HomeMy WebLinkAbout20190106.tiff SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, December 18, 2018
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held in the Weld County Administration
Building, Hearing Room, 1150 O Street, Greeley, Colorado. This meeting was called to order by Chair,
Michael Wailes, at 12:30 pm.
Roll Call.
Present: Michael Wailes, Bruce Sparrow,Gene Stille,Tom Cope, Lonnie Ford, Richard Beck, Elijah Hatch.
Absent: Bruce Johnson, Skip Holland.
Also Present: Kim Ogle, Chris Gathman, and Angela Snyder, Department of Planning Services; Lauren
Light and Ben Frissell, Department of Health; Evan Pinkham, Hayley Balzano,and Mike McRoberts, Public
Works; Frank Haug, County Attorney, and Michelle Wall, Secretary.
Motion: Approve the December 4, 2018 Weld County Planning Commission minutes, Moved by Gene
Stille, Seconded by Elijah Hatch. Motion passed unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR18-0100
APPLICANT: PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO
PLANNER: CHRIS GATHMAN
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT FOR
A MAJOR FACILITY OF A PUBLIC UTILITY (ONE (1) 230KV TRANSMISSION
LINE EXTENDING APPROXIMATELY 21 MILES, ONE (1) NEW SUBSTATION
(GRAHAM CREEK)AND UPGRADES TO AN EXISTING SUBSTATION (WAPA
AULT SUBSTATION)IN THE A(AGRICULTURAL)ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: THE TRANSMISSION LINE WILL BE LOCATED IN SECTIONS 2, 3,4, 5, 6, 10,
15, 22, 26, 27 AND 35 T7N R66W; SECTIONS 2, 11 AND 12 T6N R66W;
SECTIONS 7, 15, 16, 17, 18, 22 AND 27 T6N R65W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD
COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: TRANSMISSION LINE IS IN TWO SECTIONS:
SECTION 1 RUNS FROM THE WAPA AULT SUBSTATION LOCATED SOUTH
OF CR 86 AND EAST OF CR 25 TO THE PROPOSED HUSKY SUBSTATION
(WITHIN THE TOWN LIMITS OF AULT). THE HUSKY SUBSTATION WILL BE
LOCATED EAST OF CR 33 AND SOUTH OF CR 86.
SECTION 2 RUNS FROM THE HUSKY SUBSTATION SITE (EAST OF CR 33
AND SOUTH OF CR 86) TO A TRANSMISSION LINE THAT SERVES THE
CLOVERLY SUBSTATION LOCATED SOUTH OF CR 66 AND EAST OF CR 43.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, stated the applicant has requested the case be continued to the
February 5, 2019 Planning Commission Hearing. Mr. Gathman stated that because this will be a rather
large case,staff is requesting the Planning Commission hearing begin at 10:00 a.m. A hearing is scheduled
with the Board of County Commissioners on February 27, 2019. Mr. Gathman explained that surrounding
property owners were mailed updated information regarding the case.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against the continuation
of this application. No one wished to speak.
Motion: Continue Case USR18-0100 to the February 5, 2019 Planning Commission Hearing, Moved by
Bruce Sparrow, Seconded by Elijah Hatch.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes=7).
Yes: Bruce Sparrow, Elijah Hatch, Gene Stille, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck,Tom Cope.
CASE NUMBER: COZ18-0005
APPLICANT: PAUL&MICHELLE KING
PLANNER: ANGELA SNYDER
REQUEST: CHANGE OF ZONE FROM THE PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) TO
THE A(AGRICULTURAL)ZONE DISTRICT.
CMMU S 2019-0106
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT B REC EXEMPT RE-3358, PART NW4 SECTION 10,T7N, R67W OF THE
6TH P.M.,WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 84, EAST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 19.
Angela Snyder, Planning Services, stated that staff is requesting a continuance because they need to
correct and republish the legal notice to read "change of zone from E (Estate)to the A (Agricultural)Zone
District. Staff is requesting the case be continued to the January 15, 2019 Planning Commission Hearing.
A hearing is scheduled with the Board of County Commissioners on February 13, 2019.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against the continuation
of this application. No one wished to speak.
Motion: Continue Case COZ18-0005 to the January 15, 2019 Planning Commission Hearing, Moved by
Gene Stille, Seconded by Tom Cope.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes =7).
Yes: Bruce Sparrow, Elijah Hatch, Gene Stille, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck,Tom Cope
Motion: Move USR18-0067 on the Agenda from "Hearing Items D"to"Hearing Item A", Moved by Michael
Wailes, Seconded by Tom Cope. Motion passed unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR18-0067
APPLICANT: ADAM HILTON AND LASHAWN LAGUARDIA
PLANNER: CHRIS GATHMAN
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT FOR A HOME BUSINESS (AUTOMOBILE MODIFICATION) IN THE A
(AGRICULTURAL)ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: S2 LOT 11,BLOCK 1 JO ANN SUB;PART OF SECTION 26,T1 N, R66W OF THE
6TH P.M.,WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO BAILEY DRIVE AND APPROXIMATELY 445
FEET NORTH OF CR 4.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, stated that due to a scheduling conflict with both the applicant and
applicant's representative not being able to attend today's Planning Commission hearing, they have
requested that the case be continued. Adam Hilton and Brian DeBauche are involved in a trial in Denver
District Court Division 203 until Friday of this week. Staff recommended the case be continued to the
February 19, 2019 Planning Commission Hearing and Board of County Commissioner hearing on March
13, 2019.
Chair Wailes asked if this case has an active violation. Mr. Gathman explained there is an active zoning
violation on the property. Staff stated this case was continued once before on November 6, 2018 due to a
scheduling conflict. The applicant has informed staff that they are not currently working very much on the
property because it is their off season.
Commissioner Wailes asked what effect continuing the case would have on the zoning violation. Mr.
Gathman said he was not aware of a stipulated court deadline the applicant had to meet.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against the continuation
of this application.
Ron Garrett, 1142 Bailey Drive, Brighton, Colorado, stated that he would try to be at the continued hearing
but is running out of vacation time. He said this is the third time he has come here and it is getting difficult
for him and his neighbor Mr. Carranco to keep coming.
Commissioner Cope asked Mr. Garrett if he was a neighbor. Mr. Garrett said he lives directly across the
street from the applicant and that his neighbor Mr. Carranco lives next door to the applicant.
Commissioner Cope commented that if the applicant is under violation and has asked for another
continuance, they should not be allowed to do business on the property during this time. Commissioner
Stille said he agreed with Commissioner Cope but wasn't sure the Planning Commission could ask them
to discontinue their operation. Mr. Haug explained the Planning Department and the County Attorney's
Office could proceed with an action if this Board requested that. Mr. Haug asked Mr. Gathman if there is a
court date set up for this violation. Mr. Gathman said he would find out.
Mr. Haug explained that the Planning Commission can make the decision to not continue the case if that is
what they wish to do.
The Chair asked Mr. Haug if the applicant had to be present at the hearing if they chose to not continue the
case. Mr. Haug said the applicant has the burden of proof and if they aren't present the planning
commission will have to consider whether that burden has been met based on the evidence in the record.
Commissioner Cope expressed concern if the case continues and it can't be heard until the end of February
by Planning Commission and heard by the Board of County Commissioner until March, the applicant is
active with the business during this time. Commissioner Cope said he feels if the applicant has already
been granted a continuance, he wouldn't have an objection to denying the request for a second
continuance. He said the Planning Commission is a recommendation to the County Commissioners and if
they do not grant the continuance, the Board of County Commissioners will hear the case in January.
Motion: Denial of Continuance of Case USR18-0067. Moved by Tom Cope, Seconded by Lonnie Ford.
Commissioner Beck stated that he disagrees with the motion and added that he thinks they should set a
date to continue it. However, the applicant should be aware that this case would not be allowed to be
continued again.
Commissioner Sparrow asked Mr. Gathman how the process was explained to the applicant. Mr.Gathman
said he received an email at the end of the day on December 17, 2018 stating they would not be able to
make the hearing. Mr. Gathman was out of the office doing a field check of the site when the e-mail was
submitted. Mr. Gathman explained they needed a formal written statement requesting the hearing to be
continued.A specific e-mail requesting the continuance was provided prior to the hearing and this was the
request that staff presented to the Planning Commission at the beginning.
Commissioner Beck asked Mr. Gathman when the soonest date for a Planning Commission hearing would
be. Mr. Gathman explained the continued hearing was scheduled for today and scheduled with the Board
of County Commissioners on January 16, 2019. The next Planning Commission hearing is January 15,
2019 so the County Commissioner hearing would have to be moved as well. Mr. Gathman explained both
hearings cannot be a day apart from each other.
Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes =5, No=2, Abstain =0).
Yes: Bruce Sparrow, Elijah Hatch, Gene Stille, Lonnie Ford, Tom Cope.
No: Michael Wailes, Richard Beck.
Chair Wailes stated that the hearing for USR18-0067 will proceed.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case USR18-0067, reading the staff recommendation for
denial and comments into the record. Staff stated that this application had been submitted in response to
a zoning violation (ZCV18-00066). Staff has received one letter of objection and one petition of objection
signed by seven property owners and tenants of nearby properties. Staff received a phone call from a
nearby property owner who requested to review the application. The Department of Planning Services
recommends denial of this application with the attached conditions of approval and development standards.
Commissioner Sparrow asked if the applicant was working on his own race cars as a hobby or if it is a
business. Mr. Gathman explained that the applicant does work at an off-site repair shop but he is also
doing a car repair business at this location and that this business (at this location) is being advertised on
Faoebook.
Mike McRoberts, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic, access to the site and drainage conditions
for the site.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on-site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Commissioner Stille asked if Ms. Light had stated the residence was on an unregistered well. Ms. Light
said she did and the applicant will need to register the well with the State of Colorado.
Commissioner Sparrow asked about different noise levels with motorcycles and vehicles. Staff shared the
statistics.
Commissioner Wailes asked if the applicant was present. The applicant was not present.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
John Carranco, 1161 Bailey Drive, Brighton, Colorado stated that he lives next door to the applicant. Mr.
Carranco explained he is upset about the high noise levels that come from the racing cars. He said the
neighbors who live a half a mile away, complain about the noise that goes on night and day. Mr.Carranco
said the applicant has no consideration for the people who live in the subdivision or their livestock. He is
concerned about the traffic and that the applicant uses Bailey Drive to test drive the vehicles. Mr. Carranco
has lived in the neighborhood for over 35 years and has enjoyed it until now. He said the applicant recently
put up a fence, but he can still see everything from his property. Mr. Carranco said the applicant brings in
a semi-trailer filled with mini race cars that they drive around in the applicant's back yard.
Commissioner Stille asked if the race cars cause a lot of dust. Mr. Carranco said the Bailey Drive is a dirt
road so there is a lot of dust when they are test driving the cars on the dirt road.
Commissioner Sparrow asked if the race cars are unlicensed vehicles being driven on a public road. Mr.
Carranco said he drives motorcycles and race cars on the public road.
Commissioner Ford asked how late in the evening the applicant generally works. Mr. Carranco said he
works all hours. They have heard him anywhere from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Mr. Carranco said he just
works on them whenever he has time. He said they have called the Sheriff's office many times about the
noise.
Ron Garrett, 1142 Bailey Drive, Brighton, Colorado said he is a neighbor of the applicant. He is very
concerned about the noise levels now and can't imagine how loud it will be if the business is approved. Mr.
Garrett stated that during summer hours, he has heard them rewing engines at 10:45 pm and has had to
close his windows and even wear ear plugs. He said it is difficult to sleep and he has to go to work the next
day. Mr. Garret said the people live in the country for peace and quiet. He said he doesn't want to live in
the subdivision if this business is approved and thinks a lot of the neighbors feel the same. Mr. Garret
stated that he would like the applicant to pursue his passion, but just not on Bailey Drive. He thinks the
business should be in a commercial zoned area.
Commissioner Ford asked how many neighbors signed the petition. Mr. Garrett said that seven people out
of the 15 homes in the subdivision signed the petition. Commissioner Cope asked Mr. Garrett to point out
the homes of the petition signers on the map. Commissioner Cope commented that the impact of the noise
level is impacting the whole area not just a small area in the subdivision.
The Chair asked the staff if they had any adjustments to the Development Standards and Conditions of
Approval. Lauren Light, Environmental Health, commented that it was up to the Board, but Development
Standard 14 could be changed to noise levels allowed in the"Residential Zone"instead of the"Commercial
Zone"since it is in a Residential Subdivision.
Commissioner Ford said it is a residential area so they should have residential zone noise standards.
Commissioner Wailes said he agrees but there are a lot of USRs that have commercial zone noise
standards. Ms. Light said if the site is in residential subdivision, it is typical to have residential noise
standards.
Commissioner Ford said he feels the Planning Commission should amend the development standards to
residential and forward to the County Commissioners for the final decision.
Mr. Gathman stated that he looked up the operation on Facebook before while preparing the staff
recommendation prior to the 11/6/2018 Planning Commission Hearing.
Motion: Amend Development Standard 14 and change the word "Commercial" to "Residential". Moved
by Bruce Sparrow, Seconded by Elijah Hatch. Motion passed unanimously.
Motion: Forward Case USR18-0067 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of
Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of denial, Moved
by Gene Stille, Seconded by Lonnie Ford.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 7).
Yes: Bruce Sparrow, Elijah Hatch, Gene Stille, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck,Tom Cope.
Commissioner Stille stated the recommendation for denial is based on Section 23-2-220 and that he agreed
with staffs recommendations.
Commissioner Hatch and Commissioner Cope said they agreed with staff's recommendations.
CASE NUMBER: PUDZ18-0002
APPLICANT: DAVID KEISER AND HARRY STROHAUER
PLANNER: CHRIS GATHMAN
REQUEST: A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION
FROM A(AGRICULTURAL)TO PUD FOR NINE(9) RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITH
ESTATE ZONE DISTRICT USES ALONG WITH 5.916 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT B REC EXEMPT RE-3703; PART NE4 SECTION 5, T4N, R65W OF THE
6TH P.M.,WELD COUNTY,COLORADO.
LOCATION: SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 50 AND WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR
41.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case PUDZ18-0002, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application
with the attached conditions of approval and development standards.
Commissioner Beck asked if the animal restriction under the Bulk Standards Requirement as delineated in
Section 23-3-440 was standard requirements or if the exception was specific for this case. Staff replied
that the animal limits are specific to what animals will be allowed in the PUD. Commissioner Beck asked
what the limit of large animals such as horses was. Staff said there is no more than one large animal such
as horses and cattle per acre. Commissioner Beck confirmed it was per acre, not per lot. Staff agreed.
Commissioner Sparrow asked staff if the applicant put the one large animal per acre in the development
standards. Staff said the applicant did;they wanted a stricter standard.
Commissioner Cope excused himself from the case because the company he works for has worked on this
project.
Hayley Balzano, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic, access to the site and drainage conditions
for the site.
Commissioner Wailes asked what tracking control was. Staff reported that based on the Institute of Traffic
Engineers approximated production of trips per lot and the number of lots, it would trigger the requirement
for a tracking control device, 100 feet of asphalt or 300 feet of asphalt at the entrance. Commissioner
Wailes asked how long the driveway was from Union Drive. Staff replied it was approximately 1,300 —
1,400 feet long.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on-site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Mr. Gathman stated that after reading the note on the plat regarding the Bulk Requirements animal limits
and reviewing County Code, he isn't sure this is something the County can put as a restriction. He feels
this is something the applicant could restrict in their covenants. Mr. Haug stated he agreed that the
applicant would need to restrict the animal limits in their covenants. Mr. Haug said the purpose of the Bulk
Requirements is to make sure there is enough land for the animals.
Sherri Lockman, Lockman Land Consulting, 36509 County Road 41, Eaton, Colorado, said that Mr.
Strohauer and Mr. Keiser have worked very hard to put this application together. She said they both live in
the area and have a personal investment in the project.
Ms. Lockman said there are five requirements remaining on staff comments that are not related to the plat.
She said she wished to comment on four of them.
Ms. Lockman asked if the school district requirement for the cash in leu fee could be paid prior to the final
plat instead of the change of zone plat on the Change of Zone Condition of Approval 1.D.
In the Change of Zone Condition of Approval 1.E, Ms. Lockman feels the applicant has already meet the
agreement with the mineral owner. Mr. Strohauer has been working with a representative from Noble
Energy to ensure the criteria is met and there are no conflicts between the surface interests. She said
Noble has not requested an agreement. Ms. Lockman said the well located on the western portion of the
property has been removed and the flow line that crossed the property has been abandoned.
In the Change of Zone Condition of Approval 1.C., it states the applicant shall attempt to address the
comments of the Union Ditch Company. Ms. Lockman submitted an exhibit to Mr. Haug that included
emails between herself and representatives from the ditch company that include the two agreements the
ditch company has proposed. Ms. Lockman said they do not agree on the agreements from the ditch
company. She said they will continue to work with them.
Ms. Lockman said the applicant is requesting a waiver from the internal paved road system according to
County standards. It is their hopes they can construct the road from 100 feet of pavement and a cattle
guard. Ms. Lockman said that pavement deteriorates if it does not get enough traffic.
Ms. Lockman asked Ms. Balzano if the horseshoe drive she requested be abandoned was the road by the
oil and gas tanks. Ms. Balzano said that was correct. Ms. Lockman stated she did not agree that should
be a condition of approval. She does not feel they should be responsible for the oil and gas entities and
their existing accesses.
Commissioner Beck asked Ms. Lockman if there was going to be a home owners association. She said
yes.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
There was further discussion about the animal limits. Ms. Lockman explained they would be fine with the
language as is and noting it would be enforced by the HOA. She wants the note on the plat. Commissioner
Beck said he believes HOA requirements could be made a matter of record without the involving the County.
Motion: Remove Condition of Approval G.2. prior to recording the Change of Zone Final Plat. Moved by
Richard Beck, Seconded by Gene Stille. Motion passed unanimously.
The Chair asked Ms. Lockman what she was requesting with the Condition of Approval 1.D that regards
school district fees. Ms. Lockman said it was her understanding it could be removed and Staff would
address this condition at the Final Plat.
Motion: Remove Condition of Approval 1.D. Moved by Richard Beck, Seconded by Elijah Hatch.
Motion passed unanimously.
Commissioner Wailes asked the Planning Commission if they have had a chance to review the emails
between the applicant and the Union Ditch Company. Commissioner Beck asked for a brief summary of
what the issue is. Ms. Lockman explained the ditch company does not want to liable if something bad
happened on any of the lots. The applicant feels they should hold some liability. Commissioner Beck
stated he felt the applicant and ditch company should work this issue out with each other. Ms. Lockman
explained she isn't asking for the condition to be removed, she is saying she feels they have already met
the criteria.
The Chair asked Ms. Lockman if there was any open space. She explained there is a trail. The applicant
is proposing 11% open space (15% is required) including the trail.
Commissioner Sparrow said he would agree to waive the open space requirement because of the large lot
sizes.
The Chair mentioned a lot of subdivisions and PUDs are requesting to waive open space requirements,
and he feels eventually there will not be very much open space.
Commissioner Beck asked Ms. Lockman why they didn't make the trail wider to meet the 15%. Ms.
Lockman answered that it is a maintenance issue. She said that because the lot sizes are so big, most
residents will use their own property rather than use the trail.
Commissioner Stifle said he agreed with the applicant.
Motion: Approve waiver from the County Code Section 27-6-20, 15% common open space requirement
and keep open space at 11%. Moved by Gene Stifle, Seconded by Richard Beck. Motion carried(5-1),
with Michael Wailes casting the no vote.
The Chair asked if there were any more comments regarding the applicant's request for a waiver from the
paving requirement.
Commissioner Stille asked the Ms. Lockman why they do not want internal paved roads. Ms. Lockman
explained that the applicant lives in a subdivision that has road base and it works very well with the amount
of traffic. She explained the upkeep of pavement is very expensive and will be left up to the homeowners
to pay. Ms. Lockman said they spoke to the Town of LaSalle about possible annexation and the town had
no issues with not having internal paved roads. Commissioner Stille said if the Town of LaSalle someday
decided to annex the area, then the homeowners will be required to pay to have the roads paved. He said
the cost of paving could be incorporated in the cost of the lot.
Commissioner Sparrow said he didn't have an issue with gravel especially during the construction stages.
Commissioner Wailes expressed concern with gravel getting on County Road 50 with the average speed
of 50 mph. He feels gravel creates a hazard on the paved roads.
Ms. Balzano explained that per County Code Section 27-2-20 (Access Standards) all PUD developments
will be served by an internally paved road.
Commissioner Ford asked if there was a time requirement for the roads to be paved,or if they can be paved
after construction is complete. Ms. Balzano explained that if there were no waiver, the Improvements
Agreement would have the pavement design. Public Works would require a collateral on the improvement.
The collateral cannot be released until Staff has inspected the paved road.
Mr. Haug explained if there is an Improvements Agreement, there is the collateral to pave the road. He
said there could be a time limit placed after construction. Mr. Haug also said the time limit could be put in
the Improvements Agreement by staff. He explained by putting the time limit on the plat, the paving is
enforceable.
After further discussion, the Planning Commission agreed that the paving requirement is per County Code
and the applicant can propose the waiver to the Board of County Commissioners.
The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the amended Development Standards and
Conditions of Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in
agreement.
Motion: Forward Case PUDZ18-0002 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of
Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval,
Moved by Gene Stille, Seconded by Elijah Hatch.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes =6).
Yes: Bruce Sparrow, Elijah Hatch, Gene Stille, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck.
Excused:Tom Cope.
The Chair called a recess at 2:35 p.m. and reconvened the hearing at 2:46 p.m.
CASE NUMBER: USR18-0093
APPLICANT: ROCKY MOUNTAIN MIDSTREAM, LLC
PLANNER: KIM OGLE
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT FOR A GREATER THAN 12-INCH PIPELINE, (24-INCH HIGH
PRESSURE NATURAL GAS PIPELINE) APPROXIMATELY 9.25 MILES IN
LENGTH IN THE A(AGRICULTURAL)ZONE DISTRICT
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: THE PIPELINE CROSSES SECTIONS 18, 17, 20, 19, 30, 31, T2N, R63W;
SECTIONS 6,7, 18, 19,30,T1 N, R63W;AND SECTION 25,Ti N, R64W;ALL OF
THE 6TH P.M.,WELD COUNTY,COLORADO.
LOCATION: GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF CR 59, SOUTH OF CR 22,WEST OF CR 65
AND NORTH OF CR 4.
Kim Ogle, Planning Services, presented Case USR18-0093, reading the recommendation and comments
into the record. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application with the
attached conditions of approval and development standards.
Commissioner Sparrow stated he was going to recuse himself from this case because he is friends with%
of the people on the route. After a brief conversation amongst the Planning Commissioners it was agreed
Commissioner Sparrow could stay on the board since he had no financial stake with his friends. Mr. Haug
asked Commissioner Sparrow if those relationships were going to interfere with his ability to weigh the
evidence creditably or make a fair determination. Commissioner Sparrow said it would not.
Evan Pinkham, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic,access to the site and drainage conditions for
the site.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on-site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Matthew Norton, 3601 Stagecoach Road, Suite 202, Longmont, Colorado, said the Keenesburg South
Pipeline will transport natural gas via a 24-inch steel pipeline. The pipeline will originate in Weld County
just north of County Road 4 and west of County Road 61,extending north and terminate near County Road
18, east of Highway 76. The length of the pipeline is approximately 50,000 feet long (9.5 miles).
Construction is expected in March—July 2019. The pipeline is monitored 24/7 by trained operators. Mr.
Norton said they have acquired 100 percent of the right-of-way; all agreements have been signed by the
property owners.
Commissioner Hatch asked Mr. Norton what the depth was for boring under a major highway such as
Highway 76. Mr. Norton explained that Highway 76 would be under CDOT regulation. Most crossings on
CDOT roads vary anywhere from five to six feet at the bar ditch and go as deep as ten feet before it comes
back up. Mr. Norton said every road crossing is different and there is a bore profile based on road elevation
and regulations.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the Development Standards and Conditions of
Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in agreement.
Motion: Forward Case USR18-0093 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of
Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval,
Moved by Elijah Hatch, Seconded by Tom Cope.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes =7).
Yes: Bruce Sparrow, Elijah Hatch, Gene Stille, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck,Tom Cope.
Commissioner Hatch stated that he agreed with staff recommendation and feels the applicant has met the
requirements for Section 23-2-260 and 23-2-480 of the County Code.
CASE NUMBER: USR18-0106
APPLICANT: GARY HOWARD, JOHN & DIANA HOWARD AND D&C FARMS, LLLP, C/O
DISCOVERY DJ SERVICES, LLC
PLANNER: CHRIS GATHMAN
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT FOR MINERAL RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT FACILITIES INCLUDING
OIL AND GAS SUPPORT AND SERVICE(COMPRESSOR STATION FACILITY)
ALONG WITH A 60-FOOT COMMUNICATION ANTENNA IN THE A
(AGRICULTURAL)ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SE4 SECTION 29,Ti N,R67W OF THE 6TH P.M.,WELD COUNTY,COLORADO.
LOCATION: WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 17 AND NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO CR
4.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case USR18-0106, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Mr. Gathman stated that the compressor station site will encompass
approximately 10 acres on the property and a subdivision exemption (SUBX18-0031) is being applied for
in conjunction with this application that defines the boundaries of this USR. Three additional letters were
received last week from surrounding property owners who expressed concerns with the project. Some of
the concerns include the choice of a gas compressor rather than an electrical compressor with emissions,
the haul route could be on County Road 6 instead of County Road 2 to minimize traffic going past existing
residents during construction, and instead of commercial noise standards, residents would like the noise
standards to be residential or agriculture, The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of
this application with the attached conditions of approval and development standards.
Commissioner Hatch asked Mr. Gathman if this site is sitting on an existing pipeline. Mr. Gathman replied
that there is a USR for a pipeline that is currently being applied for (USR18-0098) that would tie into this
pipeline.
Commissioner Stille asked if the pipeline would be in a floodplain. Staff said it was and referred to the
floodplain boundaries on the map.
Hayley Balzano, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic, access to the site and drainage conditions
for the site.
Ben Frissell, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on-site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Matthew Norton,3601 Stagecoach Road, Suite 202, Longmont,Colorado,said the Broomfield Compressor
Station is located on a ten-acre site. The major equipment is contained to approximately six acres. The
site is south of County Road 6,on the west side of County Road 17. A future possible substation is planned
for the northwest corner of the property. The full build out is planned for eight compressors. Due to air
permit restrictions, if needed,the final two compressors may be driven by electrical motors. Mr. Norton said
they do not have a problem with having a residential noise standard for this location. The applicant has
submitted a draft Landscape/screening Plan.The proposed landscaping is to be watered by a underground
drip system served by a 500-gallon tank. Mr. Norton indicated that the applicant was having discussions
with a property owner to the south re:the potential for additional screening to the south and west.
Commissioner Hatch asked if the landscaping on the east side was elevated or at ground level. Mr. Norton
said he believed it is at ground level. Because of the way the site is sloped, there was not a reason to do
berming because it would interrupt the natural flow of water down to the detention pond.
Commissioner Ford asked how far the nearest resident was from the north. Mr. Norton replied it was
approximately 2.300 feet away.
Commissioner Cope asked if the future substation is included in this USR. Mr. Gathman explained it would
depend on if the transmission lines were greater than 69 kV coming into the substation. Mr. Norton said
the transmission lines would be 69 kV. Mr. Gathman said that a USR is not required for substations served
by transmission lines that are 69 kV or less.
Commissioner Stille asked Mr. Norton if they would consider changing from six gas compressors and two
electrical compressors to all electrical compressors. Mr. Norton said he has not heard of any plans to do
that. Commissioner Stille asked the applicant if they have done a study on the cost comparison between
natural gas versus electrical compressors. Mr. Norton said for them, the natural gas is much more cost
effective.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Bill Wycoff, 333 County Road 17, Brighton, Colorado submitted an exhibit of handouts for the Planning
Commission. Mr.Wycoff stated he felt traffic to the site should be coming from County Road 6,the shortest
distance to pavement,rather than County Road 2. County Road 2 has about 13 homes along it and County
Road 6 has one home,
Mr.Wycoff stated he felt it would be good if the compressor station construction did not begin until after the
Colorado Department of Health and Environment's approval. Mr.Wycoff expressed concerns about ozone
problems and pollution issues such as nitric oxides and volatile organic compounds. He would like the
compressors to be electrical motor driven. Mr. Wycoff provided a handout to the Planning Commission
delineating the difference in emissions between electrical and gas driven compressors. Mr. Wycoff stated
that he had discussed whether these compressors could be served by the substation (approved under
USR18-0109)to the west with a representative from Tri State.Tri State indicated that the substation should
have the capacity to provide electricity to this site.
Hazel Frank 1596 County Road 15, Brighton, Colorado submitted an exhibit of a handout for the Planning
Commission. Ms. Frank said that per County Code, Section 22-5-100.A.2 (OG Policy 1.2) states oil and
gas support facilities which do not rely on geology for locations should locate in commercial and industrial
areas when possible. She said that obviously this is not happening because this is a very rural and
agricultural area.
Ms. Frank is very concerned about noise. She asked the Planning Commission to recommend
Development Standard 24 be changed to residential noise levels instead of commercial.
Ms. Frank said she asked Mr. Norton to contact another neighbor Mr. Seiler to discuss landscaping. Ms.
Frank stated that she feels all nine homes in Section 29 should be included in the noise mitigation and
communication plan rather than properties that are adjacent to the site.
Commissioner Wailes stated he appreciated the neighbors working with the applicant.
Mr. Norton explained the State has a construction permitting process. He said it usually takes about 4—5
months from application submittal. The construction application for this facility has been submitted. Mr.
Norton said in addition to that, there is a general permit with the State specific to natural gas engines. Mr.
Norton indicated that they have installed electrical compressors at larger compressor facilities than this one.
They install electrical compressors where it makes sense. Mr. Norton explained it is a business decision
to choose the natural gas compressors at this location.
Mr. Norton said that all the compressor engines must meet emission requirements and are tested annually
to meet both State and Federal regulations.
Mr. Norton said he didn't have any issues with Development Standard 24 being changed to residential
noise standards.
Mr. Norton stated that there is not a problem to revise the stakeholder definition to include any of the
neighbors who want to be included in the communication plan.
Commissioner Cope asked if the applicant would consider using County Road 6 instead of County Road 2.
Mr. Norton said he will look into the reasons behind this decision and have that answer at the BOCC
hearing.
Motion: Amend Development Standard 24 to Residential noise levels. Moved by Tom Cope, Seconded
by Elijah Hatch. Motion carried unanimously.
The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the amended Development Standards and
Conditions of Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in
agreement.
Motion: Forward Case USR18-0106 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of
Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval,
Moved by Bruce Sparrow, Seconded by Richard Beck.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote(summary: Yes =7).
Yes: Bruce Sparrow, Elijah Hatch, Gene Stille, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck,Tom Cope.
The Chair asked the public if there were other items of business that they would like to discuss. No one
wished to speak.
The Chair asked the Planning Commission members if there was any new business to discuss. No one
wished to speak.
Meeting adjourned at 4:16 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Michelle Wall
Secretary
Hello