZ Z5 Ovvv/�-G F 7/ 9 Nt.lig8 // c RECEIVED J„ W o b 3 / N tdi ttni44(r,' Smut COSIISOI \AH P5L-J--/ a CLL- LU'-(t-Il hi-L_ AN& •jd . L.-IL I (g-tA-- q-)P- &)L- &' s-ALA-4 t-jta- Q-6L";(1 /(LO-at--J Ar-s-J2- It%2_ e_ fc) tk -q,„ XL-4.6,7 - 7770 Weld Co.Rd.1 ' July , 1978 Weld County Centennial Center 915 10th Street ' Greeley , Co brado 80631 JUL ' 197.8 1r County Commissioners: GREELEY,coL.o. As residents of the area affected by Flatirons proposed asphalt and concrete plants, we are not in favor of granting them industrial zoning permits. We understand that there is already 5 acres in the area already zoned for ths type of business, and feel that we donot need to industrializ:.! any- more that close. We donot see why with plants in Longmont and Boulder , why Flatiron needs an other plant so close. At Flatirons meeting, we got the impression that all we will get out of this venture is bad r‘:,ads, truck traffic, and higher liability, so the rest of the area can have cheaper concrete and asphalt; which will be used elsewhere. Lower speed limits are no good without enforcement. We will have to watch for the trucks as the truck drivers will be proctected by the signs you'll allow to be put up. True they will bring in a lot of taxes for the county, but will it be spent in this part of the county2 Sincerely j 1 /) �"rC!�e i V . _ . 7770 ueld County Rd 1 July 3, 197 1lannin€ and Lonin meld County Centennial Center 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado L05_51 Le.'r b rs; ;;e do not feel that there is need for more industrial zoning in our area. we understand that is already 5 acres zoned for this purzose and would not like to sec the whole area zoned industrial . . Flatirons is pro,:.osing to put as shalt and concrete plant: on 'f,e feel that if Llatirons needs industrialized zoning, the can w r1 it out t.ith the present owners of the co zoned area. Also with plants in Lon-mont and oulcl er, we don' t fool that they(Flatirons) need another SO close. ore already have a bad intersection at County i,,oad 1 and 1TiChwcty 52 ;-itbout addinC 150 trucks a day. Froio cur oeeting the with Flatirons, we ,et^iznprescion that all we cot in return for having Flatirons on �eulder Creek is bad roads, heavy truck traffic and hi€her liability. For cight or ten hours a day we will have }loisy and smelly tracks using the highway. Dave �Io�r i:e`aa quiet nei, hborhood. i one of the speakers at Flat- irons meeting would be willinf; to live- next to their plant. . 5inc o.. ely 2.34c�� I. JUL 1978 roF RECEIVED Wetd CoUdty � Plank {<- i` g COMMISStO© • c�`�et)k1UZ6 b\L' JA.A,,Ak (.9 Fe / 9 �8 (V:\ 7c5u) JUN 1978 Cu-�,Q.Co //�� 6 � l Weld Couotp O. s �, RECEIVED / /S /O 4 R a� At t,„/ c�-' punning Commissioe.Alkttt , O6,ato,u ./ -Pt46 /eatit) ' 1‹.) -f-L90/644 4 ./LCt-k)itdc4- r") - 9 7e co-)-„tet .A2e) 4/cutLet_e) tou, / -e,(4,1.vti 0444)42 Quo.. 013 aty2-LiAL,71 /eL-viD 0790-4i)(1.4)1,0 Z-4) /de.) Apktce) Cb4-b /6,(44,na) de) t,44,t,LOtAL6. :(44)5,Ai) ALI4A-Let /64)I'n) itie€-) 010L41,det„iczA440 eaitlitc& 4a-4-0 /0-4441/ Wel-Lt40 AA-k46,6I/0 CoLcT4) (3t Mfaitec413 latLaJ (-U144-6 C(kh0C,811 wo_ca,e9,&f _k,,Adjej r zit,„ ��r�� -" wW nn ^^ lit,4 I ) atitA,62?, Ayt n t t "kkteo-e ei26a,„,,D .ttAtt,t."4A % J htdA4^-,e,g44-o,44_e), /(-ehte4 eLvc) 0,utt,cuke,8 iatL4t44 -12et a41,6441, "eYatetkn.e4te• Alietz.0.144, 6 xixPiefrok ic,444,6? . , e Ae_L&,,t.,) APAmii&c614 )auZ az V, ) 4-(4-.O cz ,,D .(04,4„ /rie.cei 4Ke- AL6-&44„1 AA.LAZ,09 ia .,,,e.d.„ ,a ,r„,h,„ k 2„ci26 neL-71_,e.i.t. V-6,4tJ c viz Z a,< 4iccA76,6 ,ea .tio a 4 4 a 10,e0„y4 0,,O QI,Qt.to iivutbeyLLE /d44ccazia,4,4, 71.6toiatatit4c.4 a & /60Z - -el44.e J- c) a) 4/3444uia7a 0-utb.6,4 -°''' )'n .-w-fre,,,Q m4A4a t xL}A18, /qcf .6 a k ,,. hta .t 4,./;du loit,.&-z/at,„ lie ot t,t,,46,0,,,,, actu 60-04.,& icco /01,(24, 446 yit,, ,6, a,K49 itkJ 7-P,Q_ re,e) utn ,,, /0A,y3Aup 4 - -,160.ce 4.1 -.O. 4(..z( o,LDI„eazi, 4 A. 4Qe_L, �: ao L,>(eArKai've yevcrLoAT, ( Coo Proszle 4\23Z9-3-031 is ti juN 1978 c.P RECEIVED Route 2, Box 325 N lot Conti Longmont, Colorado 80501 c"A, Camtissa� O June 26, 1978 Weld County Planning Commission 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Sirs, My wife and I have several concerns and serious objections to the addition of an asphalt plant and a concrete plant 3z miles north and 1 mile east of Erie by Flatiron Paving Co. (Special use permit to amend SUP - 260:74:23) We feel that you the Planning Commission and the families surrounding the proposed plant have been seriously mislead. Recently the families bordering the proposed site requested a meeting with Flatiron Paving Co. to express our concerns and to answer our questions. We feel that many of the answers we were given were misleading and erroneous. 1. Flatirons was asked why all the families surrounding the proposed site were not contacted. They indicated that the law did not require them to do so but the Planning Commission requested them to do.so. Approximately only 7 families were contacted, none of which live near the proposed site or most importantly none of these families live along the access route on 'o ad 16k. Two of these families have since withdrawn their names from the list because Flatirons did not indicate their plans for the concrete and asphalt plants at the time the families were initially contacted. We have since learned from an employee of Flatirons and a local contractor that Flatirons has intended to include these plants for months and that is common knowledge among local contractors. Also, the concrete plant was brought to Longmont weeks ago and is awaiting erection at the site. 2. Flatirons was asked how long they planned on working in this area. Their answer was "thelife of the gravel deposit about 15 years." Since then we have learned that the agreement Flatirons has with Milton Nelson has 3 phases. The 1st phase is for 15 years, the 2nd phase is for 10 years and the 3rd phase is for the first right of refusal to continue mining. 3. Flatirons was questioned quite extensively about the type of permit they had acquired and the type of permit they were requesting from the Planning Commission. In answer to all questions Flatirons stressed that their permit was "special use", not industrial. They strongly in- sisted that they were not pursuing an industrial zoning or permit. Yet, within a week of that meeting Flatirons offered to buy 5 acres of industrial zoned land belonging to John Lamar which borders the proposed site. -2- 4. It was indicated to Flatirons that the law requires them to use the least populated road for access. Since they have chosen the most populated roads -- Road 161 and County Line Road 1, we asked what other access routes they had explored. They indicated that these were the only roads feasible to their operations, yet there are many other roads and access routes which are very feasible and mucTess populated. We strongly urged that they look into all the possibilities and work with the families in the area. To date, Flatirons has not done so. 5. Flatirons was asked what plans they had made to cut down the dust on Road 162. They indicated that if the residents along the road were in agreement they would pave the road. The residents do not want the 'road paved because this would cause much more traffic on the road. Flatirons was asked what other plans they had made and they indicated no other plans had been made. They indicated that they would do no maintenance on the raod as that was up to Weld County to maintain. They indicated that Weld County receives funds for road maintenance but Flatirons could not promise that any of these funds would be used on Road 161 or County Line Road. County Line Road is not constructed to carry these heavy trucks and it remains in very poor condition many months of the year as it it. We strongly urge you not to grant Flatirons this permit to install the asphalt and concrete plants. We feel that they can use their facilities already located in Longmont and Boulder. This land has been farmed for years and we feel that it is extremely important that it remain farmland. Also, we urge that you insist that Flatirons develop other access routes other than Road 161 and County Line Road. These roads are heavily pop- ulated and there are many children growing up in these families. We feel that the use of other routes would greatly insure the life and safety of the majority of the children in this area. Sincerely, Mr. & Mrs. Ronald F. Hankins *</t," -Z 7 r (r7Y (' Gilti` 28Z93p�!l X� �� v�'' - �c nnL�'fr_ �'ti�� r��7 s,,k, '4` 7 �� 7t-ti1' G" ?bon ►�G ; ,��, JUN 1978 11 �� c ►��' RECEIVED `4 1 Tt'7 1.6-c� - \reQt- o weld County 6' Planning Commission 00 ter-- 1()C1 , �(01 a c C) g0C3 / c � `�� 0t_ .l_z\i`\ 1-02-c- k( Sc([ .1--V5 6L- c)e2 i---h_i e)cc)tA...Q r- 6.•:(,--rtit_((_k, _.c.-5--te--) i V_ p((o , o---,Pc-"C qa+irc...4 Vz U coo-( Cern pait)(A. 9,ra r k' ixt 1 c(k-tivi) Pnr( IA- t -e-k)or) ri-(i kc.F4kf'ckti 1/7 01(..k.Jz,3 ncretA . (- _1 i., a c,,-11QC Eir-ck ) a,(on?,,c)_,,,.,, Lis( -,(r __A, a --b, n � �Sl� ---tC' e C e -(; 11\1.11.�� tQ.G%i TE `�i�,0 .-{--- ` - c^-1 c-The( eicz _( I pe yam, et- 4 .1,-- citv 070(.(tcut- r-it- .,oncreAQ_ ()a, -_-fmk p ia,t,,c_t-, -eas •n_5-, --‘pir --tiv_ et-TD-:,-,Tc_ck ' c--4ehr, —Chwi-A c`_fie r a ., co c(�'C � ry - n ( () r pU�ncQ = �rc� �: urrt (7>+ — ru ct `-01--(r_,_, 1 Rai- Go 5 -RA (D n\\ crit ha 14-` i- C on( (rei-- - i . . O co ho to l (-Nc Gcf�IctL asti X c_> (±. ---c kQ_ (aft( ,r+ _ c_.:/CCZy f ty:Gc, Ion c �.3 Lt c_jA pccaNit- v k,l__4-‘ -_(--)C \(?b( ( Of ()_ --t ru (-1 a_s 116_:,_,\, Parc)val c.c5e r c.:6 Ck i V7 (-41 Ni\c-e r4-61(:rcez--1 #: ,-E n o i- --1 -Aur- en((i.d:-Li ;Th --1--- uo 62 Crivz nrzg (' o 6-C� c`�-c c t,; ,rc _ --/ .4-cr U Q ' -Co r•Lv C C, ) �, r. u-� oh Cu77 .1 pit)cQC,aCC1 OL-A ;S CI Vrcir '74 A`, i ) CS 1��IRfcbr; _ to ng mctft O ) to ' 6 7e''')/ 77,7 - /(per ? 1 J (R , Cl 7 IOW J29 t GZrrn0--r\LAJ. l•V cue at (/ bac, ,sLiv -. k\cuu-ur O6u-rNot c A cpcuu-QA C)3,unTh -y t t.,c_ Qcc .e ho QJ- err\a tu-Ticup crrm Lead b ,oh t o - u) hQ Th COQ tion tuJ(r) Ca'a " 2°- • juaLQ al)-1 LCcjkk a O-1 ° Q-?Lsubr-i_ 'Df \j°) ruLl (x"-j cu-yot 1,'(14 PkuL crc /LJ- plack . Ut' e 1(kxlm 0,md -tikA clAkekl- Lt‘NJA,G-ION,GeoJ (a.m ciful cicW e6 L ckiyvoi AC1),A (1(1)0k. 0,/-yval 0\4-\CJI s)°(w.cdt - W,Ls aft *c _ 9 jLE c'( ,O1 -Lu, 0_ 9O1)-)- ) Nasa-C-Izt5LA a j\iNn.P t br v3._m ONT.T\i- c cud _ icsK11. D -("C"\\Sucjr -1 O-6 jCk-c. faij C_� fit_, QLCD . ‘ 1) \\Eye_D LVA CY1C\NCJ:- )(\(3.f\ _,Q_)J\ ce -) jTh C s tarni ASr 'On Wej-i-) C(N)o:1-L( h262728�g� �i cR JUN 1978 RECEIVED7. `' Weld toasty ?halal Coi isslss �V c\\Ct) 9�S1P1 et Zt�� RECEIVED r SS ' OFr;f r. CpUNTY COM�iIONERS 1.. JINN ,0pz-71ld County Road 164 ongmont, Colorado 80501 - -- -June 22, 1978 READ BY..-----------• ----__— Mr. Jack Murphy - M r. Wally Toevs v s - ~-_--•--------------- Ms. Margaret Markey— P. 0. Box 471 Boulder, Colorado 80306 Dear Sirs: We are writing to further inform you that the Weld County Planning and Zoning hearing for Flatiron vs. The People of Pleasant View Ridge is July 18 at 1 :30 p.m. We understood that they will ask for your opinion on this matter and we implore you to consider the quality of life of 40 to 50 families here (includ- ing 15 or so in Boulder County) . We not only spent premium dollars to acquire a few acres in the country, but we also value our neigh- borhood and quality of life more than money can mea- sure. It is a peaceful valley with the smell of freshness, the sounds of animals and the view of moun- tains and farm land. We do not feel that a ready mix concrete and an asphalt plant are in harmony with our environment and we ask that you visit our area to discover why. Flatiron will have 350 vehicles a day passing by our homes if they are permitted to indust- rialize on Road 164 and they will take away most of our reasons for living here. Please don' t let them ruin what we have worked so hard for. There are upwards of 50 children on their egress route to Highway 52 and we would fear for their safety. In addition, the intersection of Weld County Road 163- and County Line is a dangerous one with limited visi- bility. Please, sirs, consider the future of all the families who live here. Respectfully j /-/c/7/i. c //1,1 Dale S: Johnson, M.D. Lynn D. Johnson cc: Mr. Bing Barstow } 4W ,02 13 14157e cb ,to ex cr) 0,4OuP June 20, 1978 Weld County Planning and Zoning 915 10th St. Greeley, CO 80631 npar Sirs: We, the undersigned, strongly protest the intent of Flatirons Paving Company to locate an asphalt batch and ready-mix concrete plant in our neighborhood on Road 161. Each of is is a landowner or homeowner in close proximity to, or on the egress route of the proposed operation. We have invested all we have here, and our quality of life is very precious to us. Please don't take away everything we believe in by allowing them to industrialize our neighborhood. Flatirons has plants in Boulder, Longmont, Loveland, Fort Collins, and Greeley already. We fear that permitting them to industrialize our neighborhood is the beginning of condensing their operations--right here, in Weld County, where the taxes are lower and the county seat is so far away that enforcement of regulations will not be as stringent. They try to minimize their intent by saying that everything is "portable". Just because a huge plant can be put on wheels does not mean it is temporary. Mr. Nelson has informed us of his contract with Flatirons. Phase A is for 15 years, Phase B for 10 years, Phase C is on a "first refusal" clause. In addition, the Nelson family has property on the south side of Road 1615 that has gravel which will have to come out. This is no temporary operation, sirs, it is more than our lifetimes. May we ask you that because we must suffer the consequences of gravel trucks for 25-40 years, why should we have to bear the extra burden of the industry? Please visit our neighborhood so you can see firsthand why we value it so highly. Respectfully, NuMSEA OF .++) Z.b ) t -r HhM LK. 565 Loam et) Kj OV( G(/ A �r c/7 %fi NAME ADL_.._JS v1,„ ' alle-e-( ii ' /:,2 3,5,7/ -r71-`1° .0. --- 7-=,- L/ 77Lvi - -rei 7555 - I _3, ' 7 xx,7,2_ "7 E (/2/4.7/4 e 0( oZ %'-' -) i d 2 )/ AJ..61-ltr C, .SP-rti rl 7 o oyv-cds .O,. (R_ ),, 4,,,,4,,L.2..7 aJa..., 77 7o A ' w- - / X 5 0 - /1/;tz tz, ?V_ 15)":11-La- .! ,,,, ,,,Libt c9 q e_,.)2,2, -L 6--A ,:l '/2„:2-6/ /7676 bt-e/1 OR4C1 I nolf ic- v 7_,,,,_,_ i , i , „ t , / _ .) y, ",a),& 4.47 4.7± _ cto,, '9- L_,)-ic./.4 i -g,e(A_ 7‘‘-‘, (-(2a-5- 1--e-P1/4e irl 6-74/ alc es' 018/ 61),J2,u a .,, ifecen3- 'I Az/2.z - o3-,,--2,b2.6. /7-- .R 2 neALL,L 0 2g,) )2- 0___ j7S0' 4/6- 4?c.+ j 24,44 3-ittU—,,,i0o, ,,,,,_ ...5.', , ,? die-ei-x. . "Ae ( -e, R -,(/(:- -i,,L 5&M(--0 ---,-6 --t° v/ e ac, „_> /_;,„ „,_,_e ,-, -/Octae,/-9-n c6--)Le,di 2) c/7 FT ecc N7i7 i_/,,/,n/, Re/ or - 7- ,2 7 I '' / 1 J.) iLlyx,F7 , Ir/ )I47 c , . -‘1•er.,,,,,v- ___., 0--vu /___i 1WK- n__ %c,,i 30 lj I I 1 1r` - -()-tfc- (Id v #zecL) June 19, 1978 Planning & Zoning Department Weld County Centennial Center 915 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Sir: Wt are writing to you concerning the proposal of the Flatirons Co. to build a concrete and asphalt batch plant on Road i6i in Weld County. We have bought several acres of land on County Line Road, and built our home in 1977. Living in the country was something that we had always looked forward to. Our two children, ages 9 and 12, have always looked forward to having horses and being able to ride them to friends who live close by. As we're sure you are already aware, the proposed con- crete and asphalt plant would drastically affect us, as veil as many of our neighbors. The increased truck traffic on County Line Road would completely prevent our children from walking or riding on this road. Road 16i would also be impossible for any kinds of acitivities that our children might pursue. Your careful consideration of this serious decision will be appreciated very much. Sincerely, John and Sandy True 737`` Wd z ,4 ^� 8` ',J.L.� <k)` CrD 07) J(" 1978 N RECZA/ 430 Weld Coe! �, ►� u lci 7 C(1 • Pla_g_ALti -4 26 it:Cl ictpj-. "^�n /I _ 4 G 0 ) Q • E50 31 h, O N 1978 ,v eld Comp E'�VEp ti Planele CD-ein`RfuntLik, 6) ��•�`o 4 O1.hk (,v �� y l s Lie i t 4-tad-ior Ra.o cAl H.cpce �, , kte xAs-ta,(.Q asp kc--F( L & Li 4 c ctc)- Q I.Ea.t&1 L Al 4 laa fCt1 £e(t, se 0--c 'lItsz r bb)) � o 1 (01/p . b� �►��1t� 9 tt_ K�e�Q � UJ� 64-t UU u s �tiVrt, 51L (,..2Cf1,S C 1�6 c L�p� C�,Awl-) J it9 1 ts, O..Qi3 W . Qr , fL� J CD' O�U �" C�- u2CtJ u,ta. ,.,katua_ - Cabe, tM parr C 1Ll v�aL a.cw t 2 Ck.Sk . / ,LeA, 0-a61u.1 Q o C� uAt fa i L,�L S�'- VI. gun, ite-C l k b 6-4(& j vtru_ 10i 1 I - 1G� otko l,c OWL kV))S.-IL-LtS Lu)tiksy1)-6-)), 0 utt CotA.4:O1 s e �`n�kS�- �L .5A - Qfioo -5-Vri&L J (f , 0l_z s 5 o of 4 Via. , b l-lt,eu Wad Y 6,eicztak Los o3 ZED ©t--A- o(14 6 � 0-a. - -Ut.,E.t1u 1 L' s or it fo it S L u](k �"Zf VI�C)iC.E fr�Gy . 00-tLia �� .c:H �.G« � alt �ash � �� ,�cry. � � 6A--e-Q-060 cau v-t c t e is pAriAt4hcd. r c. , as o J el-Otria_fc , Lok_LC 41 A-zci J f CLud_ h.e >`s . 0 4c1 cyaA, lic,st tt 1 - W L- 1O1-GCS 9U-1-b611L.3-,d(... . Cam.44_("k +kat c t , sc A.. cQ5 c ci ��a s ) pub 0 (2)1_4-d c UZ.4 A:AL _ GZe_e_ June 19, 1978 Ms. June Steinmark, County Commissioner 915 10th Street Weld County Centennial Center Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Ma. Steinmark: We are writing to you concerning the proposal of the Flatirons Co. to build a concrete and asphalt batch plant on Road 16z in Weld County. We have bought several acres of land on County Line Road, and built our home in 1977. Living in the country was something that we had always looked forward to. Our two children, ages 9 and 12, have always looked forward to having horses and being able to ride them to friends who live close by. As we're sure you are already aware, the proposed con- crete and asphalt plant would drastically affect us, as well as many of our neighbors. The increased truck traffic on County Line Road would completely prevent our dhildren from walking or riding on this road. Road 16-2 would also be impossible for any kinds of activities that our children might pursue. Your careful consideration of this serious decision will be appreciated very much. Sincerely, p2122�3�A John and Sand True 7370 Weld Co. Rd. ill Longmont, CO 80501 f JUN 1978 RECE/VFD w `r weld County Planning Commisslan `n LW I 1754 Weld County Road 163- Longmont, Colorado 80501 June 16, 1978 4 �'►W I County Commissioners ,.�F�� F�t COLD Weld County Centennial Center 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Gentlemen and Ns. Steinmark: This letter is in regard to the Flatiron Company's plans of locating an asphalt and cement plant on the Nelson property adjoining Weld County Road 163-. We farm for a living and have lived in this area for over 25 years. Vie are agriculture oriented and have seen so many till- able acres taken out of production for homes and industry. We can' t stop the growth nor the gravel excavation but we protest against Flatiron establishing an asphalt and cement plant at this location. The big companies come in and even with all the government regulations on pollution, noise, and unsightly looks, not to mention the truck traffic, speed, and noise, we the innocent people have to live with the inconveniences and ugliness for years. It is our understanding that Flatirons could crush and process the gravel in two months at the proposed plant to last them a full year. We also understand Flatiron has the most modern, pollution, noise-free asphalt and cement plant west of the Mississippi already established in the White Rock area near Boulder. Why do they want to install temporary plants on this property when they have a plant already operating? Won' t you please take into consideration how these plants will affect the lives of the nice people that live on or near road 161 for many many years? S' ricere, y, v\\I 2 " s�6' Howard and Maryanne Rasmussen JUN 1978 OO (r; RRCE.IV ED CC' Warming Cem c� missleR ��°` 8 L 9 54w StartiLE: c\i2ARI \IlS �r / Mr. & Mrs. Ferman Ansel Rt. 2 • Box 318- Al (303) 772.4204 Longmont, Colorado 80501 (303) 429 0352 June 13 , 1978 ��,92p?a (" From: Ferman and Nancy Ansel JUN 1918 no 434 Weld County Rd. 16i RE co Longmont , CO 80501 r Weld eoult1 (753 ?lancing Commission Subject : Flatiron Paving Asphalt , Concrete Plant Dear Sir : In the past four weeks we have inadvertently learned that the Flatiron Paving Company has been circulating a petition for signatures asking approval of adding an asphalt and con- crete batching plant in very close proximity to our property. They have circulated the petition to people far to the north of their proposed site and had no intention of contacting the the landowners along the proposed truck traffic route or plant site . The landowners in the effected area were contacted by a group of citizens organized to find out the intentions of Flatirons Paving and the result of that meeting was approxi-. mately 32 questions that were submitted to Flatiron for answers . A meeting of landowners and Flatiron was held at the Rinn Church the first part of June and Flatiron submitted written answers to only eight of the 32 questions . Flatiron , in our opinion , was deceptive in their approach to us . As an example , they stated only 160 trucks a day would pass by our homes ; in fact when we questioned them in detail , we find that at least 320 trucks a day will pass our homes and probably many more than that from the research we have completed . They tell us our lives will not be effected or our property values altered . They refused to answer questions on pollution , its effects on wildlife and plants . They opted instead to talk around the issue . We suggested rerouting the trucks which is , by law, the way they should route . But they are intent on using Road 16i . The road is not designed for this type of traffic and they say the County is responsible for keeping it in good condition . The neighbors pool their money and have waste oil applied to Road 161 in the summer for dust control and this helps , but there is very little traffic on this road (approximately 50 cars a day) . SLR ialtc A►7ABIA►1S Mr. & Mrs. Ferman Ansel Rt. 2 - Box 318- Al (303) 772.4204 Longmont, Colorado 80501 (303) 429 0352 Flatiron Paving Asphalt , Concrete Plant June 13 , 1978 Page 2 We feel the additional traffic will create a health hazard for our children and our crops if it is allowed to happen. We have been thwarted in our attempts to contact the County Commissioners and feel Flatiron may have them in their back poc- ket as we have been told they do. Enclosed are copies of the correspondence of our group with Flatiron , etc . What can the private citizen do when a private company wishes to increase their profits at our expense and destroy a quality of life that we have paid hundreds of thousands of dol- lars to acquire? Is it right for them to tamper with our in- vestments and health of our families because they do not want to reroute their vehicles? They were asked if they lived on or close to their plants . Their answer was do I live next to mine? Why are they suggest- ing that I live next to theirs at their choice , not mine . If there is anything you can do to help us , we would deeply appreciate it . Sincerely , Ferman Ansel FA/hr %/. . ,/ '/• �4 i ,` DR. AND MRS. DEAN E. McDONAI y 1 7075 N. EAST COUNTY LINE ROAD 014011° •\ 1 la � LONGMONT, COLORADO 80501 C3L-9)11• ° June 12, 1978 Mr. Wally Toevs, Chairman RECEIVED Boulder County Commissioners P. 0. Box 471 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE Boulder, Colorado 80306 73 Dear Mr. Toevs: )I J�� r.!, 7 ' Please accept this letter as an e bn-vf'"ttiy'opinion ,agd that of my family. Five years ago, we purchased and moved to an eighty acre farm on East County Line Road. In order to make such a purchase, we had to borrow many dollars and in order to maintain the payments and expenses, both my wife and I have to work full time outside of farming. We are willing to make this sacrifice in order to maintain a family style of living away from the negative aspects of city residence. We chose our present location because of the rural nature, the quiet, the unpolluted environment and the quality of the immediate area. Residents within a mile of our location include not only stable farming families, but others seeking this quality of life including an engineer, a physician, a school principal, a solar physicist, a newspaper executive, a veterinarian, an airline pilot, business representatives and numerous others who are self- employed. We chose this physical and social atmosphere as the best one in which to live and raise our family. Now, we find our quality of life, our investment and indeed our very safety is being threatened by a business which wants to locate a pre-mix concrete and asphalt mixing plant within this immediate area. At best, East County Line Road is barely able to sustain the vehi- cular traffic, including farm vehicles, which now use it. The road is narrow and has no shoulder space upon which to walk or ride horses or bicycles. The edges of the road descend immediately into ditches. The road with its present use is in bad shape. There are numerous holes in the road which elicit dan- gerous maneuvers on the part of the drivers using the road and allow no margin of safety for pedestrians, horses and riders or bicyclists, when two vehicles meets. Into this residential/rural atmosphere, Flatirons Industries wants to inject, every minute and a half, enormous concrete and asphalt trucks (three to four hundred a day) . In a very short time, these large trucks and their heavy loads would devastate the road, to say nothing of the physical pol- lution and the noise pollution which would result. The dangerous aspects w e Mr. Wally Toevs June 12, 1978 Page 2 of these multitudinous trucks in this residential area and their impact (no pun intended) upon the safety of the residents (especially the younger ones) goes without saying. These comments further do not speak to the decrease in land values which is bound to occur as a result of the presence of a pre-mix and asphalt plant and the resultant industrial traffic. A cursory examination of the road system in this area shows that from the site of the proposed pre-mix and asphalt plant to Highway 52 by way of Weld Road 16 1/2 and East County Line Road will directly affect the lives of a minimum of twenty-one families living directly adjacent to these roads. From the proposed site to Highway 119 by way of Weld Road 16 1/2 and East County Line Road will directly affect the lives of a minimum of twenty-four families. To have access to Highway 52, the company involved could exit their site and proceed directly south, utilizing the lessor's land and the right- of-way of another gravel company and involve no family units, or they could exit east on Weld Road 16 1/2 and south on Weld Road 3 and affect two or three families. To have access to Highway 119, the company could exit directly north from their site along the creek, proceed past a rendering plant and have direct access to Highway 119 with a minimum of residential disruption. These options do not seem to be a part of the company official's thinking. In any event, there does not appear to be a need in this area for a concrete or asphalt operation. The area is residential and farming in nature. It is a quiet area with little or no unnatural pollution, physical or aural. May my family and I urge you to protect this environment and us? Thank you for your kind consideration. Dr. Dean E. McDonald e Thelma A. McDonald, R.N. sr 4 N. McDonald Denise T. McDonald IL* Stuart G. McDonald / C ,, Q6,.. - V' , , . -(47 sotley ,ç &&4(t -Pri _ Jc?irY ...e RECEIVED 1M 2 `"° COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE 1 _ LJ_ DZ.i'i11₹MINT JUN 14 1973 7075 N.E. County Line Rd. READ BYE `) r �...._.- Longmont, CO 80501 -- ..--- -......... June 9, 1978 ... Boulder County Commissioners P. 0. Box 471 Boulder, CO 80306 Gentlemen: We are writing to you regarding a proposal by the Flatirons Paving Co. to get industrial use out of some property on Road 162, one-half mile east of County Line Road. (Please see enclosed map showing the pro- posed sight.) The Flatiron Company wants to build a ready-mix concrete plant, plus an asphalt batch plant. All of the traffic from these industries will be routed down Road 162 and County Line Road. Flatirons intends to use County Line Road as an egress route. We would like to bring the following points to your attention: 1. The road condition of County Lire Road is in bad shape. There will be 320 multi-ton trucks per day using this road. Flatirons has no intention of helping maintain this road. We want to know who will. 2. There are 18 private residences on County Line Road between Road 16-2 and Hwy. 52. There are another 8 one-half mile north of this junction. There are up- wards of 50 children on their egress route. Please recommend to the Weld Co. Commissioners that the routing of truck traffic be on a less residential route. the know that this will cost Flatirons more money, but what is more important--the expenditure for a bridge or the life of a child? 3. Many of us in Boulder County just had our taxes in- creased, and we now learn that we may be forced to live on a freeway for Flatirons multi-ton trucks. We paid a premium price for our homes in the country--Please don't let the Weld Co. Commissioners permit this. s 1 - 2 - The names that are marked with an asteric are the people who are resi- dents of Boulder County. We appreciate your concern and hope this will receive your prompt attention. A reply is requested. Respectfully, Boulder County Residents Enc.: Map of proposed sight cc: Engineering Dept. ) I r. , . .1 j,n s \ ,., j , , _ ,",./ \ 1-. _ / ,, V/ ,, 1- i '01 I ji?II ----'1.I• � II 1i, I 1�� i . � _ _ � ��e � I � ,III ►�u ;,, \ r vel Pd ) , / / ll --.O,4„ i 'e ."'• I r4 ,- ,, , / I I a J �� ,a A A� r� l 'z)`-J —11. 50,2 itoi2. ' _ _11r- =I___== / PcN�'' si�G --_ -- , --- --` - '49,5 `1C - - 1ic927 II - vii' I 11 , ____D /,, ei-/ ,:::3 ,,, ((r I I 7, /( \ / �6 0 ` - l'_ . ' ) i 1 495<I -` - —Radio Towers II , (/ I ( , , \ ' ' •T/1/ 1 ': , z' 1 t �t�� it o I _ 7' ',/'-: 0 ,u /0 o h I 11 p /- 44 / ,' I 'I / 1r Ir • i , JIr/ 0� ' 1. • i'^� ��(I 1 oc''`"`r� 111•.� ,� 1 I '1' II IN/' I I. Plumbs T9e2 1 �,, , r =_�_.. ---—_= ar�—,/.1211 -_ "• — -_-^ ^ _ �.`�-,__„' 7-i• ..� - '^ --- - , i^ MINERAL . . , 4957 , I .. - i,.. _ - I ! J _ II / f I f 1 \ I I i c II :, i dG a ' I�� it !/ �� V, \II ` 5047 „ I l� I �0 II ) II I i _ j (i i ' ' / ' i ' I I E-k 7 f _ .J oI / -.. , 1. ../,• - -.\ •,/1 It ENs,ON Tf / /i f l 50,31 =-_-__ -r _=_ll I , p0 J`\ l '4� ( Cp„pN Np / DI 7p _ - - • (---- y ' ' . II v. \ <98H 5086 I II • of n 1 it t I r, View 12 ' 1 1` ' 10 )e,1. )U. (' 9 /9 711 0:"(e7/V)1-/ 47X44. - -Jim - - „4--it- ii-fr-rx-x-/& - , ,t-rxd,vt, „/ `L__*.e_ 4 .,,,,,,__,e., a , , - _,,, __ ),- ,,, ;,/ ,/t-L 4-d-et-a4.e.re_sii7y2A,-&,e, . e,,,,,47 4, i_./- e, A,e-e-sZ 2?., -, %d_z. _4_7-4__ /e_d--74,1e___alia_____ fi-6/r-A ott,A i_e..16a- ' _..1 _,./-1:0_, 4.4,-4_, _ . _______ zdu, _,..Z A/ _e_ ____ _ --e-z-4-2->Zit/-d_L - ' • _, ),t-ci._, _ ,/,0,76 ./e.ta/Le,,//,-1,,, - _ f 2,/,..e_, , .4. 4__,/a.i- - _ _ , , i,e,04/L,A4-0--d - , --).--7. 457-ZbZ -J --71- - ,--_-_' -i16,Lc-Y- ��, c.�. jam_ - - - , ( —,, _,.4- - - , i , _,,,,, —1--- ------------------------ ----- ------------------- -- -- __, ,c§\ `'sue' - rc„., 3.191$ p c_), 0, - „.., -! QIalt tom�1S5�0d cu 95 W Prods 1 June 2, 1978 Flatirons Companies Longmont , CO 805'; 1 Gentlemen : I want to thank you for your presentation last evening and the ti7-ne your erployees gave us from their personal lives . The asphalt and concrete batch operation on the Nel- \� son property has still not been resolved in an acceptable manner as far as the people living on Road 16 are concerned . \ I am proposin to you an alternate route which will en- able your company to 'shine your product and be acceptable to the people concerned . A. Install a conveyor across Boulder Creek to trans- poeb crushed ,`raysl to stockpile area. 3. Set up asphalt and concrete batch plant on east side , of the river. \ 1 C. `:3e Poad 3 ', south to Highway 52. `, The advanta es of this proposal to us are that it re- duces truck traffic by our homes. It moves the traffic that I \ will exist farther away and on a road that is not as steep \ so the noise generated will be less. Road has been uti- lized by large gravel trucks in the past so culverts and bridges are not a problem. Since we feel it is impractical for you to operate from a supply of crushed gravel from your crushers direct to the batch plants , stockpiling is going to be the most effective method anyway , a conveyor system is inexpensive and you prob- ably already have them. The cost of a bridge over Boulder Creek would not be a factor. Your company would be inconvenienced by trucks wanting to get to Highway 119 but the trade offs to us are worth it. The visual problem on Highway 52 is not as severe and are safer than the problem on Road 16i and County Line Road . We would appreciate an early response of your views on this proposal. Thanks again for your time. Sincerely, Ferman Ansel FA/hr . 3 / , / 9 /6 CJ ,' 8 .Q.t.),„ 4t-c-,,,,, 0_,y4---1,-c' ., , i ia_o_,.,_ - .;--t--.) . , . ,' ,,L,O4 -ems A'7LO_..� _' - : ttA'Q9 \e' r9e..{%-416k. CJL 4 L-' A.„7-:_12J- 2 Le, a-P-_D._,7u...-0-v-,' 0.0 -51-42-fr--;--] ask— , -t--erg-9 I (2_, _.,..,,z -i:, ofTe--O.--k-i , i /6.,(2.,..._.........„..,0 (t.....,..,.e,--1-- . f ! .-e-t-A-).-.C.,"-•-) et-13"\ :7J4-(1- &-A---C241-il'i"-/1 -eQ .14--et-A."15L.C.L 'l . fp.,11- ----) ,.:_,___, n , rty,i.,,.., _}.. 7te_ka,,...-vt.., C.-3a4 e.:L.; - ,//j9_14,,- . L-5f---p--t--(c 0 /,-7 a_.1,6,,e- (1' - ' )1' 52/44,i *,e_, 505 Weld County Road 162 Longmont, CO 80501 May 26, 1978 Weld County Commissioners P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO Dear Sirs: We are writing you as concerned homeowners in southwestern Weld County. It has been brought to our attention fran good neighbors east of us, that Flatirons Paving Company of Boulder, is intending to industrialize some land very near us. They have a permit granted in 1974 to remove sand and gravel from Milt Nelson's land next to Boulder Creek on Road 162. However, they apparently have sent a representative to numerous landowners north, south, and east of the proposed site to encourage the construction there of an asphalt batch plant and a ready-mix concrete plant. Some of the residents were upset with the tactics that Flatirons is using, and they infauled us of their intent. In our research in the past ten days, we have sadly discovered that Flatirons does have there intentions and they do not need a zoning change for this industrial use. We would like to bring three things to your attention: 1) Flatirons did not contact one landowner or homeowner west of the proposed site nor did they even contact some people who own adjacent land. They have not contacted one of approximately thirty families that live on their proposed traffic route. We feel that their intent is highly questionable and they have no concern for a few families that may block their path. 2) It is our understanding that Flatirons intends to "do good" in Weld County by paving Road 162 from County Line to the proposed site. Mr. Commissioners, we do not want our road paved. We are families who have spend every last penny to acquire a few acres and raise our children in the country. A paved road not only would mean an increased vol tutu of t raffic•; it would also mean an increased speed. Cars often violate speed limits on country roads anyway--a paved road would add to the problem. Please do not allow ��111213/4' them to pave a road; at least defer their request .C S , until after the hearing for an asphalt batch and -o ready-mix concrete plant. (We are secondarily concerned CO JUN 1978 that if they are approved to pave the road now, they to RECEIVE® ,6), will have already achieved a first step in their desire Cr) Weld Cnnoty to construct industrial plants.) • Planning COMMiSail '\c. 0b' 9252�� ZLZ 3) We moved out to the country to improve a quality of life that we now feel is being threatened. We love the view of the mountains and farmland, not of an asphalt batch and ready-mix concrete plant. We love the srrell of the barnyard and freshly cut alfalfa, not asphalt mixing next door. We love the sounds of the animals, birds, and wind--the sound of nothing. Please don't force us to be smothered by the sounds of industry and an increased number of multi-ton trucks. plus it 32,E`i4,4'45 The first IS ^signatures below are from all the hoarecwners and land- awners on Road 161, west of the proposed—site. The remaining are homeowners on County Line Road and Road 18, who are directly affected by the traffic, noise, view, and smell of a proposed asphalt and ready- mix concrete plant. The list is incomplete because of the short length of time we have had to contact neighbors. Thank you. Reply requested. Respectfully, 71_,_--. .r- rte- C t,' 1 s i-L« - , 3, / (. - ' _ .3, k....j)„. ,) ---) , i-) . .4 ,___ r` ,,,,i• ( e 1 ` ' �,f//l'l '• /gi ` ire {/1 �LCZ //((' ',./ •1';:-*ZC �i �I. I // / r.,,/ : I ,./7 / ' ' , 1 y • -'''' s c" i-N-71,O-- ;-A. ).-',-.-( i:.-',-; 2 2. ilie-i1 ,t' i .4 lic..7,-z— /,..) (' ; 2��, v, t� oi. J ' ;).3 (/`..�j ,sft. ( ' . "f,',_ --- . / / .-1 I / 2 1 !i I i :-( 1 L C_- fAy ✓C/4. :( /C f"c' t 1/ / /767 ie e " - / 4.4 IC/ ( ( i't.J a )- ( ` N N ( „? f J/4J-LL--1'--41 , 4, :, ,'. '. ,,..1 ,, -_.:, I ' 64e.itex..--,,....'A ttce<i eel, 1:4 ,L'-_ ,. • � -( �t' / t� (- ;--f; k:'- �1r.( 7 - P-1 L/�ca .. ~ j 1-,,. _L,1 4-F_ 4.1, C ,t i L l .// `` `- /i' t�� ,. :%,.( y k r L, ty - r!` ( z nn C ii ,4� tl(lt.2, /t u )Y I p _4(I ri-it,,•-/kk,- d-`I lsL Jam. ..A-t.A_ S _J , r 1� ,:reCy, ,Z- /; /t,,'L 7 •7./ ' U ..% L Lcv,1/4...,, 2- "7--- e---7k3-7-1-77._ e;,_ 19 il.-f-ti.,:f c___ f is T_` (-, f'A_/-e /4 -- -,--c3;.--Ge 0. A 6...„._Lz..,, ,) 1 Xct4() ,, i " i çacs L.-'� . , . 4it. _, •ezeze_22,-(:76, , ,,.,- 7 ! , /17• i 'eE , ' 1-tier.- ? < «-e yi,__ e--2- ruz_ q)- :›O- ..,,,_,_., /� ',C ,:ca:/ ),0171,,,,,---• ..„....-.0, ,, ,,,_ �� ry c$a-Pui,...9-„, ‘,_,1„_,„ , ,,,,,...e._ ke.„.__,.(- / , 0,,,,_ 4 55- - Oeciro, X OP4044 ,4- ,-..,-, , '�. CAL4t,ry May z6, 1978 Flatiron Companies Longmont, CO 80501 Subject: Asphalt Plant Proposal Our concern, gentlemen, is that Flatiron has a communication problem, and if it were to continue after your gravel operation is started, in the same manner as the proposed asphalt concrete batch operation on the Nelson property has progressed, the land- owners surrounding and or affected by your operations will suffer financial and personal damage. We have moved to the country and pay a premium price for this privilege because of the quality of life available there. We have no intention of accepting a degradation of that life style and adverse economic effects on our investments . If your company can convince us that none of this will happen, and support it with factual information, you will find us ready and willing to support Flatiron' s business ventures. Think about it, (you are taking something from people'. ) What are you giving to the people in return. Some Questions and Concerns We Have Why weren' t all adjacent landowners notified? Was the form altered? (Some people think the paper they signed had additions typed in later. ) Why weren' t generally accepted procedures followed in contacting people involved? What is the exact location of the proposed plant? Is there a need for another plant? (Owned by Flatiron) What kind of studies were made to choose this site . What is the projected truck traffic? Exactly what kind of industrial operations will there be? Which county maintains and removes snow from County Line Road? Which county maintains Road 162? What are the hours that trucks will be using the roads? What is the comparison of just gravel truck traffic compared to asphalt and cement truck traffic? How will they keep traffic noise to EPA levels? What alternate routes do they have available to them? Will the pollution standards meet those of Boulder County? What will be the economic impact to surrounding landowners' property value? Will a plant like this open doors to other industries? What is the projected life of the plant and what will become of it when they are through? What will be the impact of the environment? Chemical emissions, particulates, etc. , by the plant and how will they be monitored? What are the safety and violations records of the companies trucks? What is the company policy relating to this? Where will water come from and where will waste water go? How many employees and total people will be at projected site? What percent of concrete, asphalt and gravel will be used in Weld County as compared to Boulder County? What are the working hours of the employees? What route would the trucks take from County Line Road? What are the plans for reclamation of open mined areas? If they pave the road, will it add to traffic by other than Flatiron personnel? (What supports your answer?) Would additional power lines be brought in and where would they be located? What effect will concrete dust, etc. , have on animal and plant life? (Supportive data) Are you running any similar plants to the proposed one that we could look at and monitor? Who owns Flatiron Paving Company? Did the County do a study on the effects your proposed changes will have on County Line Road standards? If asphalt and concrete plants are not put in, are you planning to asphalt Road 161/2? What is the traffic count on Road 161/2 presently and what type of vehicles use it? Do you know what effects these proposed changes will have on the lives of the nearby residents? What supports your answer? • Sincerely, Concerned Landowners ••\ ,1 ( \\ 7555 'Fast Co. Line Rd. Longmont, CO 80501 Ms. June Steinmark Mr. EdDunbar Mr. Vic Jaccobucci Mr. Norm Carlson Mr. Leonard Roe 915 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 Gentlemen and Ms. Steinmark As a property ownerin the area of Rd. 16 in Southwest veld County, I am deeply concerned about your consideration of approving Flatiron Paving Company's request for an Industrial Use Permit in this area. My primary concerns are as follows: 1. I am asthmatic, and I would have to move to get away from the constant smoke and dust. 2. Heavy vehicle traffic would endanger children and animals. 3. Property would decrease in value considerable. 4. Environmental impact would be detrimental, regardless of the precautions taken by the company. 5. Damage to roads would be an important factor as the company traffic would adversely affect the roads. 6. Industry would tend to move into the same vicinity. Sincerely, o and J n Tho4as and Rhonda and Janet ,41reLA1J A KT /3/7� C ine E . Sims 7 ) Weld Co. Rd . #1 Longmont , Co . 80501 -Dear Commissioners , I am writing to ask you to deny the special use permit for the cement and asphalt plants in our neighborhood . The planning and zoning board claimed that there was not "enough" difference between the gravel pit alone and the gravel pit plus the cement and asphalt plants . They felt that the difference in profit for Flatirons was more important . ( The remarks made by the chairman of the group about our being the kind of people who would vote for proposition 13 were uncalled for and unappreciated ) The noise pollution was never a factor in their decision. Adding the asphalt and cement plants will significantly increase the amount of noise as well as the length of time spent making that noise .Instead of waking up to the sound of birds and roosters , we will find ourselves waking up to the sound of heavy equipment and trucks etc . It could be a real hardship on the horse doctor and others in the area who raise and train horses and other livestock as well as a nuisance to the rest of us . If noise and air pollution is not "enough" difference , then it seems we made our mistake in not fighting the gravel pit in the first place . We were not aware that they already were planning the asphalt and cement. Since we realize that gravel must be mined where it is found , but an asphalt and cement plant is not NECESSARY at this location, we did not,- and do not oppose the gravel pit alone . It was alleged by Flatirons that there would be less air pollution from their operation than from the "cultivated" land . But the land in question is not all Regularly plowed etc . because it is pasture and perennial crops . Besides which, there are many differences between dust from plowing and pollutants from these other operations . Even being within E .P .A. standards may effect us adversly. My doctor feels that my wintertime allergies are caused by air pollution. I surely don't want an added supply: Another resident here has athsma. I"m sure it won't help him either. The chairman of the P and Z commented that he was interested in saving the taxpayers money. If it costs less to process cement and asphalt does that guarantee that Weld Co. will . see any savings? Flatirons has little competition in the area. Why should they pass the savings on to the customers? If you agree that health and happiness is more important than profit (additional profit that is . ) please refuse the permit for the asphalt and cement plants . Sincerely, 0 . Corine E. Sims P .S . Temporary is a word I don't understand . 25 years is not temporary to my two sons , at 6 and 17 mo. . It is their entire childhood . ` f n /) ' gf17'e KEN NEUENS, D.V.M. PRACTICE LIMITED TO HORSES 354 WELD COUNTY ROAD 16'5 LONGMONT,COLORADO 80501 (303) 772-4840 Weld County Commissioners 915 10th Street Creeley, Colk.rado C0651 June Steinmark, Vic Jacobucci, Leonard Roe, Ed Dunbar and Norm Carlson: 1.,y wife, Christi, and I are writing to voice our objection to Flatiron Paving Company and Flatiron Fre-mix Concrete Company's intention to locate an asphalt plant and a pre-mix concrete plant on the kilt Nelson property. The rroposed location is on Weld County Road 16L, approximately two-thirds of a Tulle east of County Line Road. We also object to the re-routing of the gravel truck traffic west on Jeld County Road 161 to County Line Road. The origionally planned egress route was east of '..eld County Road 1611 to 'geld County Road 3 and then south to Highway 52. This route has the least population density. We would like to emphasize that we have no objections to the already proposed gravel operations. What we do object to is the attempt to industrialize a rural area when no real reason has been shown except that of maximizing Flatiron Company(s profits at the expense of the many rural residents way of life. To allow the asphalt plant and pre-mix plant into this area, we believe, would be the first step toward making this area the center of the gravel, asphalt and pre-mix operations for Flatiron Company for years to Come. Res Oetfull , Christi and Ken Neuens cc : Planning and toning Department ,g192O /< titiN NQ7 VieMo lannr'ng C hun Slt 1, nnl slen cN ATTENTIC FAMILY We have a problem , and must unite to express our feelings . Flatirons Paving Company of Boulder is attempting to get industrial use out of some property on Road 16i , and the bulk of the traffic will pass right by your house . In 1974 , they were approved to haul sand and gravel off Milt Nelson ' s property near Boulder Creek. But now, they want to build an asphalt batch plant there , plus a ready-mix concrete plant . All the increas- ed traffic from these industries is routed down Road l6 and County Line Road . (see map below) . Our additional concern is that Flatirons has contacted numerous land- owners to the north , south and east of their proposed site . These people have signed petitions and letters in the last several months . Luckily , we got wind of their intentions , and we hope to organize before they are approved by the County Commissioners . But Flatirons has not contacted one landowner or homeowner to the west of the site , nor one of the thirty families their trucks will affect . Suffice it to say that they would like to get approval quietly , without opposition . If you feel that your quality of life would be threatened by a daily multitude of sand , gravel , and cement trucks zooming by your country home , please bring a neighbor and meet at Ferman Ansel ' s 'home , 434 Weld County Road 16i , at 7 : 00 P.M. this Thursday night ! (Sorry for the short notice , but we just found out today that Flatirons will even meet with us to explain to us and answer our questions . ) This is an organizational meeting. * MOST IMPORTANT - Next Thursday, June 1st , Flatirons will meet us at the Rinn Church at . 7 :00 P .M. Please plan to be there - our strength is in numbers at this point . Any questions? Call Lyna Johnson 776-7837 Ferman Ansel 772-4204 I i 6 -,;(2`.7 N I 'rr c cd i ynei, J y Lamar 7'1 -597 .z 5-- i E ,. b Ahs�O7Anh, tE )9,]p6,a9s) ix (0 1 News 61.5 o 3 5 Ch sc 1-16.75 N ; Y\ 0-1 fl .. �I — IC-irC_V1 W ,.c�. T 1 Z 1"' -r 3 f p t 3-c r 3 w S �n S -- - J - - - (-cm-a‘,)ItA Liner La. i cil ..2-444PV' , 6- s � "r � W t. —C. • • 'IP01 3,1 r�L w ccrlj 8`s`NAP 'U 7441( J ;-,;,.T s •^ auTao 0 4191 IL O\ 'FTaaeouTs Gaiu c�? MQu sT Sn se q?.noo at . oq ;Td em; RE ' aotTc! aaJ is t o; o;noa um; &a7fi t{o off. ouop oq uTm;f:ut u o ' cpuoJ <aro uo s:Lo...��. u UCz' saAico....rio u=✓ u0..1.'J o � � u"+ u �.,�-- gut tTtra .ano ,00;oad o; smtT otJ JBaq. em; ooaojua pur ;T4it T goads ano ,zo oT asEOTU .nq ' put;saopun I 'ToAuaf, oq; u;TM kon;G ApuoaTE eat; Om ;;utT6 ;ual.i.eo put ;Tiniest eq; .zoJ ;Tulaeo. emq esn;ea est✓eTd • F f T9 T' r;.z q-E TT 0th . JO doh. auk, uc Jau.zoo puTTq s sT �Eu.s • otzr ; UT uMop MoTc off. eTqu eau saToTmeA a'u'} acouo um; adoll put y.no TTnc: ;SnV duty; -oTs.iEt=l. e uT aTuaco UV JOJ ; TEM ulop[es szion.z; ToAt.I i cc.Jug eL1; .eta aouE.Taadxa Fite uaaq sEl.1 I 'JCPEaaTE Bolt ate; uT uoaPTTtgo Jug O(q. Jo J';aJ.t;s auk. .zoJ Jt@J z ';ctJ Rae/. su TTom 513 £AE01 iZ.zaA GT eaom ot.;JBa. Sur, •aoj uTpt;s t{;aoM oq ;ou pInOM seem e.sTT Jo J;TTEnb oq; ;nq eii; ;nq ' aoTad ;ueosp E TT as off. oTgt oq ;au pjnBm S 's,xogqPT eu Am a.IP ;weld .Ttmdst Out; ;memo° t? J.1 't7II't TET;uopTSCa 'TBan.z t UT oi,,om Au uT GATT off. .LIE? I 'teat ItT•a.slpUT UV UT R;aaaoau ,To coeTc: onTtA mOTq t aAEq oq ;utI n•uO T 'A;aodo.zc pauoz TuTa;st puT .IoJ eau scan',44s eq. ;um; Ars off. o;ocTlrou a.nq 'sonTcA i aeclo.ao .zoMoT ;1usaop YT ;um; ve;u;s suoaT3tTj Nona oo; ; ni sT Aa;onpuT 4'u T Pp1 ;nq ' eTqupToA1 -un ST pTtf JO ;oT tt • s).On.z4 eaTJ (gut ' s2T.a faITTTTap TTo 'q;nos eu; o; ;Td TeAta:c., t ' ciona; ' sato ' seut?TcxgE utoa; g_allOt3a q.ut;suoo OAt t aA Mopj • acTu put ;cTnb cc GUM ;T eaem brOACLA gM uSLIM uca?eO puu q.TB1 ast Jo T TetJe put OsTcu eqq. ppt O; £atscooeu iTTtea ;T sT ;nq ' ac ou ap,tti; pus ' pto.a :no an -juTateq. oaaq ;no slIona; s.;T put ;Td TeAEa.� E so patzEli auk. eA'Bq o; £atsseoeu ei Aids ;T Gaut ' seotTa uTuotzeo uc.zj. sewoc J uo TaAt.x:d ;ti ; azTreea opA • cuc.z;uTj Aq pasodc..z s;usTd ;uawao put ' ;TELUst T alcua: am; ;nogt T ecj e: rota no4 1'04. 04. eNTT PTnoM I 'uo cT.at O put3 ' oo '.xtqunq '31auia Ta;.p 'Toong0otf saeuoTesTuwoD Loco . 'oio, ';uca.teuo''i E) 'o0 PT°l (.2a2. swp ;-zogoj Nut euTao0 _ U • NAME ADDRESS PHONE 1. )11, , • ii,,, • 'r� 2 ' ,e t :‘ i•1 ? 77A -f-:- ')9 2- ic/ri X .Al.;,e-1/./, t•-:'-''',;.:-.— 3- ,/ ( / ,kif�. ,,G',C<9 1'11)1 a , . 7 0 /- ./7f3 1 _� 4. A ). ,--c,_ "5<ri tiQ 1"---__ / Y 6- '' i7?; .,,� r 7....„.".;,__L_/ft._/I,t !`. .'- Pl(e- (__L) c7.?35C, / 9 7?0 /\'',//).' / ,ir.-_- ---/Q ,F? 8- (I' C i.f. t.t , t `'c.t,, ; If k,�".) S 1/,) i,7 CJc. I1 ( !: ,jL �, 1 9. 5 r J ( 1 10. I.,' i i ,11,'l /,r,•,• ., r . r /� /S 11. 12. • / , 13. y - , ,v 14. f eG ttLf �lc L't e..l CJ ma ') ➢c 4, 1 1 (' ' , y.l(o '5 P g 2_ 15 ,..4-,� � :-: 3 "' -7v//I e�.e �-c>�c Ac. 772 --,-/e) 2_.. s• 16 . 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26 . 27. 28. NAME ADDRESS PHONE c, ( 2. i , r Za6//) ri Y� ' 'L I r ,_ ;r,,: 10 r�; !l , . 7. .!7/ fir( /' L./.7-''K' - `--, ' </ /71) g. • .0 -,* 7 2 (} ,1•j, tP 0,1 C.•-r.< t.Ti, /Yd / 2-7(. -4/›),- /2._ 4. ) /(-11 .5... f)(1 (Q . .P._) . ;;��,1� ;'6 s (�. (d C"c�, I( c 4 , I ',/ `7(- -/ ,� / 5. -/ 1"(;;-r-<^< d M /'1 L c1O l afr- 6 i, I ,, //I/ / 75735' `] 6. i ,r�,,•;_-_, r i , , , ,7 , ./ ;, _ • , , : a /_I, 7• • c` f/� /`,/ 1 9. l / O� J i 10. ' ; %. _ .f-``: . . . / e 11. 12. A �,1, / y, ; -', 13. . ' k. ' 1;rI:' ,', 1 Yc n tr+' t . (:- (,o ,, '-1 ) 'J(, ` e'7 .g'-"')0 `, 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25 . 26 . 27. 28. NAME ADDRESS PHONE 1. /} 1,60 ',P-/y <. r 2. J- iL s9 r = C '� ( ).., /,•t71, e e! ;•�i:!.r/Ytf r 7-74-- 74-/P7 ✓, 3. ,:". ( `, 'k(.,/- ( (, 1 /k 4. � �� ,� � t°� ✓ `1/-0 (/ Lt CU / i t'A'c- J1: � 5. 01,4;2G (JE'Ar17V=lam �� [/cam C L-�t/ �'_ u� ) 6. ` •L1 / V L' (ccit.- �J ' ( Z� ?'" �- IC� I (n 1 (n----7 (f 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26 . 27. 28. NAME ADDRESS PHONE 1. Ray L. Nelson 6028 Weld County Rd. 3a 828-3896 2. Doris Sawdey 7770 Weld County Rd. 1 776-7489 3. James Sawdey 4. Tom Baur 7460 E.County Line Rd. 776-4068 5 . Howard Guemther 7240 County Line Rd. 1 772-4567 6 . Ken Neuens 354 Weld County Rd. 162 776-7185 7. Mrs. John Lamar Weld County Rd. 162 776-5399 8. John & Sandy True 7370 Weld County Rd. l 776-3140 9. Bess Burgess 7010 Weld County Rd. 1 776-7863 10. Dave Burgess 7010 Weld County Rd. 1 776-7863 11. Barbara Hankins Rt. 2, Box 325 772-7267 12. R. Hankins 13. Ginny Shaw 2320 Lake Park Dr. 772-1297 14. Gerald Porche 7905 N. County Line Rd. 772-1297 15 . M. Williams 8876 Rogers Rd. 776-7527 16 . Luke Stromquist 776-4532 17. Arthur R. Stromquist 12189 Oxford Rd. 776-5832 18. Charles Stromquist 8449 Weld County Rd. 5 772-8338 19. Regnier Farms 0500 Weld County Rd. 2- 776-3182 20. Arnold Hinkley 7411 E. County Line Rd. 772-9102 21. Mr&Mrs Ferman Ansel 434 Weld County Rd. 162 772-4204 22. Dean&Thelma McDonald 7075 N.E. County Line Rd. 776-5666 23. Robert L. Sims 7220 Weld County Rd. 1 776-4842 24. Dr. &Mrs. Dale Johnson 505 Weld County Rd. 162 776-7837 25 . Helen & Lamar Bryant 504 Weld County Rd. 162 776-5399 26 . Christi Neuens 354 Weld County Rd. 162 776-7185 27. Helen Voake 7659 County Line Rd. 776-1497 28. Inez Sawdey 7770 Weld County Rd. l 776-7489 J NAME ADDRESS PHONE 1. Maryanne Rasmussen 1754 Weld County Rd. 162 776-2587 2. Howard Rasmussen 3. Margaret Kobobel 7909 Weld County Rd. #5 772-8333 4. Bill Kobobel 7909 Weld County Rd. #5 772-8333 5 . Steve Johnson 6860 E. County Line Rd. 776-6277 6. Norman Johnson 6860 E. County Line Rd. 776-6277 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15 . 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26 . 27. 28. L✓s�_ iva:02,5— 407 .9f/ 2s- e Landowners approximately 1 mile radius mainly on or south of Road 16 1/2 in Weld County. Mr. & Mrs. Ferman Ansel 434 Weld County Rd. 16 1/2 772-4204 Mr. Martin Oase 344 Weld County Rd. 16 1/2 ''' 772-5677 Dr. & Mrs. Dale Johnson 505 Weld County Rd. 16 1/2 776-7837 Mr. Robert Stewart (Bobby) 318 A-2 BT-2 ✓ (not in phone book) Mr. & Mrs. John True 7370 Weld County Rd. 1 776-3140 Mr. Douglas L. McDonald 7247 N.E. County Line Rd. 772-4577 Mr. ARnold L. Hinkley 7411 E. County Line Rd. 772-9102 Mr. Robert L. Sims 7220 N.E. County Line Rd. 776-4842 Mr. Rufus Sawdey 7770 Weld County Rd 1 776-7489 ,Mr. Dean E. McDonald 7075 N.E. County Line Rd. 772-5666 'Mr. Owen Burgess 7010 Weld County Rd. 1 776-7863 Av, Al . Walker (Herb Olsen, owners) ✓ 828-3888 Mr. Howard Rasmussen 1754 Weld County Rd. 16 1/2 776-2587 Mr. Ken Nuens 354 Weld County Rd. 16 1/2 ✓ 772-4840 h Mr. Vincent S. Durali 6825 County Line Rd. 772-7342 Mr. Charles Rasmussen 8120 Weld County Rd. 1 776-1838 John W. Lamar 504 Weld County Rd. 16 1/2 772-5399 Mr. Thomas G. Baur 7460 Weld County Rd. 1 776-4068 Mr. Les Brown 7150 Weld County Rd. 1 776-8336 Mr. Alan James 6960 Weld County Rd. 1 772-6373 Mr. Norman H. Johnson S.E. of Longmont 776-6277 Mr. Donald Giebelhaus 6740 Weld County Rd. 1 772-1426 Mr. Anthony L. Lutz 6703 Weld County Rd. 1 776-6597 Mr. Charles Cullian 6887 N.E. County Rd. 1 772-9691 6951 N.E. County Rd. 1 772-8468 Mr. Ray Zuehlsdorf 7229 N.E. Weld County Rd. 1 772-3502 Mr. Ronald E. Thomas 7555 E. County Line Rd. 772=8374 •w -2- Mr. Wendell L. Resler 7619 N. E. County Line Rd. 776-9142 Mr. Ronald Hankins Route 2 772=7267 - N 'Ir. Ned G. Sprague Route 2 776-2878 Mr. Keith Merrick Route 2 unlisted Florina Gittlein 517 Weld County Rd. 18 776-2885 Mr. Dale C. Voake 7659 N.E. County Rd. 1 776-1497 Mr. Ray Nelson 6028 Country Rd. 3 828-3896 Madhava Honey Mr. Craig Gerbore 7509 N. County Line Rd. 776-7999 Flatiron Paving Company SUP-365 : 78 : 17 SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS June 20, 1978 Milton H. and Helen C. Nelson Gerald and Claudia Je n Sprague 2040 West Longs Peak Longmont , Colorado 80501 Longmont , Colorado 80501 William E. and Margaret Kobobel P.O. Box 11 Erie, Colorado 80516 Michael S. and Virginia Show 1435 Weld County Road 162 Longmont , Colorado 80501 Howard V. and Mary Ann Rasmussen 1300 Route 4, Box 66B Longmont, Colorado 80501 Martha Williams and Virginia Shaw Route 4, Box 66 A-1 Longmont , Colorado 80501 Dale S. and Lynn D. Johnson 1300 Route 2 , Box 318 2A Longmont , Colorado 80501 John W. Lamar 1300 Route 2, Box 318-A Longmont , Colorado 80501 Regnier Farms, Inc. 1300 Route 2, Box 334 Longmont, Colorado 80501 Herman and Betty L. Schlagel 1300 Route 4, Box 39 Longmont , Colorado 80501 Arthur, Lucy and Luther Stromquist 1300 Route 2 , Box 340 Longmont, Colorado 80501 Lee Ervin Olson 1300 Route 4, Box 42 Longmont , Colorado 80501 Ronald F. and Barbara T. Hankins 1300 Route 2, Box 325 Longmont, Colorado 80501 I TJ `C,�, r 1 rk5e. , .M/I-TOa 1/ F I/Jj4A1 C . &AiC 1 rc 86 s I d6GB2 1,(,'114.i.4,v) 41,4G;3r?E T P o . 86y y 11 i CGI—O 80sf JV, 1 CNi 1)13 rig 14, R A Sill US65AJ f4owir1) e A4 �-1 jA ,j 130c - RI A-1 - 66 /3 6-mo T CcI SC5c J r L-i.4 c .14 e" _S..114() I'Gr -kit; - R Li ' 6. 6 - off 1-c.-L(r ,,1.z, T , lc • C-SU 1 >HA)50it) 'Dale ..5 Lynjl a . 1306 - f - 'cox f • 4 1-c/vcmG.r a, Cot. , gr;So ► LAN HR 1300 - R 1- a - /3c,x :3i - 4 1- 64; A:7 , g) SC. f F4P-415 "Titic 1&) c) - Rt i3 n v Lok G.pricA - , C ��7 goseJ 13cc -- 1G)t 37 I. 6-.41C L,T CQ , 5- TAO-47) AR Tit Ui LUC? L� [ ft�fa� t3oC i ` Uc 3q6 -r, Co A-0 c a O 61--.50A) ff R V/x lacc R} LI , Soy 'la LO4)6-MatiT, Co 1 '3 - 3 D s )-c)./v c, A (04-0 ( / .a SPR 4Gt k:�� C� -/L'6/r1 > y�r1 7C 3 ,_ L • �ttr F©Al Q 9 i f 6 D I -; ', • ._..). D ,) . c, 4Ei_Scs,u iv .fP rc),1,• /f c" '}e(1-.1 C V f aa1i6 , ti'l /r)(J y j ,, e„ ,. r e -* ` 'l 1 O 4.'� s- ,-,:i !) Ai (t) PL, L,„,„/ :.): ,,,,, .,,, /y/0 ilk c,.' ;\ ;40) C. -.O. -.4, -.#( — \) _1 '2, 4/„, : .4 ., / li '. •:),44 6 l 31 - .1 ') - ,.,-, - k.'‘'.)1 d P,:-, ' , . (it f fr 11,4 6. t / /OMl (O-74 DLII p O , r3y i1 i1 / 7 1JL L( /J &'1 - eve ( /lc, ,,,;(1„,•4! `, l •' 4 d • I Asa' ti C pO+C c I ',:+,,i, ys, (4�\<' f` t�,v�'.ti. U ( 's,`\ -, "— .-- «. a. t 0 - aA✓ ,'d r)1'' q5 It',ci :,- � l s , , c-) (313 - .-.,)q . �, i,r, ,,,s'-,---.) - ESN ?tio, /1'11(1, '- i S. 5,- J ' , -, ' ;t t- /t}' - Pt >'11. ; Ai , :' . ; ,I F (1 t, , . t(' , /.._ .,s, 7 a I 1-1 /(-:'- :' ,. to t,t2 # Uttr , f, -r A), i e¢,`. „ �. /1) i ✓V 5 t;+,- 14 - / ' , y-- to 0 6 O - 0 - co Acs , ;30f> • Rf • r)cly �; � r� �/' X11 G e 1 r. A,a O e /3 ' tic) - it, SS C OS i r 9L!O ' - d . s cILIO ' -1O ?.() . 4 V: , w , t Oclie- • 9 L( 6 -Ire 2.3 1300 - RI BOY ---irdV I eat :; t itj SEA 30 /1 R b 4' . 2 `t� 2c, . -_,,„ ce_.,. is, ,. V__ &Cfi I (I S(=4;) 1 `>c->C 0 G\1 dit 1 : L.,c),4) , /, i , • i,,_) 4' V °i t, - P4 /U 1- 1: s w L, , 6- a--) A) t h ../t):-4 :-- st 5e L' of 73 ( { ch o' . ': ,': _ ..:+ O . C) , k. � i :° V Y 6 v \\) t- . t. f (, .-1 (Ir : /a , ,1 t Alf c c, p l� is i , t > `k/. 7- 5 A.. Li : : 1t " , a - A) V,'_ , 1 , - 1., ' ` a ( Pfu111 6 r 1 r A r fq _ L �� 4 SI_ °1 S ®, b v c p ,�,t C+ -- , /i L �, f=. Z 6 t L,t ,= �. , ,S f-y(Veyl,.,'j' .-? ! , 1 ' r ♦l , 4. . C IV :1-. (*;* , :'- ' ` .. t: I Ai& !I .,L'/ r/ , 6D - f ,-'_. C, - 0 (\4' p 7,, ,o, r , io ‘__,/ 1 -; tea' w 0 !. ::' 4 r i.., / r I_ Gl C 41-1 , e,c- . / ? 6 - I .1 . , j` --' I C4 c 1 S 17- O 6 . , •••_J . / r V 1 C / 0 1 r ,' , '' r , t`� 4 ' -, 4,,� •t \ ≤L (gyp E � ti S (J .::;C r.4 j 10'i i 4 i Al c r ►dam- i! : x= ₹( btil ( ' , ¢ ,` ,.- " `S ,t:- /O11<A > ,-': j l ','f 1-1 i =, ' 4c 1 � . 6 - .. , to ff . / S7C0-1/ 4 Z- \/ , 1 I- 13 T '. 10-7 63 - (3 (3 - I i -o - dam ., ovz_ - REGA)(g.-R- � A-Plms .7�c_ l�Dg(a3 1366 • I?i• - 13ox 3 34,/ • iUFk4 I. A) CO kees a EL , CLOithtdn1- 4) 60( 6-( u to w`i • • •--_ � 0°7-- .-9 0 LIQ , �- -- _------•-- --- - a , �r—.-.•... 4=— - . - -- -_-- . , i • C A l' i / b /` / vR ,, - ' \. r 1/ • --s•r , 7/ 4. •' • nt-\" ' .. _- �� I j • / si . . , . .F-7 SECTION FEET 660 1320 1980 2640 3300 3960 464 5280 QUARTER FEET 330 660 990 1320 1650 1980 2310 2640 80 SCALE 40 SCALE ..)AI) $ec. L'Ke , 1 w O' C ii or I V \ f.V t. /r f V v i 6a - i3i3 _ 1q _ b .0o - oil Z )C( c6c al � _ III C61 "`. 06I • 06. 7------- . (Abl , I - r -- , I ��r^ v I I 0(-;a Jt i . i Ar I" . . . , . . . • CL / c•C�� ♦ . A - i . • - 1. ,. / SECTION FEET 660 1320 1980 2640 3300 3960 4620 5280 QUARTER FEET 330 660 990 1320 1650 1980 2310 2640 80 SCALE 40 SCALE - -. • — —• • O ' , • • - ___ if Nil •1 C • 1 . • • • _ •--t_ __ _____- ---- • . ♦ • • • • I • - • 1 a • - • SECTION FEET 660 • 1320 1980 2640 3300 3960 4620 5280 QUARTER FEET 330 660 990 1320 1650 1980 2310 2640 80 SCALE 40 SCALE • •l IN THE DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WELD AND STATE OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 30181 Division No. IV BOULDER GRAVEL PRODUCTS, INC. , ) d/b/a FLATIRON SAND AND GRAVEL ) COMPANY, a Colorado Corporation, ) and MILTON H. NELSON, ) Plaintiffs , ) vs. ) CERTIFICATION OF RECORD THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ) OF THE COUNTY OF WELD and ED ) DUNBAR, LEONARD ROE, NORMAN ) CARLSON, JUNE STEINMARK and VICTOR ) JACOBUCCI , in their official ) capacities, and the WELD COUNTY ) PLANNING COMMISSION, ) Defendants. ) I, JEANNETTE ORDWAY, Deputy County Clerk and Recorder of Weld County, Colorado and Clerk to the Board of County Commis- sioners of Weld County, Colorado, do hereby certify that the enclosed record is a true and correct and complete record of all of the proceedings in the matter of the application of FlatIron Paving Company c/o Michael J. Hart, P.O. Box 229 , Boulder, Colorado, 80301, for a Special Use Permit for an asphalt plant and concrete batch plant. This record consists of the following: 1. The reporter' s transcript of the proceedings before the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colo- rado on September 13; 1978 and September 18 , 1978. 2. Tape recordings of proceedings before the Planning Commission of Weld County, Colorado on July 18, 1978 and August 1, 1978. 3. Minutes of the proceedings before the Planning Comm- ission of Weld County, Colorado on July 18 , 1978 and August 1, 1978. 4. The application form, materials submitted by the Applicant, referrals , staff correspondence, Planning staff recommendations and Planning Commission recommendations s" r to the Board of County Commissioners , letters of opposition and support, and the Resolution of the decision of the Board of County Commissioners . 5. Exhibits introduced at the Hearing before the Board of County Commissioners. 6. The Weld County Zoning Resolution. DATED this 30th Day of October, 1978 . MARY ANN FEURSTEIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER WELD COUNTY, COLORADO By: j, I"�" ( � fl S (G..1 Jeannette Ordway ,f Deputy County Clerk and(�Record r / and Clerk to the Board •of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado -2- EXHIBIT A ."—i. - -,P,,\,):,,, „. A • ),',. c'utlft ''''`cCr,1,11,,,Y'':', ‘:::" 1 7-''N'' -k '..evi,-: ,?, , 4 '-r,. '...o.'` - t‘"\704t4ff., ''VA.t,#,m'S;*. ;ore.. / •._nC •R ''Ld + ,-*,=Y-- S1ITN:,,,� ��l i ti•; V.nplg `'N • •T �• ,INL�-il• • �'- ! •f vtu"�i� { a k„ ,Q'' > mot* ;�=,,,,- `,,. - �• i' oyL'^-.4%f, l Y trl.�SMF.} .�'<t f R• i"FL•.V.0 " IV'b. ""ll R '+ ,y k` - - j' x%91 , y Y-,.•"t.t _ '-': ,,..„1„.:: s Y'_ zw .'2$i17, ,,,-- :—"r41—a .' 14 7;t hom N W,c°,e, i. Sec, z3 COI IN Ii N SE 0. ,vE•/4y rr= SECT/cw 3c .ik l�I �` � /y c� .7-Z,ri k g,,,,._), 6-..4i, A i7�, : " 06.S Ohl P. rr,, f 9' r zN ,P�gw 3 , 3`/(� Acrt6S ' c) , `) 3°/ i9c'`,'�S �l,V N Oo ° \ o \ N 0 h G/ C .C. W//ycnR, • I -- — /?63F•j� — ger 3c, sec, z9 /33/, 8-, -------- • A/es- /8 '0 -' �= A/ 89° /o '2. ..'�/ /1\4( z --6-z---,vo SCALC- / v0 I A/-- Z�^7a T06 ' z78-i- Certificate of Survey I hereby certify that in April , 1978, a survey was made under my direct super- vision of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 30 and of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 29, T2N, R68W of the 6th P.M. Weld County, Colorado more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the East one-quarter corner of Section 30; thence South 88° 18' 05" West 1288.10 feet to the Southwest corner of the SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of said Section 30; thence North 01° 21 ' 13" West 1314.76 feet to the Northwest corner of said SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 30; thence North 88° 44' 54" East 1329. 01 feet to the Northeast corner of said SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 30; thence South 89° 45' 19" East 1331 .60 feet to the Northeast corner of the Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 29; thence South 00° 25' 56" West 1307. 19 feet to the Southeast corner of said SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section,,. jL6Wte_ North 89° 40' 23" West 1331 .86 feet to the point of beginning, containin n i n ,, �; tacre,s',rnore or less. ROCKY MOUNTA " jONSULTANTS, aI NC,. Harold E. Law, d & o'..:.,,:, n ds:'c t c,•9:' P Longmont Office: 647 17th Avenue Longmont, Colorado 80501 phone 772-5282 (metro) 665-6283 ise ;1. 1 1 ) ,i 11„1 ,l�'.J ICJ '•) �.'•'•'•'1 /R( 4M, 4.)!b 11;6•. 1 i1 I'I' I I. I ( AN l I . I 111 I jar Ph inr It fi uir7 Neu�9 asrI7 FLATIRON P, VG cl : 0 0 PM ---6r"m,;. 0/,,,e4ki•o r,tvpr4J,, L II`` I I SEPII'1';MT31sR 13, 1978 I' I ,IIII I : SUP, Asphalt & ConcraL P1 -1-Tr __NAN I, I Al)11 It l.';'; ` L ,\ J1 1J—�' { 1) , nl , c �,r 6ti�c�,s� -kj - rl_\C\e ,rr� --- 3�`� lC �� Cc,�c"u� �,c�- l6 �� (7,� hl_p(_� s ) r / - - �11.r,1-/ 1..11. _ 1 G/.l,-(_C ",,, -- 1 1, / i , ��,fl�f �I t �,( �,� �,a t ' 6 t {j)c_`�� _ ,)� ��.,,1,_a r _ c() - -- I �) Q 0 _ (<" -IR (. 11 r/ _a- 4 , at_i),,,,____ stie4,/,i (/ ' ,//;/ / )/z_ ,/,:t__ . . _ _. ____. __ . ____/--,. -/-___ _ , _ _ __ __ _,....;) ,.. _., , . ,? ,, v 1., , . . . . ,. . . ... . _ _ , •• • ........ .... . . _ L .<-,.\(•_-) , ,-/.. , hi z7 . __,_________!5_ __,_,__:_:. -(7::__,;cri-4 ,;-;f- _ __ __ _ _________ /61C 7 _ 7 — t_ree. 6:::,.L - 4 ,5-2-.6-. .--.- ,3,S 4- 42C/2/t.qe_ z")-1._j.,--7_1_,43__(ir;_L-/o_ _________ 1Z6--17 ) _-/712- a-/27 ( ,i_Y A26_ ./6_7(.2_J ___ _ t : \\ T i __ ,�` !1_t.,.L_C._!'`i--` ' I - -�y"•''� r, ----- �� /--�= c.."I-c"G!-� �� /1'^_! �/j -,,,,4"(_/--y %'_,--7 -'./_-_ -..L ' J �. ? �� 7,--_-.) v - / - --- - Vii- ---j--f ' --_ --_-" 71'.1 -•:- ____ . - .. 2j`-- -�c.,/:"_t-,_-_-,.. -___.(- _------ � �� /--`,----C,=--L `,r-- ,.-V.7 '\-_L. _,� .1,--1,_ -`-r �--- ,i. �, / J I J 61,e,-{,-- //y____)(;)(,,‘,-/ ,...9:4._/ e /Y.!,s j/-t� �V v—2A ??,..:1-1---- -kr,--2r c 3 S/ �/�"2,'l' _71,e-r"c7,__ ZL`—_12__ 7 - "�- 1 r f 1�r�-'2�t _— G1Z1<2� — — -- J =( � '_�ew 1 l Y f L-v_i .,vLs�te �`G� -- -- J/ ‘,//-1,-,-1 j, mil,,// — --- — — — — -- 711-o--6 _r_ _LS--LLh Liii_e /l l an<1HGh1/J (a - - 1,7)16'_/'''...,L s_,.. l''- 1 T N I — [ , r l , �ti� j rc ill' r — (1 , i L is .,/ CP , f )f/ •f •,°. y Lo„`T ( =-`(_. r I, , , / - , j 1 I r_ k , - -- -t '1,1 ' - --,(.._. ••1 c . . ,J'. -i r-,'_ �..." l. 1 _ J 1 1' _ 1 �_ L- 1 J ,')1, (-t' ' r I---'t - = ' -' ' C ' % ' L!',./_' _ '' L'- - 1;_ �z.. I (.r(i 4u770.. od).)k , Let,,,d , I, 14/-3.(3- (c)-(-- 0()_c) _1(-)C) /4 /e niTktogi (.ecfb 1) , c---:- t-ttc. z' t_. ' id 10/ �. f- 1 I ' I R i o c-,ti; .a.• : t ,:7: , iw.:(I` `� "w ,►--,rt--a -e y. -.,r,r^7,r{1•,a ra^• r-. ° '.�`+�"c`ywy4� q i x'1iw s" ' ;� �. t �v S, "T�,t N ;+n r—r�'t, r dan;.t+ +� -, ,,C":; `�,r, ��{"� a .r e.. S., �+ 3, . _ via' � �? l •t • ? r ' . •.- �.•r rx, ,�r�!.,Y..�,�,-_ ,ya•v r,1• tr�' „,,,. i2' 7.'°'r.`�"d ` s'• DA",%a�a.rc� t�,.,•.s w'an f�au ,v+"•I"J•i,,- <,{ a,k ♦'}ig " ; ". '•,,,;. ,Nr.,,,Y., ,+ti, a-. 4 . a•�,y • �«�, e _ - '�•,- •"-. ... , 5'),..O., r of -,, w - . . +. �).� d•,3 _ r_ vI°.:,;,�"yam • �a • ' ;:e"' 5 _. f i I 1 4 - __—_ PUBLIC NOTICE NOTIC�_� f' ' • Pursuant to the zoning laws of the State of Colorado and the Weld "IfIROPIIIMPimp. County Land Use Code, a public hearing will'be held in the Chambers of the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County Colorado,Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Greeley Colorado,at the time specified.All persons in any manner interested in the Special Use Permit arc requested to attend and may be Iheard -' BE IT ALSO KNOWN that the text' .• -- - 1+, and maps so certified by the Weld ,,-u - '% " ' .•: +;:� , • ' . 't", t , ',' „,'�R°'*8byc- .r.,1 ''n• A, '' p' '• I ,n ' ,j may be examined in the Office of ',„ t, •,.''.:A''...'• „ '` ' ' * " ' ' •'' • "• • -• ' - - the Clerk to the Board of County a' : • t' `4'• • •4•'. '` ,• ,1'..r..%'-' -,'w'- ,�° , Commissioners, located in the Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Third Floor, Greeley, Colorado Docket No 78.56 1 Flatiron Paving Company c-o Michael J Hart P O Box 229 Boulder,Colorado 80301 S Date: September 13, 1978 Time.'2:00 p m 4'° '' '' ' ''''...°.:- ' " Request: Special Use Permit for d ' . . -r.; • , ' •,,,,,, , �.'',..:.'',7-1fi Z ,, 6•' A' ,f'r'',.,-.'r '°•,'+,� q '9: ;v , td a'�',''` Y.,-'-4, • • .1, '.•' i ' . ire r` - , mI an Asphalt Plant and Concrete a: _ }"<r' �,-„:1.,.."�' r., ,, . .} r ,' . � Batch Plant , LEGAL DESCRIPTION: - ,,r t',.,,t; 4',..4,....-',,,,,,,., The Southeast Quarter of the + L ; '` �" "_""' Northeast Quarter of Section 30�=7..1�':J,,ye, „„ar ' -;x 40v..„_.,,„0.:,-,,,,„3.6,05, '''74x- 7f^ • i',:,y ,•tr`; ,- • , .,t a'rl,-w. - - and the Southwest Quarter of the , 1_ _ � ' "� ` ' i ,,•, -,• ', Northwest 'Quarter of Section 2D ,5-"•ter ,,,.,, �,.1.•a �` s Township 2 North, Range 68 West ¢ `A' ' . '1' t'` of the 8th P.M Weld County, �� ;'" ' - - 1 Colorado more particularly de- 1 ,!' „ , scribed as follows. • `• • i. . Beginning at the East one-quarter - �" ' corner of Section30,thence South ' . 88 degrees 18'05"West 1288 10 feet to the Southwest corner of the SEy`.of the NEy of said Section 30,thence North E1 degrees 21'13" West 1314 76 feet to the Northwest corner of said SE'.,of the NEy4of $ Section 30; thence North 88 4i degrees 44'54"East 1329.01 feet to v ..,,• of Northeast corner of said SE 1/4 of the NEV of Section 30• thence South HD degrees 45' 19" East • 1331 60 feel to the Northeast ' corner of the Southwest quarter of ',v'''''-'_ - '• " ---" -- - - the Northwest quarter of Section - i 29;thence South 00 degrees 26'56" _ . - . '-- - West 1307.19 feet to the Southeast corner of said SW y4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 29; thence North 89 ' ' 7, o - ' - degrees 40'23"West 1331'88 feet to - li , ti , ,r-• • _ .• ^•,. ;,. , , •' „ w ,r - the point of beginning containing , - 79.274 acres more or less. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY,COLORADO BY:MARY ANN FEUERSTEIN WELD COUNTY CLERK I AND RECORDER AND CLERK TO THE BOARD BY:Jeannette Ordway,Deputy DATED: August 9, 1978 „'-+'".~ y-,,."• `t� • '1, r; ., , PUBLISHED: August 10 1978 and r• •• • • ,.t, e'. , 5,. rs , <„ s�`,'" , 's ,g 4,`,, A• - 4 .'4t, a • ,rt', , 1 v ' August 31, 1978 in the Johnstown ' . y ^+ Y. ,„ ,.+.,'i 1IVW O31.111x3O ONV O3UIISNI 'O32131SID]H '1dI333N NIIl13U 9L61 SON'INC WJ0d Sd W r-� N nr,i-. :-. • � W A L7 :S � L� iv A) qEfuh11 ozw to w O O x, 7 c. C7 m '—f � ' ≥ m 1J Q a 5. r vi o M p A r Ct r o ocr, o tri o o - O n gn tov o o z ,P o rD E l7 A r E A Cro a3 _ • _t�__.1_ ��._ _I T .; 11 m B r- ' ❑a cr C o m a' o o t o o x 2 i 1 f° a C:iid 3 to w d d d B w a m n < N a P oo al m O n r0,, F-'•v R- w o '' tJ w '' 5_ a CI-- . I I I �1 z to N . f+ ,I• xl •z O X ...I 0 'A M 0.tri rj t7. w. 0 LSJ CI O i n 0 o '_I Ol U) •O n a C C R f° o: a J Ri 0O G lrl, �t D ' A CD o .1 p CO Ol `l' o O- O- o.. ( „,, • 4; 23 .I i vcir9 2 -• n rn z o Pi o n.'< 2.!•C <' ro ,, • O tZ , C_ '0O.t 9a. N ., n CC ��' �; Id �: 4. I c o o fp w v�a ri L z n 4•' . - ' M m F' w �c 4 Q. d^ �:E I I I l. IP.I' 1,411' r ( rs" O p • v o U tli z I �, O 1...,.,O-,'i lt'I1C WU)531K __xi `° O I'' " o CO .1=, vNi o r lII I' ,---I a - ( el 7.J N()1 1 „f:Lvzo, NN11 `D 7 <a Co CC RESTRICTED DELIVERY. 850 - _ Show to whom and date delivered I I -- RESTRICTED DELIVERY. < i ' I Show to whom,date,and address of delivery ..$1 05 ' �= rli ' I (Fees shown arc in addition to postage charges and other c) E':; I � ' i I fees). ' —' I Q : lfl I 2. ARTICLE ADDRESSED TO: William and : !� Margaret Kobebel ' r l_ ``'r~ .O '� P. O. Box 11 • - ''•-7--- R$ O ,-I pep. Z 8 0516_U �� I x k , I I �. I m Erie, CO . ' ✓ f +1 Q 0 I ' ' - c n 3. ARTICLE DESCRIPTION: '� l® �C' Q U 1 I a R REGISTERED NO CEI;TIFIED'NO. INSURED NO. Is v - as .I I I a o 637391 RI • 4 �' O I-•�I ; 1 ' ' 13- p ¢ rli (Always obtain signature of addressee or agent) �1a • a a N W - c_ I5 m I have received the article described above I -- -- I ' O IIi m SIGNATURE O Addressie Li Authorized agent 9161 CdV'01 ` z !r. • to m 4. DATE OF DELIVERY POSTMARK' m o 1w D z n O X I!:HDDINS g.'.DE;. F1S m UlPIliED - -1 'n - S 9 S O ; D_ F Dock -et 7 � - GOP 1976 O 201 456 A f • r T M ; t ` ( (( �,�,!t+"c1•'.1;-la,"4.'` ,i.Y�', .„rF'T;` ;°';eo,';..r '''�7{;s.: ;er".%isi'i8'-s . 7 1 S T n C '31 u.` 1 ) ) i i ( i (' I) i 0 -8L g9=[00 9S6 E0Z-O-9L61 d09 9-+S J ..---Q57-;--- 1. S1VIIINI - - - + w—''°s°� S.N83l0 :3S(1V339 213AI130 01 3levNn 9 w �,��C+,', --. \�\ • .r • O 7 s : I-- -. (palsonbol J+,puo alotdwo3) SS3x00V s 2 y O_ `,�1 V �• '� / - i )1xVW.SOd Ael3A1130 3O 31VO 4 n"r` !, .1 I - .4 N ' r -. H • O � in lY ' ` ` H �1 1uaNt p.i7oyln�' ❑ a•ssarPPV El3xf11VNJIS w I 1 U u • •anogt paq iail.u sap alt Dip paniaaaI anti{ I H O 0 t (walls JO oasseippe;o wnieu2 s ule;go s,(eMIV) w 4.,,s...—..,:s,...... — > U U / 'ON 03x11SNI ON 031311x33 'ON 031J31SI03H L 0 w O Z a {�f NOl1dIx3S30 31311xV 'E w 12 tr, o ? , 1 W/. 0 !!! T0S08, OD ';U❑UIbUO2 1;^ xw in C7 �9T Pte° I 1C4kIno� PTaM SEVT . ce iO7 �, H O1 o 1o1IS PTUTbLITA L ,p' X .-I a ' `; aUP Ta_t_OTNN,__•$1 03SS3x00V 313118V Z �-•-•I, o ��. o ism^ , F (Sa-j A x 1aypo pus salseya a5tlsod d1nronTpFs tit WE umoys saa3) O r r * 'COSO I$ banriap Jo ssaippt 1pus k 'alrp`worite o1 A oyS , , , ,Y ATIaAITaa Qd.13III.LS:RI ❑ i / , M"`- r ,. t �S8 Pa1anT�ap altp pus woyn o1 moyS " 6 - T A�IaAITIU Q3.LDIII.LSII}I ❑ t ,tiSY /Janriap Jo ssarpps 1g'alsp'woyro O114)O1(S Elo ) - • �"'' I ,�SZ Palanriap an:p pus woyti w noq ® .- LiI' L •(duo opaya) palsanbal Sr aarnlas Uuiwoi[oi ail" I + r € (� I E ' 05.10A01 ,, k 1 uo cords ..0.1. NIJILL3IJ.. ar11 ur ssarppr ,no.( ppy W J + pur •1 swab araldwo) 1r3QNJS 0 i t h _ ' •J Gi y td2._ I T I 1 � xo a,...)4, . • • D o } kt,LIkll W ' r 1 0• < o _ i ,-- Q T i • w ' k • 1 s 9161 A0N'119£WO.]Sd • -IIVIN 031J112i33 ONV 031MSNI '032i31SID3R •1d13D321 NUD1321 V' A t/1 r'r M ry N fp...q r �' CO rI Sr �1 f°, ≥ m O Oct 5 5' 7'`� 7� c ° o cdn U O d °r° m > 'm �'A CD E m O m o rte" ° N ° ° P' r r' i a Ifl O m N �a�V "' rro w o p O Z > ° E E E E >n 4+J r o n 1 < Z m N o w o 0 0 O. 5• o.o -r , U1 CO, rte, o a C T O (e v. Z fn O P E (,-11 8 fr'-1] E E 2 jt ara 1-- '' rd rt. r ' ill N wdBI7 9 2 Cr, -' ' s~ O O J m e �'+< a» w m p f) ti o awC7 ° d w o °. e°3 ' ` '; o a U � ° ., � � � z oo � � Maw �� O U11 CO (D -c o•�c rr p �r ° n �I _ v� l-P 1) . I m y �� • o o T..r' .• '� " P w ter, K• c U - r_ -I N ca a3 lJ1 D (\� ° a ° U..1 my'^f i X70 {!1 ;• o o..P0 °-qo a. °- H • Z •r-I "�-+ N al c 'o .‘A.. ro r lr� ',P,.,. i , ,,b ,,,t,,-< r°-.,`, R. `°'. ro n sC lf_ v OOC I m c ��j • a Nr$'��, Uld'fD'r" ' N n • " r- •�� I � F. �', , ai 1 p Q• O. \Irv; • tb (D'}} ' W A •n 74 w N ^ 7tl.. I) ! H I 'r : ,' 3)e >• . 7 O o a el ny r' (It O (� ,, \ w o T 7c- n 1r _ 1� c o z w , a- c z I .fr P y - j wCL rn a• : li • r� r 1U O l'�t/T� r. O, �rt," •p L'Pi, - o C° I-,J ,' i rd rl A t�� • �n tl'-'+_ U_ �'. I 1i1u Rl IN U m ,r a- \) ❑ • 5 ' t' a' a a. a C' X > kt n�iU , p + n » • e r y;', w ao e e) IL. :1 O P:1 i-I I �} / v� o 0 0 w a • oro ° ,...'-',I I m I ( f t? 7 o < -. C td ro + I 4, O el < ° o C P cr ,J4:1, , y rn \.`rl 0_ N 1 m O Er*^ .O N.. rr. Howard V. =_ ( W& Mary Ann I F'CSr"ARK�' , (Y, Z H •i v al Rasmussen DR DATE O [� u v , o O d O w O ° V N < ! V w 1300 Route 4 , Box 66B H o <4 W U z 'M LO M m rn• > -13 a " v< w o Longmont, CO _ 80501 I w o ' a W `.j r.; ',rl flrS -- o rd CO U • a ° w o a r .. .� . ia ''Ir nI\ 65." < ❑ cJ 0 a q •v U. N H • I•^ t I 'nl I ,,,rd 35P w TS ui a M wr 3 v cc N.. U • w r ' 'r only _95c' U rl a U F < '" �,• F m +� r f 5JC I ra Z U U z F P, 1110fr'_ N rf c ., v, v �; "o ' ' F • -'r. ' r l lfl; gI "qrt (err oflwr srdaJ e,,,. , „ I ,- RETURN RECEIPT, REGISTERED, INSURED AND CERTIFIED MAF -Mall-trci -_._ - -- - ----- _ -- - - - --- - `C Route 4 , Box 66 A-1 li r , ,. , :CO r�` mont 80501 r rLong lil I' 16,! ' Iv SESC yn,, I ' , T - `- IT- ^ I .I r'''' r(1'I 'nE Frr,r1V0rll -- (SHE' oII, r !dri j31SID321 ^1d133321 NUl13N 9161'r.oN'USE wind Sd - -T n, r "T1 N N^ - " I,.{�A�_--u�c` ��l�l)S ADO^a$c� Dale — �'e) < y � oti ww � ❑ ❑❑® � M S. and rosrmnrlc re 1 m 5 o f—' ti cn en o Lynn D. Johnson ORDA1E ri f r- o r 8 0 o p p o m �� m m m pi o o o ,r✓'; E E 2. h 1300 Route 2 En r 7 , Box 318 2A 14 •••( v o o > o Z m O • o w o � o %a o o E >n . I , r IIVIN 0313112133 ONV 0321RSNI '032131SIo321 '1d13O321 Ni1f11321 9161 A°N'1180 WJ0J Sd __ I Lon I gmont, CO 80501 /_il w N »^ - r, Ili IN m a' ``\ . '-' m C 1� U • r� M ' I ,, . ,III r Z O O - y < (7, O �' > • of°, ❑ ❑❑® t -' I d m N o f m r'o 03 r o m O �1 n ] E y E y E E E >�, .,in. r _ ., o .1 �� ' a ifi0 ',-J' O • O w O o 'rrti O o O' a.o • -1 r,2 „,—,,., e ° o \ , G c O n ft G A r�o Q C� E C� 7 7 Oo a9, I• Ff'U(`,' Y, 0 3 � d5. _ r- L�Fm o' ogo o o rn '2,n'§;,.:,-. rf < a- >' w c1 �—� (] O m � C7 w C7 w ^' w n m e \{ �• a P, 7 Mr' O O Iv Iv 0 n. w d a d w p. H a B John W. Lamar J 7 . \ N • m ,A A+ ll -+ o r a•r n. ., a - .:j I n - ° •• O P < !".' < SZ, ,-, --Jr) O hi ro M w rn �,a 1300 Route 2 , Box If' A ) 0 0 0 o b 0. � a m ° `�i ma .A Z V'1 �C O Cl- < H 0. a ,1 7. O ro rC'. Longmont, CO 8050" a H I-' w y a ° p 7 �{ r f ' r c ° e w L. r 1 ,\, .'r ' , , 1., ,Id. :a * I •' ,-, O < o Z I n ;�.. • ' N•-nil'.,, 8 .t: ,T. 8 v ., ro m c ',)y a' i, 8 ;i.,, r , . ro -o ; n o P. -tS r,,. �.,r1'1 I, I(,, r- ^;'rr f.0VF'AG III \NN 5 r -r0- p v n g n a wC�IV�ed COB§ ® v �4111Q1fib 1, m 0 en ca v) o in ed 00 a) 02 o 00 e. r U O ^c :2 .i° o .. cd +) 9 'd O ccc bn ` ' w 0 01) U_ cc w -i`O 1 1, z y z z , Q o F-- i z w 1 , CC II �' � ;, a Q r I w !) oP ' 01% 4 `-- L£908 00vd0100'A313389-13381S - L 9l6 • ' IIVW 0313112!33 ONV a32ffSNI '03H31SIJ321 '1d13032f NUf11321 9161710N'11861010dSd d z 0 o > < _ in o hi z . z o mo r• �mx..\ C ., ≥ re O n 'ti ? S o m --' m m `, m CD 4( p m O 7d m g E .-I E H E E o ' r-f• -I f , r, r- r, 7,1 I ft o o � m n� a. c p rf' '' ° rgo E C� E ("' E E cm d9 m S ❑ r rrt a r x �oo orro On 7,9_ — — _ J r 5 ,�m , �� 7 9 N f� m '4. t3 t7 DO d 3 °^ Regnler Farms, IncI XI �� N a 0.^• d rn A O. r�I• o p' w d p- rn H I `,a r1'I •rr Osl Ti s< y A. • g.g. ro c 'A :-A I-.< Q w r w — w 'e a< < R° a 0 -. rD o' O m COW o trl ro lr1 ro 5- t-..,‘ 1300 Route 2 , Box D a J ° o O ti 0-pd 0-pc) a y 2- h....., IIVW 0313112!30 ONV a32ff1SNl 'O32l31SIJ32! '1113032! N2lf1132! r Longmont, CO 8051 „ • 9161'AoN'TTBEwjodSd III ' - 1 I OR ''I • �' . CA fr m W N �. ° if, v,1' I,'' O m -i \ '•I CD i _1 O w (D ..I • ® o-. M p r m �_, m L, c . m n O�4 n a cn;d (n (n cn ° Z r () RI m ` ° \' m re m m 4 O m o o o 0 o O Cr. 0 o J ° - . n o z m O �7 N v w o 7y E �y E E o` z r _t ,. : 1 II';II;,,r,l`: CI t, ;. rf' m I\ - \ ❑° o O fi A ro C) C' E E o°o ��3 M U A '\d rD ~ ` to w B u d � B ., C n _ re, (� P1 m a, Herman & Betty L. Sc; I CO ' °1 m ° n I-10 a �d ad w a a�z IJI 01 n ,c , I ro c la 1 • 0 N O o" ° 0..a. ;..; �' '" °' 1300 Route 4, Box 39 N a " ° m c s ° GtJ ` o w 7y .b a o N r , t , ,1 ° ?�„o5r as w z O O H ti a.' .,� o g N.,• I in Jc:i o / ,D • Is X $ a• < N <' a __ •, r, ro Longmont, CO , 80501 s 1 a a y o o w y I;I`r * K w n I--I w • re o a• Q„ a 7 ti ' ' ' '� - .Z� , `i; i4 » m ro ~ • n. O •-1m > Co O f. r' I' v. .� ly ;n z a : co A. N ni I m ''' 0 ,-- nV. `^- 0 61 , ` Arthur, IIVW 0313112!30 ONV 03af1SNl 'a32131S1032! '.1413031d'.1413031dNaf113a 9L6T'AoN'118£wJojSd Lut Lucy a: ►+ N her Stromqu; W A CO W z o ° • z w m F- t1 ®' �, wm ❑ ❑❑® '4 r--- ( C , 1300 Route 2 r Bo 3C,o m m i.m n \' m ., $ r r- o O m o o trf o f o o m O r:. m CO n , m m Ti4, (n v f Longmont. CO 0 -I Tn �� r9 ° ti E a E H E E o ao ri D � A p x O n 0 N ro 0 z � II ° 10 0 0 8 O $ >, r1 i •r1 r8O"501 ,Cat m 3 ❑a d -" 0 < o EJ 1 ny 7po ,...4av • • m N. A .6 o tD1 o Iz1 0 0 0 "' ! 'I'Ir,�" < ° '..• D D p 01 n -o `. m „ BUBO B B 4.c�l C' I ^q,r'„ .2 1•'y� '� O• I { �`• n.ti. J ,A m 0 ° Oa• p-V o b a• ` 5 apt ' I i I 03 7 ! ' •t n A z a „• w trl a.trl °' 0. ..• 0-=' a m _ c .• f'^Irr,r•r; (I m rD $ O ° CO o a nom. wa. 0 al. c 5 W ri a r I,. �!;� (' r n.'1T llJ RI N ( r ❑ n. Di Z U1 '� a,K' <''� N n• P^0.. -4, '" Lee CD 3 .-. C`: „Ervin Olsen 9161 Aohl'TT9Ewio1Sd r• 1300 - -INN 0313112!30 ONV a3UfSN1 '032l31SI032f '1113032! NNf113H 4 N • 1' Route , BOX 4 CC A a s 0 ). O w w A 2 ❑ ❑❑® - z ,..---,1 f / Lonmofltco D ° > -I f° ≥ m F O C5- Fi o 5� o o o ° m ''� 80,501 °r° xi N .! m \ m m m m O ('+ Q �I `�'1 E E >n r• I ID m rn O Ps N O ° Il D B r7y O 7j p o 7 yc ,. I 7 I', . „I '1 0ii ° '\ r<o M O 0 PI O io r-iE �' 4, W 2 ' • \ `� ,r ', ,, 1 ° 3 art q.a F. O'O (�' t1' N B. d d on g $2,n a tom, <-- x N mu, w , c r - - '_ ' - '1 I, r -h < ° go 01 , a w • n O 0 o- w d 5 d w\� a3 "1 t _ �1 A O ti o ra A Z O -1 'n•rer. �-, Fr, n `in �' r!` CI. II`t „:O0 CO I c O °o w < < R° 0\-r1 o= --• - - - ' : 1D')f"',n;1r)^1 n = C a s m W .' o n•PO 3"r. PI p- r9-D. � m lw,rr..__ > o '/' :� CD °• l0 al ° CO 0 H- �) 'd a.,-'< `.,-< O., • o F rn N a \ s z 0 X i O o a.• < 2 2 a •Bart ara R. Hanx� In .; k.1 . rig a P 01 in N ° a M�. . In o w Pi °' mC t`;� 1300 Route 2 , Box 325 a ` ' G w I- Q, x aa. Longmont, CO 80501 .• L $ d = ° w T o • 4 i i . t ' IHvi^„1,'- ol''1I o _ /^� L1 R1 ___ 0—,f-,❑ ,y O ry-0 0 ra o 5, , 1 ill„ I" • -tit-- < d > C r -i l J p f N , 9 U B V B 8 , C^ J 13 p 7 na n X7 2 O X P� ° a• w d a d w t3 ;° m PK Gerald & Claudia Jeari m ? rr, _, o -7 w P. o a 17-w c ;', R. w PD . - ' La D r� f° 11 '° J m W N F'- D h'1 rD � o-•a l c o D ° 61 ° O (Jtpl o ava a s '� Route 2 , Box 325-A 61 m ' s co z Ut lI rr,, ak =k .9,-.❑�• .. rp rp D I (D H .n o n Longmont, CO 80501 1 a 0 w rD o a' a c. IR �� '_ ;I, •, r'1� tI,I'ID � I} • Q' s �. rao,-, 7G- re, ^ ��?? :..frc si- t tl, , „�, 'lc d, b, �'o o z w a o r Its d 11,4 r iu I dr" • v • ry N Cr) o r • , •r v'h,,,,, e ,nrl t I' 1 CIg 11 r N TO '� r<o .� 0 • ti ,r , , ,., 'II I .�• v yf p 1•—J, r e A v ° a �-. : • •p r pit (..,r,n ' - r'n1il^dI ,_ r� , �4 W r° O lQ O • . t- ,Vs_, n 18• t 2 S f rv, r•1 II,CI,!,I,I',•f r W o '-'A" o 1 n l`n r, EVEN N In rn ,f (D 0 V • 47 ;:J 3 0 P ^`a)cd� 00 O b o3 0 Z TS gi / { w '-I X 0 1 0 1 ' 0 V'b isu 43- ,n .-4 • a) N., to sic- rcn r H l O , ttt /.4.,i rI 5 if z f z z a J ,Id�\2223k2s, 0_ I— n � �� 197 g ``) 2 K� Recs:V ED '94 < a Meld Caaaty °a planninU Cam1issian �, a .��?`f; �,�4,L‘139.4.4), 61/ 001:e0 ,90 L6908 °OVUM00'A373310-133ki16--JL 51.6 t ® Telephone (303) 443-9400 t FLATIRON N iI i. PAVING COMPANY JIM SHORT P. 0 Box 229 57th &Valmont Road Boulder, Colorado 80306 Hello