Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20180185.tiffHEARING CERTIFICATION DOCKET NO. 2017-86.C RE: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT, USR17-0043, FOR MINERAL RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT INCLUDING ASPHALT AND CONCRETE BATCH PLANTS, MATERIALS PROCESSING (CRUSHING AND SCREENING), MATERIAL STOCK PILES, AN OFFICE, A SHOP, AND OUTDOOR TRUCK AND EMPLOYEE PARKING IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT - CACTUS HILL RANCH COMPANY, C/O SIMON CONTRACTORS, INC. A public hearing was conducted on January 10, 2018, at 10:00 a.m., with the following present: Commissioner Steve Moreno, Chair Commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer, Pro -Tern Commissioner Sean P. Conway Commissioner Julie Cozad Commissioner Mike Freeman Also present: Acting Clerk to the Board, Tisa Juanicorena Assistant County Attorney, Bob Choate Planning Services Department representative, Kim Ogle Public Works Department representative, Evan Pinkham Planning Services Engineer representative, Hayley Balzano Health Department representative, Ben Frissell The following business was transacted: • Chair Moreno called the hearing to order. Commissioner Cozad clarified she does not have a conflict of interest with the case being heard today. • Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated a conflict of interest, per the County Code, would mean receiving a financial gain from the applicants. Commissioner Cozad stated for the record she has no financial interest and has not received any financial gain from the companies represented in this case. • I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated September 15, 2017, and duly published October 20, 2017, in the Greeley Tribune, a public hearing was conducted on October 25, 2017, to consider the request of Cactus Hill Ranch Company, c/o Simon Contractors, Inc., for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit, USR17-0043, for Mineral Resource Development including Asphalt and Concrete Batch Plants, materials processing (crushing and screening), material stock piles, an office, a shop, and outdoor truck and employee parking in the A (Agricultural) Zone District, at which time the Board deemed it appropriate to continue the matter to Monday, November 6, 2017, at 10:00 a.m., to allow the applicant time to schedule a second open house for surrounding property owners and to allow all five (5) Commissioners to be present. On November 6, 2017, the hearing was conducted and recessed at 3:30 p.m., to be reconvened on November 8, 2017, at 9:00 a.m., and subsequently continued to January 10, 2018, at 10:00 a.m., to allow the Board of County Commissioners adequate time cc: PLC Ko/MM),Pit NB), EHCC3F),cT$cTSB oacos/ ISr 2018-0185 PL2503 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CACTUS HILL RANCH COMPANY, C/O SIMON CONTRACTORS, INC. (USR17-0043) PAGE 2 to review the numerous exhibits submitted at the hearing. On January 10, 2018, Bob Choate, Assistant County Attorney, made this a matter of record and instructed the audience regarding the order of procedures for the hearing today. • In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Choate stated the Board has the discretion to re -open public comment; however, he reviewed the direction given at the prior hearing to not allow further exhibits from the public due to the amount of information received. Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated due to the amount of information submitted by the applicant since the last hearing, and given the responsibility of every Commissioner to review all the documents, she requested the Board limit the rebuttal to 90 minutes and asked for a continuance to February 5, 2018, at 10:00 a.m., to be able to review these additional documents submitted so close to this hearing date. She also requested the Board close public record for the applicant, as well as the public, to refrain from anymore document submittals. eg Chair Moreno followed up stating he was also overwhelmed with the amount of documents submitted and agreed the Board needs more time to review these items. • Commissioner Conway agreed with the sentiments of his fellow Commissioners and stated he was stunned regarding the number of documents received. He further clarified the motion for a continuance opens the option for public comment regarding the continuance. • Commissioner Cozad agreed and provided a recap of receiving the book of information on December 27th and the additional documents on Friday prior to this hearing and that she has spent a lot of time reviewing these documents; however, she stated she would appreciate more time to review these items more closely. She further stated she is willing to hear the applicant's closing comments today, but is in agreement with a continuance and closing the public record to make sure there are no additional submittals. • Commissioner Freeman stated he left town on December 26th and returned on January 3rd to this large amount of information. He asserted that although he has reviewed much of it, he agreed with the suggested continuance to allow time to review these items more completely. • In response to Chair Moreno, Commissioner Kirkmeyer reiterated the idea of limiting the rebuttal to 90 minutes for expert testimonies. • In response to the Board's limit on the rebuttal, Anne Johnson, Tetra Tech, represented the applicant and explained the nature of the rebuttal is to walk through the Conditions of Approval, Development Standards and the mitigation responses to questions and concerns presented at prior hearings. • Ms. Johnson began with a summation of the presentation to include the dates additional documents were presented and the reasoning behind these submittals to mitigate and answer questions presented to the applicant at prior hearings. She clarified the intended land use is for a 2018-0185 PL2503 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CACTUS HILL RANCH COMPANY, C/O SIMON CONTRACTORS, INC. (USR17-0043) PAGE 3 ready mix concrete plant, not a cement plant; and an asphalt plant, not a paving operation, and it would include parking, an office, and recycling. She introduced several individuals who will discuss their areas of expertise and be available to answer questions. Ms. Johnson stated the rebuttal presentation is being divided into three (3) main sections to illustrate how the applicant meets and exceeds standard application requirements, has considered questions and concerns from both the Board and the public comment, and has mitigated or addressed compliance with Conditions and Development Standards. • Michael Smith, consultant with Foster Valuation, spoke regarding diminution related to property values, as referenced in Exhibit CP pages 96-252, offered to answer questions regarding the results of his value comparisons and sales analysis as related to similar residential sites in Weld County being adjacent to an industrial facility. In response to Commissioner Conway, he provided basic site analysis regarding properties that fit the criteria and average cost per acre in terms of A (Agricultural) zoned land. When asked the average cost to buy an industrial site, versus an agricultural site, Mr. Smith stated that would be difficult for him to answer accurately; however, he did believe an industrial site would cost more per acre. eA In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Smith stated there are plenty of analyses to suggest similar increase in resale in subdivisions adjacent to industrial sites, over the course of time, opposed to the price increase of subdivisions not adjacent to an industrial site. He confirmed he is not seeing less appreciation. • Commissioner Cozad clarified Mr. Smith was tasked to look at residential values in proximity to industrial sites and he was not asked to look at the site selection process. He agreed. In response to Commissioner Cozad, Mr. Smith provided his background education, credentials and experience to support his findings regarding property values and his expertise was not in the site selection process. Ms. Johnson confirmed every question will be answered and she introduced those to speak regarding toxicology and air modeling. • Dr. Scott Phillips stated he is an internal medicine doctor and medical toxicology physician for the University of Colorado and Rocky Mountain Poison Center. He stated he has focused on the health impact assessments of these types of sites and has been working on these types of sites for at least five (5) years and looking at associated health impacts. Dr. Phillips provided information as related to the Environmental Protection Agency, the Center for Disease Control and the World Health Organization and emphasized the difference between science and opinions. He summarized his documentation and stated he is not concerned about the heath impact from this site given the measures being taken by the applicant and the regulations enforced by the State. • In response to Commissioner Cozad, Dr. Phillips stated he reviewed all the comments and information that was submitted by the surrounding property owners and reiterated his confidence in the science, strict regulations and monitoring provided by the State regarding the facility which controls the emissions very specifically and carefully monitors the particulates and his professional opinion is there is no health risk. 2018-0185 PL2503 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CACTUS HILL RANCH COMPANY, C/O SIMON CONTRACTORS, INC. (USR17-0043) PAGE 4 In response to Commissioner Conway, Dr. Phillips stated the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) monitors particulates and criteria pollutants; however, he is not aware of perimeter monitors in relation to asphalt plants. Ms. Johnson followed up with the clarification that much of the information submitted was in relation to cement facilities and paving operations which was not applicable to this case. Commissioner Kirkmeyer requested Ms. Johnson describe the specific differences, at some point in the presentation, between a cement facility and ready -mix facility, and between a paving operation and an asphalt production facility. Ms. Johnson stated her suggestion is noted. Jeff Harrington, Tetra Tech, stated he is a Senior Environmental Engineer based in the Portland Maine office and has been doing air quality permitting work for 30 years for many states in the country. He reviewed the rigorous process and strict statutes the applicant must address in the permit process as outlined in Exhibit CP, pages 2-71. Mr. Harrington stated he reviewed the applicant's submittals to comply with permit procedures and their implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) that exceed the requirements. He concluded his review by asserting this is a state-of-the-art facility with respect to air emissions. In response to several questions from the Board, Mr. Harrington stated the applicant has exceeded the requirements related to air permitting. Mitchell Little, Hellman and Associates, addressed Development Standard #15 regarding noise, as related to Exhibit CO, pages 8-11. He provided his background, credentials and experience and explained he was hired by Simon Contractors to evaluate noise emissions and recommend control measures with the intent of compliance. Mr. Little provided a summary of his findings and reported the efforts made by the applicant to include proposed mitigation as the site is developed and comes online and other equipment is installed. He clarified the measurements he takes also considers intensity and frequency. He cited back-up alarms for mobile equipment, berms, hay bales, baffles, redirection, enclosing point sources, noise treatment, all with the intent to reduce noise through specific science. In response to Chair Moreno, Mr. Little explained there are several factors taken into consideration when taking noise measurements. al Ms. Johnson stated corn bales will be placed around the recycling operations which will baffle and absorb the noise on three (3) sides, along with landscaping and berms that have been added to provide visual and noise buffers on the western side. She also covered a few quick points between speakers to emphasize the developer's effort to create better communication tools which include a blog, and an entrance sign with contact information on it. al Brett Baker, Simon Contractors, spoke on the site selection process and stated, from a business perspective, the cost and value of the land is an important factor and equally important is the opportunity for growth in the market, how the competitor layout is, and what the opportunity is for products, materials and services. He stated they performed a lengthy assessment of the northern Colorado market and based on population growth forecasts being very high and rapid, it confirmed a good market and this site allows the company to be close to the growth with access to Highway 14. 2018-0185 PL2503 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CACTUS HILL RANCH COMPANY, C/O SIMON CONTRACTORS, INC. (USR17-0043) PAGE 5 la Ms. Johnson reviewed the criteria for the site selection process to include: approximately five miles from 1-25, on the east side of 1-25, one mile from Highway 14, minimum parcel size of 20 acres, land that is zoned to support the use, not in wetlands or floodplains, not on Weld County delineated prime farm ground, close access onto a state highway, limited use of county roads, near signalized highway intersections, not in platted residential subdivisions, and haul routes to minimize direct routes through communities. She continued by stating this particular site offers a bonus because it is within a development node for the Town of Severance and the development node recognized by Weld County as well, which elevates the selection of this property from others because it is zoned to support the land use and designated for development. She described similar uses in the area and reiterated the parcel was difficult to farm and the Use proposed is allowed as a Use by Special Review option in the A (Agricultural) Zone District. • In response to Commissioner Conway, Ms. Johnson stated there were industrial properties for sale along 1-25 but they were located in the City of Fort Collins and do not support the land use. ▪ Mr. Baker explained the difference between a cement production facility, which creates the cement powder, and a ready -mix facility, which uses the cement powder to make a sidewalk or foundation when mixed with water and sometimes sand. He also explained the difference between asphalt production, mixing and heating the asphalt to send out in trucks to the location of the paving operation which is using equipment that holds the asphalt and applies it to the roadway. In response to Ms. Johnson, Mr. Baker stated there are no plastic bottles in the asphalt production, only recycled aggregate and road base from tearing up old roads. • Ms. Johnson took a moment to clarify items related to waste water handling to point out aggregates are not washed on -site and reclaimed water will be used for dust suppression. She mentioned landscaping, access, and lighting items to be addressed. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, she acquiesced to instead move forward with addressing the issue regarding the Larimer County Ditch. la Ken Lind and John Siren, attorneys, introduced themselves to address the ditch and water rights issues. Mr. Lind referred to Exhibit D, a letter from Cactus Hill Ranch Company stating they agreed to accept the historical overland flows from the USR site, which was an alternative to water flowing into the canal, and described they would take water from the site underneath the canal and onto property owned by Cactus Hill. He explained County staff then requested evidence that the down slope property owner will accept the stormwater and drainage water, which was referenced as a proposed license agreement involving Simon Contractors and Cactus Hill because you cannot install an easement on your own property and Cactus Hill owns all the property north of the site, the site, over and under the ditch, and to the south and to the west of the site. The draft license agreement provides for all the storm and drain water to come onto Cactus Hill Ranch Company property. He stated there was a question regarding what the Division of Water Resources might have to say about this arrangement, and those responses are included as letters in Exhibit CO, pages 12-31. 2018-0185 PL2503 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CACTUS HILL RANCH COMPANY, C/O SIMON CONTRACTORS, INC. (USR17-0043) PAGE 6 el Mr. Siren began by reviewing his credentials as a water attorney to include extensive experience with the Division of Water Resources. He explained the intent to channel water in a way that it avoids the Larimer Canal and that this is typically not a concern with the Division of Water Resources. He stated to be sure, he contacted Jeff Deatherage, Chief of Water Supply for the Colorado State Engineer at the Colorado Division of Water Resources and explained the intent to channel the water to prevent it from entering the canal and while maintaining historic drainage patterns. He reiterated the water is not being used for agriculture, will be returned to the native grass fields and will only be moving a short distance in a way that injures no one. Mr. Siren stated the intended alternative meets the requirements and complies with the cited Colorado Revised Statutes and was of no concern to the State (Exhibit CO, pages 12-31). ID Mr. Lind confirmed the license agreement between Cactus Hill Ranch Company and Simon Contractors is completed, it includes a paragraph citing compliance with directives from the State and also a paragraph referencing compliance with a decommissioning plan. Lastly, he requested the language be changed on the Condition regarding the ditch company to reflect the alternative plan to not utilize the Larimer County Canal. • In response to Commissioner Conway, Ms. Balzano stated she had not reviewed the license agreement; however, she suggested adding language to allow the operator to access the property for inspection, maintenance and repairs. She further recommended replacing the current language on Condition of Approval (COA) #1.E with the language she suggested and forwarded to both the applicant and the Board. Mr. Lind interjected that he has seen the language and agrees. The Board agreed also to remove reference to easement and replace with license. Mr. Lind stated they plan to record the license agreement and he confirmed the language for the license agreement contains the suggestion from Ms. Balzano to allow the operator access to the property for inspection, maintenance and repairs. • In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Lind verified the language will reference "drainage license," not "easement" throughout the document. • In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Ms. Johnson asked for clarification regarding any opportunity to continue the rebuttal presentation on February 5th. Commissioner Kirkmeyer reviewed the procedures to follow on February 5, 2018, and explained the Board will engage with the applicant and the staff in a normal manner of discussion and she reiterated the importance of having more time to review the documents that have been submitted and there needs to be a stopping point. Ms. Johnson stated there are items she wishes could have been discussed today such as drainage modifications. • Chair Moreno recessed the hearing at 11:45 a.m., for a five (5) minute break. • Chair Moreno reconvened at 11:51 a.m. • Ms. Johnson requested one (1) hour for the engineers to discuss drainage, proposed road improvements, and traffic. She also requested time to summarize her other points regarding 2018-0185 PL2503 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CACTUS HILL RANCH COMPANY, C/O SIMON CONTRACTORS, INC. (USR17-0043) PAGE 7 Conditions of Approval and the Development Standards to indicate items that are either being modified by staff or acknowledged by the applicant regarding compliance. The Board agreed to grant the hour on February 5th as requested by the applicant. • Commissioner Kirkmeyer moved to continue the request of Cactus Hill Ranch Company, do Simon Contractors, Inc., for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit, USR17-0043, for Mineral Resource Development including Asphalt and Concrete Batch Plants, materials processing (crushing and screening), material stock piles, an office, a shop, and outdoor truck and employee parking in the A (Agricultural) Zone District, to February 5, 2018, at 10:00 a.m., to allow adequate time for the Board to review document submittals and to reiterate there will be no more documents received from the public or applicant. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Conway. Chair Moreno opened public comment regarding the continuance only. • Christian Schulte, attorney, stated with respect to the continuance he has two (2) requests of the Board. He recommended the Board allow further input from the public, otherwise it is unfair to have only heard from the applicant recently. He also requested the Board allow time for the public to submit additional documents for their review but to put a cap on it such as 10 days, if the materials submitted can fairly be characterized as new information. Mr. Schulte stated he is concerned with the volume of materials submitted by the applicant, and stated the public should be given a chance to respond. • The Board and Mr. Choate discussed the recommendations from Mr. Schulte and how it relates to due process and whether it is a direction they should consider given the volumes of materials received to date and if it would cause a further continuance. • Tom Moore, surrounding property owner (SPO), requested the continuance not be granted and the decision be made today. He asked for a denial based on incompatibility and the cost he will incur if it is passed. • Eric Steidl, SPO, stated his observation that the Board received a large notebook and another addendum and there was no opportunity for the public to review these submittals. He requested the public be allowed to review these items and provide feedback. • Ken Lind, on behalf of applicant, stated it will be a problem for the applicant if the hearing is opened for public input again, because he would request a sur-rebuttal time. He stated they attempted to provide answers to the public input from the prior hearings. He reiterated the importance of the rebuttal and mitigation and requested the Board not go beyond, otherwise it never ends and raises a due process issue. • Ms. Johnson stated, for the record, that the only items submitted by the applicant were direct answers to questions they were asked to answer or were directly related to Conditions and/or 2018-0185 PL2503 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CACTUS HILL RANCH COMPANY, C/O SIMON CONTRACTORS, INC. (USR17-0043) PAGE 8 Development Standards. She requested if the Board chooses to open it to public input again, that the applicant would again have adequate time to review public input and prepare for an additional rebuttal. El Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated only the Board can decide if the process moves past rebuttal. Commissioner Cozad stated if the Board decides to take additional information from the public, the February 5th date will not work because then the applicant will need time to review the documents and then the Board would need time to review the documents. In response to the comment made by Mr. Moore, she explained they cannot make a decision today because they must have time to review the materials submitted. • Susan Lake, SPO, asked who is going to monitor the water and the air and will it be monitored properly so there is no leakage of pollution into the water or air. • Chair Moreno closed public input and called the Board's attention back to the motion to continue to February 5, 2018, with no new information allowed from either the public or the applicant, other than the agreed upon time on February 5th to allow the applicant to finish their rebuttal and make any wrap up comments. The Board discussed the motion. • Commissioner Conway requested staff provide direction to the public on how to access the additional documents provided by the applicant. El Chair Moreno called for a vote on the motion to continue the matter to Monday, February 5, 2018, at 10:00 a.m., to allow the Board adequate time to review the document submittals and no new information from the applicant or the public will be allowed. The motion carried unanimously. There being no further discussion, the hearing was completed at 12:22 p.m. This Certification was approved on the 15th day of January, 2018. 2018-0185 PL2503 HEARING CERTIFICATION - CACTUS HILL RANCH COMPANY, C/O SIMON CONTRACTORS, INC. (USR17-0043) PAGE 9 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO ATTEST: detifiA)•� Weld County Clerk to the Board BY: Pf$ J t —JsAv Deputy Clerk to the APP County Attorney Date of signature: G l -o Steve Moreno, Chair Sean P. Conway /a, c/. Cozad l� �.a Mike Freeman 2018-0185 PL2503 ATTENDANCE LIST DATE: tJ l® I( NAME - PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY EMAIL i ADDRESS COUNTY OF RESIDENCE SPEAKING? (YIN) A5Do\r\ Ahne, , \Jokn5c,nojefrk fech.c� (�1.�.� �.S�<<��,��-`3r is i� �,�. vn„�r- �t L2 vntti y L (0 x),, le7.0-d411 // GX.y( (21-:),✓cO2,ze of- seZ ciitic, Cr>7. cc%die ✓/l.,ve,e [/ 4P g�‘/6 ti4/�' WQ 'I e- z-c),A1-e-a- Lc:0'v.. i ,119,1:;,`" t_'' O" rg:1; p-0 i< VIAL i ci 3 CG g&r'r ti it IA .11 ar; a n @•)-ek L4Pci..e o nl r•�'LeZ NiC Arce Con& -f�. e( (Mai 0e) Y j Je y F e J`� -R-. CD ire..•., z -vim;-ect, .cn,1 s. 9CX� 5. SL,_,,_..-- sr. !Lc L --� w-„ k-, c_O w 1 / �, �.,firfe-(1 c3 $-2-o/(//ems//\pi /VI) S1'�i //;s V 'C., isie, GL9,,, AO 50)c. i 3 Z 3 u..,f C..c.�)4- Ys --6(3 � i �° � i0\ -vi ,(‘z‘r--) f J b i ael '- c4p.A.Lo ccom 0 .,, iZA"i 7 7 4 _.nL� (Q go -a06 De, n, i yeS n_‘/, --AP l ` / 7 6 -LS CAL [w& (*f ,,,e-- GG�... Y _`5te724-- rha,f Cis in aq As: .. Ze --r exec( 4 ��7 Leici - V kY ),.,-,t=`Jr, iyir). dip. 0 s;,--, p.-,o-.F41:cI1-, c �yri$- �.p-2...$7,7 44 .I - - ; ( G_ .4-ra,' �p a' Ce Get C1-. n�{ L,-1-i-e 4-,,,,,,..�a a I & .. D ® IG i ca5 )y Li 1 f‘etitt ( 46.11-4elif-wh2-6- -it �''� C �� eye3Lii 2. rte/ '/11/ `,c/ /4,4., �r i-P�r? C f / 1 I / M (s l(e_ e( CAE,-( n n �e, cfs, S � �� /(413 u� Z -7v star'4d7a. /24 J' G✓4i„4, •�>- c�- r �i coC,ca � a a � `3 / J - J- f a / C�./I:�l-,cr-, sC.L.�,1 Gsc��.it-40CoC rte--s,CVj� � ek o. ` Lek y linqaji) e a. -1-1.4 Hie f)L� w e u At i.( tr ,1: fi Ir PePOg .-r ( 6 Cb C)S "S-7 �,M ‘A.\-(, � 1q1) C.Or r;i� SIEJn L j 6),i'711-111� 11l2(14,11ai ,cOrh ) � C.4".,..vv-r7 .4O - Boa,— -1, 1,:›52-4 G(��) i/ jj^ Gd%�-(S. kWh' "").,1°/)-1.) ,32438.1i 1:4. f"<) ,--52.2 Zi---3-1----1C-1 7 y i <./toA,riot �L s �4 t�� `. ?) 9a) G it i�J EC Lc► ►e;4 — J\J Hello