The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About780442.tiff / -----4, Derr�L3 I . }K , „•..R '` �` iliNttli ' '. I( l'‘Ii jj p i 1 •'I _y am i` L m ,., " ?; s i ii .� 'x — -�--- / i ;' il,.R, •i',l l� .!Ai. . • ,_J,v,ice'._ �-.�•T _^Jc-,. . .4i.a 3� --,e, ,v y�' 4 L-1;',- Ise -n'�;., -�-.;•.- 2.x .��r, =_ -_10 d % = 7.. 4 I4 01.:-�_--- -- - ---- -_ = - I _ - - ..� .._ , C: N awl: . , ! �� . #1,isql OTC,&& L- .:,y€�f t,.— l.Oi f or-i k�' F .7..:>.:3 � ' ky1 y .4cv Y%1 pr ms' E1r rr.{ir - y/ ( 1 .--- -.-- ; --) tr''..---- 4, III,% r - 7 ,,., 1 1'' ,— _-=L,r.--;::: ,.%1---,,:.-{` • , _ a I N _- ,r i;, a m �1 41 r ___- ------ ', d Z W ,� rye 6 Q � a a = - I - - --- -il - � 0 i. Z mil in ;_ a ,. s W 0 i y 1;1] Cr a F 3PhW m N 1 .'495 f. Z Z 0 f sUi '€ 0 W W W a'n F F> O 2F:Fg� o In 0 Wo F-'0 W �.a .sa 0 a W0 0 Fg aoa (� �� :� z 0 oo, m0 YWO _ O f f f a..!! - U 0 a F O W m o 0 Z 0 Z 6aebi6$ e F ago a mAZo IZo 4 0 4 ;,;;g; 1° a 3o-W, ? 0032 >- od.W, C - cc �..N_,�: y U FmW Z OJ W ,_°,_d W W --;.''.-",,'::,71 J W0 Z >0 o > a¢ Z 2 gags ma"g s" Il m o.0 4 m a n m T z cv 0 .. J ..222.5..4-- d _I 7 9�� a=.:,^ Q I O) JIl Q 0 6..f.6=S L. F a 0 � ≤ie; e cc U " Aiiimmasommir 0 d >- e,. a: :2.+i=reset— is ' I Z i" s.. =a i n 2 id X 0 . I? �g5 - - F >Lr r"1,E.': • F 4C0C 0 - s o2..$ I .9 -5 z WZO e� _ _ a , r aFJ a Eti E c V 1 ..r . I F W 2W s ., - w: a 0 ? 1 �a h6 6 1. , ,Ejf \ y. 3 7;u s..aa �, d- "€: _ t i! °x' i z g2. a`A ...22222; 1 ' . + �j��, 1 �� rla x Ailk i�Ifri,r. _ 0 2; 22-2 22G - �m�dr / A ,,�TI�Y; Sr .C.,:,-.'tr? .00.010j..#1„...„l - a °o `ea •-•,! .2. �3 a -m�,4=„ � to.,:,L, r., _ O N F^ };- H 2 °:8;;:. ^8 A`� ,14 1 I /Jr� t "j) i NS~ ISM '. i- a _g a--vb. 6� 222222222 22 -,. .E vaao aaaajihi;g269..,_ �� l sa!( � t � n t`b,tlew.*`li 1'i62 --6 ^.-TLIT . 00-,- ',I.:01 7Fin/-10 , • .f,!1' s> °#}}!}#t'ttilri;,l i,_r!t-: n? !ie il 'L''',%e!7,„t�!„tr ,l I�il l _ - °r�}!i' _ �,j' I ! i 4.•li};i° :7711�1itF; i'• °_ ,� i'L+tii,�• - , ;et, i t� ;!!t S% !t+ti _ a S� .•, ;-1 }}I! _,L 11) tsi L t t „ , °!!ll-' - 'i - ! 1'• i, ('- �.''°- — ,: - F� ��#'e�}�j 14�}el}.I tt�!�ell•ill; lit cl it i li:�';'�I;h;;;l{ij fii !; ih' 1 (!+`S '` t! !ti}�� ••`F - y }�1 tL S� lii}eli �fl°t+i: ft?� a' ,e,F e 'i''' li �' - F t , e' ,1 '' Y a }'q 1 _ 7 _ JI1 gg t}ill}}}ft!L-a11•; -e%' liq! - i,#y t •_'y!' F' !S l:}tb _ - -F-i t ryf i },l. L' liti' i r rlu I�i,Lii,l.-7%:r,l�l!-iL L;"' !•' tt '''' tiie°, 'i.•,,, :,l, , q.;( r let. ,! ,.; F:jl!,' s I t I t[iihliP!s{f! PAP:)1::fn'II; � ! ii f?ttti-a,°,r,,i!le e I L I !1'' lit ! ti; ttii�'. i • ! 11 !r :li },L -1 -''eh e4'.! ;ii! t',1 ,, ;•; - -i'} ! ;t f'i. i , ..,,, _. �, o a 1 , t�L,j°.t}virl..LL• i'ieii ;:I , , t--'',';;i2.:;;;!1.;;; ;- v• i q ';,, , t , 8 '-A �� iI I t; ipI .1,hi-,7•' ' 1[ -it- t!,'e. p'L 1 t"• ; t !,;I i 1 e+- ,r,!! -ii !LP T .w 1 te�ei„Lest:i,lfl{Ai?!Fe?-if,'#! iF,• t. r,-�"_ .-e `r,d ,i',4'- :1! .s' ;.'S tt'''N �_ ..- iii #o_.,lltt1 e,i,=,e° L t p. tl 7 I-„, L_ J - Y - - i t if iiid 7#,_ f i 1L-- _, t it .'„„tint• ,a!• ;'?}= t!, ' — g- ! AlS it#1',ilit' i ist i!{'7'- tt last t' --,l,f ri,I!„ -r•1 i,zl'1:y, , e? S,i r_ et;i„r �, g —— E t .slier,?'!:n.LJi,7![l }.B F-lii ,,,17!;,,„:d};i1'!t8,_c•S!S,n•.e a LFi-,•.i 1}'e+ :-f'S,I s.urtlil — — _ 0 f g - tut ao �i _c 1' tt .! 3 - ;A: E S� • ttId 'i •, ,'(i7 - '1,` tli n u 4,1 , Z Q N it'� p ', i, ��e i '�'f Y ; - e "u` E s„d 4111 11 .81 r'- s.., a ^�� _ 9 _:c3 2 ° �i ''t v!-,\to{t.1,$;,•.="t.'. t 8 - r :; ? ,. m ` m !,7 f)-'i,i, Jaw,s, 'iLil,`,i 1S . /„, . -----77_7-_ ,,,,_2::, _,,,,, = 7 'I .,•----------------------------- -------------------r - !' \ w,W !N ! �f �I I ', a ! � ffl ) . r `�� ,ie - -_` dW” J e� _te�a i i ,,,, LJ Z �w' ' -_ - x --� ��"2 , ,,,_ -, : ,,:,._' r�' ' ,77 \ \ // I !� % 7 ^c �.f r, ill # -- ' III i„ .,) -I '' /7','L, .„ /7 . ,\ rio, tr K p`,', j lr' J F i ' I,k, �, ) _ Orc> I c aw- / ' 1/% .7 \ tlJi� I' F # cz: I 37. / 1(1�>i \I Ca WY I, i_ i.w, , / fN t� • !l 1' o7Y� 1 \ n i 'S, CO \ `, gi :il' it [lc i,,l a• k \' f m U? -N i °� W 1 _ f-' t )( 0aI ,_ Y , "I---o A U. i •1 / K j OOOh190N Ci. 5glJV N �yUI ///W� 11 iNl _ Ifilli.".0� { :,•„ //' ___ _ t �i 3A ' .�l�; /{ NSZ �. /.' Na O �kl4-1 �_� "IX: •MH._zv -� t _=4?i� ,,I Lo B i .,`,..T.7, .1-..u g;-r-.e..-1 , :�'�i ��_-- W a F., ,I�,�,] IV 0 r 1 3AV VI99•tT - J 3AV v19 sso _ ,/ \ itilI i� • �� I �0 j ,�.I I I I r0, s _ rOV; ` i oar Fil • o / S l 879021,..,ir-- - 10NV 3d0NS o" _ x z - 3AV yri.E t �— - - --- 0• vl �;, 1 r. ..e 9S , / (_____I{- i•1 3A VJ92-. W w 2 I PY a :.." �N v� e ?_,___,1 2 A r 4 0� �� : 'IT—i-'-'--- 1:'- ' J 3A V"f 1I 9 0 �1 r SIO •..I: I ri w: ❑ 1}Li-Vrp;�R 'yl� r79 s� 3nd,. • 8Wp / !� 3AV`-1:. • 4;AV iSlf _— _ , 0 "',-Y E \ �•I r irik.. • !" war m n % I-59 V_ ,-wi 1N W > w 2 z E '.. '- IiE� V • UQ cc W W 3 a t I�i ^'LI W 31 zJ I 'f :�..F=3 <3 ,3— *-3 ., .. E _'a{ 'I_ W 1r n c.,,�'�I_J__11�"' N-N ••' 1tl .'. .3■ ■4R N ',- iVdiA,OJ O�' ,,, 6 b o 31 I a$ ; Il q u'•' �O� c, .Ciro{]' `. 1 J� 'T i � ,�� a i m �7�J C1 �.I a N�V M Lia N�1 :;R� ��° 4 .. .i • i a ,yy��pp wl� / \J3 k .i . /V•l i Y x17..el1 .. ^ . :� ■ 2I2 Oa r �AZ' LINS �i■1++■1�lI�i�E>I t.ss:L-' 0 In g2 1 11 EI -2 y# 1Vno. 3nNJnv Wit ,■yy�y �.T7 �d'-.T*1�A_j1 w j jy1�1•1�ri�31;' w c�� rya In m 'i �':._ Z plt il / I'1' 1 •I.-_. 3 /' ,_� './t-y1ric.•t' _Yy•il .l '� ▪ 11�;. � f 'CO! I— �L = ^ l.] ,�` , ' • ±• ^:I - ' 4j�.� ▪ War _- —_—_ �• -- N.nS^`� •'' OSN..O.. -< a ,N %:I,,i _ 1 1 Z ' _ Z o I o F 1' z i y1 ! In Q J r - 6 al J Q ■ I g ' \---------., \ - Q Cc Z Q O O W o I- I- ZZ It F = X r a z a 1_ Ce vJ D w ilacr z o_ I a N 7 w M 1 / ;Il A RESOLUTION RE: APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR AN OPEN CUT MINING PERMIT - GRAVEL PIT, BEST WAY PAVING COMPANY, ET AL. , P.O. BOX 820, GREELEY, COLORADO 80631. 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 7th day of June, 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 Best Way Paving Company, et al. , P.O. Box 820, Greeley, Colorado 80631 for the granting of a Special Use Permit for an open cut mining permit and gravel pit on the property described below, and TRACT A (75.0 Acre) A tract of land located in the Northeast Quarter (NEW of Section 2, Township 5 North, Range 66 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Weld County, Colorado and being further described as follows: Commencing at the Center Quarter Corner (Cen4Cor) of said Section 2, and considering the South Line of the Northeast Quarter (NE4) of said Section 2 to bear South 89°55'53" East, with all bearings herein being relative thereto: Thence South 89°55'53" East, along the South Line of the Northeast Quarter (NE4) of said Section 2, a distance of 1242.80 feet to the True Point of Beginning, said Point being the Southeast Corner (SE Cor) of JOHNSON SUBDIVISION, as platted and recorded in the records of Weld County, Colorado: Thence along the Easterly boundary line of said JOHNSON SUBDIVISION by the following two (2) bearings and distances: North 13°44'30" West, 1300.19 feet; North 09°12'16" East, 1040.61 feet to a point on the South bank of Greeley Canal No. 3; Thence along the South bank of said Greeley Canal No. 3 by the following nine (9) bearings and distances: North 84°39'18" East, 81.45 feet; South 89°00'30" Fast, 254.37 feet; South 75°18'29" East, 125.79 feet; South 66°09'38" East, 380.46 feet; South 63°20'48" East, 230.77 feet; South 49°27'12" East, 458.03 feet; South 69°28'12" East, 214.99 feet; South 80°30'45" East, 112.96 feet; South 73°04'44" East, 266.46 feet; Thence South 06°10'17" West, along the East line of the Northeast Quarter (NEQ) of said Section 2, a distance of 886.39 feet; Thence North 89°55'53" West, along the North line of an 11.540 acre tract of land, 766.69 feet; ., - y ' 7_304-416 -- PLCIQI .ii BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Date June 6 , 1978 Case No. SUP# 347 : 77 : 21 APPLICATION OF Best-Way Paving Company, etal c/o Carl Hill ADDRESS P.O . Box 820 , Greeley, Colorado 80631 Moved by Jerry Kiefer that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning Commission: Be it Resolved by the Weld C unty Planning Commission that the appli- cation for site approval of ��ne�ui �i n i ng Permit- covering the following described property in Weld County, Colorado, to-wit: !.-.: - RACT A {75-.0 Acre) - , : A tract of lana located in the Northeast Quarter _(NE1/4), of Section.;2,'T nship 5.North, Range .€ . . 66 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Weld Couflty, Colorado and'belr�§ -farther described as '`•``4- follows. _ Commencing at the Center Quarter Corner(Cen]/4Cor),`of said Section 2,:'andL considering the South iIi_7 -Line'of the Northeast Quarter (NE1/4) •of 'salts -Section 2 to bearr' South S9°55'53" -East, with all .4.?- bearings herein being relative thereto: t=- -- - • - - _ rT Thence South 89°5 '53" East, along the South- Lire of the Northeast Quartet (NE1/4) of said `' Section 2, a distance of 1242.80 feet to the"true Point of Begioning,y.sa1d:Point being the ' • `: Southeast Corner (SECor)' of JOHNSON SUBDIVISION,:,as platted-and recorded•'-ln the records `of - Weld -County, Colorado; :- '_ - - ' " ' - . " r ,.,z Thence along the '- 'sterly boundary line of--said JOHNSON 'SUBQ$V[tION bTT:theL-foliewing-t to (2) --:-%'--' bearings air (' . ces: r f - . North_ 13°44130" West, 1300.19.feet; - _ . r -North 09°12' 1(., ' East, 1040.61 feet- to a"point on the South bank '©f Grf eley Canal N . 3;" - --• -' " Thence along the , ,th bank of said Greeley Canal No. 3 by the-fo1_4owing•n,ine (9) b_earingg, and distances- : ' cam:_ ., North 84039' 1R" East, 81 .45 feet; , O _ } ; - South.89°00' " East, - 254.37 feet; b . South 75°18'29,1 East, -125.79 feet; .ya`��j-2- r ; a'-'» - • South 66'09'38" East, 380.46 fee _ " -1� - •. South 63°20'48" East, -230.77 feel, -_ . .. • _ • --` _-- South 49°27' East, 458.03 feet:, . _ ° Y SOU t!' ' East; ' -214;99 feet; . - _ _ `',- _ w SoUth 80°30'45" East, 112.96 feet; - ``= South 3°04'44'" East 266.46 feet- _ 5 '2'. Thence South -06°10' 17" West, along the East line of the Northeast Quarter (NE1/4) of said Section 2, a distance of 886.39 feet; - . Thence North 89°55'53" West, along the North Line of an 11 .540 acre tract -of land, 766.69 feet; - Thence South '06°10' 17" West, along the West Line. of said 11.540 acre tract of land, 659.36 feet --- to the" South Line of the Northeast Quarter (NE1/4) of said Section 2; . ; . "'.Thence North 89°55'53" West, along the South Line of the Northeast Quarter (NE1/4) of said Section 2, -a distance of 851.81- feet to the True Point of Beginning. Said tract of• land -- - contains 75.-000 acres 'and is subject .to- any.F l4hts-of-Way or other Easements as granted or _`. ;.reserved by:Instruments of record or as- now existing on said tract of- land. ' . -- . • _ .. _ L Iz r\ u' u l I ly Jt • .Y y 1, • eL •' ✓ ' 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 June 6 , 1978 and recorded in Book No. VI of the proceedings of the said Planning Commission. Dated the 7 day of June 19 78 - _ %,\N-__ _._‘_ , ..Ska_ Secretary , Best-Way Paving Company , etal P . C . RECOMMENDATION June 6 , 1978 After adoption of a master plan for extraction for an area under its jurisdiction , no board of county commissioners , governing body of any city and county, city, or town , or other governmental authority which has control over zoning shall , by zoning , rezoning , granting a variance , or other official action or inaction , permit the use of any area containing a commercial mineral deposit in a manner which would interfere with the present or future extraction of such deposit by an extractor . " Section C. 1 of the Weld County Mineral Resources Extraction Plan states : "Access to future mineral resource development shall be considered in all land use decisions . In accordance with Colorado Statute , no Weld County governmental authority which has control over zoning shall , by zoning , rezoning granting a variance , or other official action or inaction , permit the use of any area known to contain a commercial mineral deposit in a manner which would interfere with the present or future extraction of such deposit by an extractor. " It is thus the opinion of the Planning Commission that in those instances where a parcel of land is underlain by commercial mineral deposits and is zoned in such a manner as to permit the extraction of those resources , the extraction of such resources must be accommodated so long as adequate protection of the health , safety and welfare of the citizens of the area in question is provided. In the current application , it is the opinion of the Planning Commission that the applicant has demonstrated through submitted plans and oral statements that adequate protection of the health , safety and welfare of area residents will be provided as extraction of the resource and reclamation of the site occurs . In addition , it is the opinion of the Planning Commission that the plans submitted by the applicant serve to substantially mitigate adverse impacts of the proposed operation on surrounding uses . 2 . The request is in compliance with Section C. 2 of the Weld County Mineral Resources Extraction Plan which states : "Open cut mining operations shall be discouraged on prime irrigated agricultural lands until such time that alternative resource deposits within less productive land areas are depleted . Only when detailed extraction and reclamation plans accompanied by economic and environmental impact statements , prepared by recognized experts justify the sacrifice of these agricultural assets will such request for open-cut mining operations receive favorable consideration . " BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Date May 2, 1978 Case No. SUPL_347: 77: 21 APPLICATION OF Best-Way Paving Company , etal c/o Carl Hill ADDRESS P.O. Box 820, Greeley , Colorado 80631 Moved by Ben Nix that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning Commission: Be it Resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the appli- cation for site approval of Open Cut Mine—Gravel Pit covering the following described property in Weld Counter: ' 1 I • °'9 0117 LEGAL DESCRIPTION l y,2 A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 66 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO AND BEING FURTHER DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE CENTER QUARTER CORNER (CEN. I /4 COR) OF SAID SECTION 2 AND CONSIDERING THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE I /4) OF SAID SECTION 2 TO BEAR SOUTH 89'55' 53" EAST, WITH ALL BEARINGS HERE- IN BEING RELATIVE THERETO: THENCE SOUTH 89°55'53" EAST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) OF SAID SECTION 2, ' A DISTANCE OF 1242.80 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER (SECOR) OF JOHNSON SUBDIVISION, AS PLATTED AND RECORDED IN THE RECORDS OF WELD COUNTY, COLORADO; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID JOHNSON SUBDIVISION BY THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) BEARINGS AND DISTANCES: NORTH 13°44'30" WEST, 1300.19 FEET; NORTH 09°12' 16" EAST, 105.61 FEET; TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF (S 1 /2) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) SECTION 2; THENCE SOUTH 88°55' 17" EAST, ALCNG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF (S 1 /2) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE T 4 SECTION HENCESOUTH 0610' DISTANCE 54.69 FEET; THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) OF SAID SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 678.88 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°55'53" WEST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF AN 11 .540 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, 766.69 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 06°10' 17" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID 11 .540 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, 659.36 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE I /4) OF SAID SECTION 2; THENCE NORTH 89°55' 53" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) OF SAID SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 851 .61 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID TRACT OF LAND CONTAINS 45.91 ACRES AND IS SUBJECT TO ANY RIGHTS-OF-WAY OR OTHER EASEMENTS AS GRANTED OR RESERVED BY INSTRUMENTS OF RECORD OR AS NOW EXISTING ON SAID TRACT OF LAND Vote: For Passage Chuck Carlson Against Passage Ben Nix _ Abstained Marge Yost Jerry Kiefer Percy Hiatt Irma White Bette Kountz 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 May 2 , 1978 and recorded in Book No. VI of the proceedings of the said Planning Commission. Dated the 5 day of May , 19 78 . Secretary GREELEY TRIBUNE FIHRUARY 8, 1978 a a'5- c r. En., Cl.'� CD o cn o cn w crop w 1:1CD a X ,..., 00 .-;CD c -•a 0- Fn 2 f° o a 0- w .., o o -) 6 a •Y � < o' �5 • o Ga cO o n. 0 Z w o.O m w o w o lo 0 co Co oo -- -y, 1 i y o o p v `< co -- . S O p• , . G to O a, r o• o, O 4 1 "Zan o °' c > ° 0 I w o < a o a o' o 'o o w 'o cc r° a w fir* 95 MI in• w �' `< o B.ti ? r, cam v y `< c.f.o o a. u, ro '1_ _' eV'J' CD 0 0 CD T v, 'Y o < o .c x _ a o a n cD - o w °' a 3 n co c-'D G7 S. x ro '- wit O < Y_ ° cc a 7 c c`nn co m No 6 cra °o, c° o o ' CD o CD w , I m o a a oa `� `$ aoa wCD a .n O b to C o f] cD Q G CD CD CD cD ,'1� o O w °,° w o o n. o. c1°n m o a n. O• a. n cwn o a �. c°i co ®• CD id, nur v, w < O c3.. (OD ',C �. r. G w O N a 0 c. y 5 c~D N `< 0 n a, ,_„ ,-•, CD SD G O CD CT w w w 0 fD Cr° y '-1a f.D a o „y Q4 ri is�ce•[ •� C b " O •.. (D O '< 0 o y o w R D. w (D 0� [n CT' .cn G, w ar9 cD �, co -s ❑ w •s cr' .�, w a F n. a w a, FD g• < coo a. m rD C7'b 2 `� CD n co w cn G D' 'o 5.- J a °' op n• F r°"""• on :-1 2 Q4 TJ - 0 v' CCD — — n• n al.'O ..y T• cD 'b• ry •�O . w co N N O v, a C•aq MI 7' •,sca co • , �p G ca61 con O. C"'•G .n'3• O o •c" o' O , coi, a cob OM N ^ O n.CD a lit fn CD .� w G. r, • o c_^' fD n ur = fD I:0 3 ' . w 'a. c<o <• a 5 [[Oo o -A b o• v'1 0 c�.°G�° tAT G ® �1�� a cD '< (n 0 .-. [n as 0 .w--• y ur c-.• O O ur O �' D7. cD �1✓W ¢fl cm• __ a o CD o F°n o o a w w �'� O CD ‘,15 o o a, pi'p c< CD '< p CD O N O fa a .y w co ?. u, al 0 �' CD w ., O ;+ ur D3, cn -.� co' t-. CD _, rn G �, w C sG —•5.•p '< o sn << n. oisolcs wonCn Cc7w a, o , ma w CD cc°„ m .a 0' 0 " 0 ° Q, -, O ar 0 0. -, O .n-, w cD w O' C !n co 5 co rD ai 5- fl, O n 'y cn CD cD CD o- c < �. cn 0 y °.'• a ti o DJ c << -c 2 m .- w o H , o n y y' O < ', o w 0 ct CD O• °q 00- n0 w ,< a G O ,'y„ n o r' w o O n w•cn cD ¢, y .ni !n' (n 0 n. O rD w• O0 �< - o a ; o as 'G�i °a .n`'.'000co x 7'0 C Dom' › 00 y CDD c.<by C. -+ o' cn n �+ S < con a a`', 0 co m C 0 $ w w CD °a w O in' CD w • O ?..0 p0 n. n - O, -. 0 .<0D. G pj- 0 O..o d o• .-" 0 0• 0 J o a = o n =. n Qrya co �. aJ 0 o C n n F o w -I p y O 7 G _F ra,D w cD .''rCp�7 o T w (�"p5� c. T 7 CDD O n '=' n 'i7 CD O 0 ., •b ^D '•- < °a °Q o o CP w o E. c" o - te co 5i: a <CA Z. 0 5 .w, < ,D 0 0. < ,+ O w .DD u! 0 19 0 OCD N �, nU. ,+ f�D `< vn, O °a a, 2.' �T' ,-a' " Q.CI..." '? F' Oj,• R S cD o w cD - o o w °a c° 0 a CD n , w -, o n. co ro < co 0 CD o o o w cc N n cn o CD � o p. o -- w = n w 0 (ICI 5 � = C C .< � CD a) a 0: Cp CD U) c, o F C. �+-.a O f] n w ul • o n n a' a' o' 0 w w CD O (U w O BEFORE THE L,--D COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANN.,-T COMMISSION RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Date February 21, 1978 Case #`Z-294 :77:12 Change of Zone "E" to"A" APPLICATION OF Best-Way Paving Company etal ADDRESS c/o Carl Hill, P.O. Box 820, Greeley, Colorado 80631 The Chairman of the Planning Commission stated that this application would be forwarded to the County Commissioners because of a split decision among the Planning Commission members. Included in this action is their individual comments for reaching their decision: Percy Hiatt : "I fully agree with the staff's recommendation here that it is the ojnion of them that the zoning was not faulty, so I will have to go along with that and let it go at that." Ben Nix: "I think previously I have made it quite clear my feeling as regards the County Comprehensive Plan referring to mineral ,icposits or which we have a limited amount . Now it ' s debatable abut how long these supplies can and will last , "Jut I feel t•" ' t -Iver_t.ioup- this cannot be reeded for even as lolig as 3( year:: thor we 'rr amiss to allow housing development or any other kind of develonment to develop on t_tis partic.lir ,;rav::L 1' ^t4 �rpi site ,_d t.1is is the 7'ef ;olt i or ':'y vt iti n4 the ay I }lf,v9 . I Lave a real c•OI"!zern for the feel i.na 3 of the people living in the area. I a ls: c ouLd like to say that I think Develo; ;sprit, Ptnnd_ards can recluireu so that these people will have to develop tbis in suc:11 a way ac:; not to be a nuisance and if tLi_n couldn' t be done then I would riot be favorable, hut I know it can and uilJ.rn that we must oreserve the minerals th.t are available to mu in t is area." Frank `. t , "My asc•I. pretty riuch such as bem ia1 ,:'fi. I believe our 11a,L fal 1C sous"'cos shonid 1,e ',reserved whether it ?"le ;;ravel , coal or other natural t'esollrcot; . Aft. they are this par ieu LIa of 4 e t;ittl'_t' 1'.e made into a oar,': or c ,e 2 .puee c r other uses s+nd I would like to see : one ,�triL,t land u. • put in this o tt would be present- able and 7;e 4. good >,:en ";;'race for the arch. ^.Ild my reason c Fella,--a,,; .1 „,r as no7 ie level and h.--al th 1?arzards , I don ' t think tat the health ha.e,ars rrol t 'the F ravel_ nit would ,L significant and t*10 noise level--probably most homes have nore rtoiue in their 11:1meu than you have in the gravel _ice t, .ii i;h your goin° Your decibels L e t pretty high :;ometimen I.Lnd I T.+oul d ) Le to noo goo.t ntalt.:ard_, i11t -in tie` Y a_ ,' ;�, 7)c•rrh' t.ti i Irma :Last,; : r ;_ ,141':: ,,1rlr` ,LL 111,; ';.ii: l �:li., te'r'm dux(' ,;aiti tttat o:'tin al ;. ,nl. i ,ray; no `a t?.' y a 1 I believe t i:?L 'l;ld 1 ';t-:G ie h .ni e in csn(1i1 o?tn flit 1ustifv a new r31.1 .. . !t., i.ir1.1. 1 ti 0 , %'-�<. 'fevelonmont 7Laa41ard i :ia i :1ee.1 vn .t::1": t=it'") not t',n lf. 1r:?'.t:l v, I nay :►:1v + '/t,<.,. l .1: ;"tt . i .lave eaven' t ..t:. 11 .a 4e_eJ ,ind Oflo 1 1u s 1;�Yr �,` t .. .�Z v n n ,rave" l in our ._ r e , _1 ,'1 :n'i o "it; h`4"-.') 7rIt d• Tnre:;onted oviden : ',Ca': , t'-47A I an ali7itAre.. to • Page February Jerry Kiefer: "I agree , too, with the staff 's recommendation primarily 1 surne -e en two points. 'Ine is I also have not been coevf ecod of the need, although I understand the value of the mineral deposit. I feel that the nega L -re impact to rue on the surrounding noit;ijhorhooe outweigh:; the benefit from the mineral deposit and part of that then , my second concern rests with the property values of the land surrounding. I feel that even with diligent care then the majority of the residents could not have been made to realize the future plans for that piece of property ." Chuck Carlson: "For myself, being in agriculture and kno iinr the value of gravel in all forms of business and knowing the fact that we have good gravel in this country, knowing the fact chat ..n 1057, ' 53 and ' 5n when I was in i-of lege we r;'.'T("a re i i sai'i we would never r?ri out n energy ruin th.:t 's not oven 20 7ea rs 3,72 and ,Jere -le are lnokinc7 at it str-Ignt In t ho face. Au lthr tih ng ehholit the ( revel. IL i.:i diLfc_'e113e. '1e are never '"G.~;'Y t,2 run out of gravel.' j'i_;t can'iot '';(a Bade to }'O {(;ve r_i:lt . anther r4oint , the asbestos 'oi„t thet was brought up I rr levant. 'lidn 't 'av' any f,,u., ).,tz » to 2t--nine s hatsoevo c ;1 cause ,:';o rec'r- in tni , ce l;..wry arouu i ..,'re have no u3,7Les to!c; R ar t`.(:3 , ;7 t a>, what wac presented to us and I tilt 7 t".,an -as not rel C-A) to this situation, Also, I think along with the fact that the value of gravel that re have to us in this ir:it,-:eui2,tn area v i t.h t.'. -ero^rte~ that n.ro ,`.'niag today r5 f' ' 1 YC ♦r- i i r . f6.,TL r^-e ! F f rr' i ni L wu..e YY ..t... .._1C' 1 �'_ 1_ � ::�.t, !Jar .). si. .�♦ for .1.J: � •.a. area t;) areas, it is a very valuable thine to protect and I tid.w-: it 's sJr etnin..' we need to ioC'l_ head-on into lri, a very. c.ioar :.i1.- ti ar:i n tlsc be a Creal %1`-; et to raler i._i'c;2: . detrtt;'t'n_t to l,hi c.re•,. because I oeliev:.` that tai:; c :a 3:e :''alt with ti2ronc;n cur I'll_c O!_(1 2'.:J;ulct ' on'. health an(> rr _ �. "`'.1;J ;:r; nrt-) joctri that t't coin '' :.r avlirelY ].Ive'd V:4'tti. uen't tthin% tt!£s r ecp_i(_ i:ou] (: even know t e thing was being there e tt:; til the act' net t''iat cleri. : the ":'.2• `ilil :.1: v` i•t, str_e l . ecrtroticd ai C r...srr,L_' o0 b.• the � State l eat th Pe,,,trt•r" t II P_tt ' ai s car ire cene. 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, Colorado, adopted on February 21, 1978, and recorded in Book 210. VI of the proceedings of the said Planning Commission. Dated the 27th day of February, 1978 Secretary BEFORE THE D COUNTY, COLORADO PLANNING C( SSION RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Date February 7, 1978 Case No. Z# 294 : 77:12 and SUP-347: 77:21 APPLICATION OF Best-Way Paving Company etal ADDRESS P.O. Box 820, Greeley, Colorado 80631 Moved by Frank Suckla la that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning Commission: Be it Resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the appli- cation for rezoning from E ( Estate District) to A ( Agriculture District) covering the following described property in Weld County, Colorado, to-wit: / / / LEGAL DESCRIPTION A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 66 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO AND BEING FURTHER DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING NORTHEAST THE QUARTER (NE QUARTER I /4)CORNER SAIDCSECTIONC2R)TOOBEAR SAID SOUTHSECTION 55'53" EAST, WITH CONSIDERING ALLTHE BEARISOUTH NGSLINE HERE- IN BEING RELATIVE THERETO: THENCE SOUTH 89°55'53" EAST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE I /4) OF SAID SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 1242.80 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER (SECOR) OF JOHNSON SUBDIVISION, AS PLATTED AND RECORDED IN THE RECORDS OF WELD COUNTY, COLORADO; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID JOHNSON SUBDIVISION BY THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) BEARINGS AND DISTANCES: NORTH 13°44'30" WEST, 1300.19 FEET; NORTH 09°12' 16" EAST, 105.61 FEET; TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF (S I/2) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) SECTION 2; THENCE SOUTH 88°55' 17" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF (S 1 /2) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1/4) SECTION 2 A DISTANCE OF 2054.69 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 06°10'17" WEST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1/4) OF SAID SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 678.88 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°55'53" WEST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF AN 11 .540 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, 766.69 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 06°10' 17" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID II .540 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, 659.36 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE THE NORTHEAST ION 2; THENCE NORTH F89°55'53" WEST,QALONG RTHE ESOUTH LINE OFTHE TNORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) OF SAID SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 851 .61 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID TRACT OF LAND CONTAINS 45.91 ACRES AND IS SUBJECT TO ANY RIGHTS-OF-WAY OR OTHER EASEMENTS AS GRANTED OR RESERVED BY INSTRUMENTS OF RECORD OR AS NOW EXISTING ON SAID TRACT OF LAND vu-Ce: rur raasaye unuci _LarIsQn- ---- ---Ftga 11m5L raauc vci ��cici - - Ben Nix Abstained _ Marge Yost • Frank Such _-- Percy Hiatt Bette Konatz Irma White The Chairman declared the Resolution pa';sed and ordered thatacertified copy be for- warded with the file of this case Lo 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 I':.t,-�n H rg Comhii si on of Weld County, Colorado, adopt' on February 7, 1978 and re ::' 1hd 1', f,o3k No. VI of the proceedings c the said Planning Commissicn. Dated the 9 day of February , 19 78 . Secretary Best-Way Paving Company etal Z-294 : 77:12 and SUP-347:77:21 P. C. RECOMMENDATION February 7, 1978 It is the opinion of the Planning Commission that the time remaining between February 6 and today's scheduled Planning Commission meeting was not adequate time to prepare final comments and recommendation for these applications. In addition, final Development Standards for the project have yet to be drafted. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends these applications be tabled until the Planning Commission meeting scheduled for February 21, 1978, to provide time for the staff to adequately review the application materials and formulate final recommendations to the Planning Commission. BEFORE THE "rLD COUNTY, COLORADO PLANNING Cr""ISSrION RESOLUTION OF REuur`MENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNir COMMISSIONERS Date January 17, 1978 Case No. Z# 294 : 77: 12 and SUP-347: 77: 21 APPLICATION OF Best-Way Paving Company etal c/o Carl Hill ADDRESS P.O. Box 820, Greeley, Colorado 80621 Moved by Jerry Kiefer that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning Commission: Be it Resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the appli- cation for rezoning from "E" ( Estate District) to "A"( Agricultural District) covering the followinn owi nn ,rl ''T'";_"r+ property in Weld County, Colorado, to-wit: 0/( 1 / 1� Ol - ' LEGAL DESCRIPTION1:"9- IZ A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 66 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO AND BEING FURTHER DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE CENTER QUARTER CORNER (CEN. I /4 COR) OF SAID SECTION 2, AND CONSIDERING THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) OF SAID SECTION 2 TO BEAR SOUTH 89°55' 53" EAST, WITH ALL BEARINGS HERE- IN BEING RELATIVE THERETO: THENCE SOUTH 89°55'53" EAST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) OF SAID SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 1242.80 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER (SECOR) OF JOHNSON SUBDIVISION, AS PLATTED AND RECORDED IN THE RECORDS OF WELD COUNTY, COLORADO; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID JOHNSON SUBDIVISION BY THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) BEARINGS AND DISTANCES: NORTH 13°44'30" WEST, 1300.19 FEET; NORTH 09°12' 16" EAST, 105.61 FEET; TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF (S 1/2) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) SECTION 2; THENCE SOUTH 88°55' 17" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF (S 1 /2) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE THENCE4)SOUTHT06°10' 17"DWESTI,CE OF ALONG2TTHE.69 FET; EASTELINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) OF SAID SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 678.88 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°55'53" WEST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF AN 11 .540 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, 766.69 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 06°10' 17" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID II .540 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, 659.36 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) OF SAID SECTION 2; THENCE NORTH 89°55'53" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) OF SAID SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 851 .61 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID TRACT OF LAND CONTAINS 45.91 ACRES AND IS SUBJECT TO ANY RIGHTS-OF-WAY OR OTHER EASEMENTS AS GRANTED OR RESERVED BY INSTRUMENTS OF RECORD OR AS NOW EXISTING ON SAID TRACT OF LAND vote: ror rJassage -Chuck_._Carlson is i n r, -FaS-Sa-5 Irma White Ben Pdi x Harry_Ashley -- — Frank Suckl a Jerry Kiefer— — — Percy Hiatt - -- --The Chairman declared the Pesolut ,on passed and ordercu thatacer'tlfied copy be for- warded with the file of this case to the Barn ;f County Commissioners for further proceedings. CERTIEICa.TI0r OF COPY I, Shirley A. Phillips , Pnc o` e i na Secretary of the void County Planning Commission, do hereby certify tn ,t. m e ok,,,e and foregoing Resolution is a true copy of the Resolution of the H ; , -, ion of We'0 County, Colorado, adopt, on January 17, 1978 aid No. VI of the proceedings c - the said Planning Commissicn. Dated the 18 day of January , 1978 . Secret ry ' Best-Way Paving Company etal Z-294:77:12 and SUP-347: 77:21 P. C. RECOMMENDATION January 17, 1978 3. The applicant needs to submit evidence that he has liability insurance coverage of not less than $100, 000. 4. The applicant needs to clarify the proposed use and status of the proposed access onto 4th Street. These items should be identified as Development Standards on the plans. 5. As requested by the County Engineer, the applicant needs to indicate the method of controlling the drainage between the proposed 4 ' berm and 35th Avenue and between the 4 ' berm and 4th Street. 6. Receipt of further information by the applicant regarding clarification of noise, air pollution, and dust abatement from the operation and further proof for the need of the change of zone in view of the ramifications involved. BEFORE THE "-c-'_D COUNTY, COLORADO PLANNING Cf""TSSION RESOLUTION OF RECUMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Date January 17, 1978 Case No. Z# 294:77:12 and SUP-347:77:21 APPLICATION OF Best-Way Paving Company etal c/o Carl Hill ADDRESS P.O. Box 820, Greeley, Colorado 80631 Moved by Jerry Kiefer that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning Commission: Be it Resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the appli- cation for rezoning from "E" ( Estate District) to "A"( Agricultural District) covering the following described property in Weld County, Colorado, to-wit: /'1( I *4:91a /2/e2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION ` A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1/4) OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 66 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO AND BEING FURTHER DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE CENTER QUARTER CORNER (CEN. I /4 COR) OF SAID SECTION 2 AND CONSIDERING THE SOUTH LINE ' OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) OF SAID SECTION 2 TO BEAR SOUTH 89°55'53'• EAST, WITH ALL BEARINGS HERE- IN BEING RELATIVE THERETO: THENCE SOUTH 89°55'53" EAST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1/4) OF SAID SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 1242.80 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER (SECOR) THENCENALN LONGUTHEVISION,EASTERLYS PLATTED BOUNDARYAND LINEEOFFRDED SAIDIN THE JOHNSONECORDS OF SUBDIVISIONLD BYCTHETFOLLOWINGDTWO (2) BEARINGS AND DISTANCES:NORTH 13°44'30" 300.19 FEET; NORTH 09°12' 16" EAST, '105.61 FEET; TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF (S 1/2) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1/4) SECTION 2; THENCE SOUTH 88°55' 17" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF (S 1/2) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1/4) SECTION 2 A DISTANCE OF 2054.69 FEET; THENCE SOUTH O6°I0�17" WEST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1/4) OF SAID SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 678.88 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°55'53" WEST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF AN 11 .540 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, 766.69 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 06°10'17" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID 11 .540 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, 659.36 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE THE NORTHEAST THENCE NORTH F89°55'53" WEST,QALONG RTHEESOUTH LLINEAOF THET NORTHEASTQUARTER (NE 1 /4) OF SAID SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 851 .61 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID TRACT OF LAND CONTAINS 45.91 ACRES AND IS SUBJECT TO ANY RIGHTS-OF-WAY OR OTHER EASEMENTS AS GRANTED OR RESERVED BY INSTRUMENTS OF RECORD OR AS NOW EXISTING ON SAID TRACT OF LAND Vote: For Passage Chuck Carlson Against F'assagc Irma White Ben Nix Harry Ashley Frank Suckle Jerry Kiefer Percy Hiatt The Chairman declared the Resolution passed and ordered thatacertified copy be for- warded with the file of th7s 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 cert'fy that the qbo vc and foregoing Resolution is a true copy of the Resolution of the P i an i nu Lorrir,i--,s i on of Weld County, Colorado, adopted on January 17, 1978 and recol d d in 5001: No. VI of the proceedings of the said Planning Commission. Dated the 18 day of January , 19 78. Secretary ti Best-Way Paving Company etal Z-294:77:12 and SUP-347:77:21 P. C. RECOMMENDATION January 17, 1978 3. The applicant needs to submit evidence that he has liability insurance coverage of not less than $100,000. 4. The applicant needs to clarify the proposed use and status of the proposed access onto 4th Street. These items should be identified as Development Standards on the plans. 5. As requested by the County Engineer, the applicant needs to indicate the method of controlling the drainage between the proposed 4' berm and 35th Avenue and between the 4' berm and 4th Street. 6. Receipt of further information by the applicant regarding clarification of noise, air pollution, and dust abatement from the operation and further proof for the need of the change of zone in view of the ramifications involved. The Weld County Planning Commmission held a scheduled meeting on June 6 , 1978, at 10 : 00 a.m. in the Weld County Centennial Center County Commissioners Hearing Room, x)15 10th Street , Greeley, Colorado . Roll Call was as follows : Chuck Carlson Present Ben Nix Present Harry Ashley Present Percy Hiatt Present Bette Kountz Present Irma White Present Frank Suckla 'Present Jerry Kiefer Present Marge Yost Absent Also present were : Gary Z. Fortner, Director of Planning Tom Honn , Zoning Administrator Chuck Cunliffe , Assistant Zoning Administrator Kay Norton , Assistant County Attorney As a quorum was present , the meeting proceeded as scheduled. The minutes of the May 2 , 1978, meeting were unanimously approved. APPLICANT: Eagles Nest Gun Club CASE NUMBER: CUP-35 : 78 :4 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . Sections 17 and 18 , T4N, R62W LOCATION: 13 miles southeast of Kersey SUBJECT: Gun Club and Game Reserve APPEARANCE: Joe Smith DISCUSSION : Mr. Smith, agent for the Eagles Nest Gun Club , stated that the request is to place a mobile home on the property to be used as a club house for the club . There are approximately 12 members in the club who would be using the facility. There being no questions or comments at this time, Chuck Cunliffe read the staff ' s recommendation for approval and the Development Standards . There was some discussion regarding the two irrigation ditches that go through the property in question . Mr. Suckla asked how many acres are involved and was told 225 acres by Chuck Cunliffe . Mr. Suckla indicated he was concerned for the use of the land other than agriculture in regard to noxious weed control . Not much can be done to control these noxious weeds . Mr. Smith said they would take adequate measures and work with the control to control the weeds . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend approval to the Board of County Commissioners with the Development Standards based on the staff ' s recommendation . Motion by Ben Nix, seconded by Bette Kountz . A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix, Frank Suckla, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , Bette Kountz, Irma White and Harry Ashley. Motion carried . APPLICANT: Lovemont Investment Company CASE NUMBER: 8-148: 78 : 5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . NW*, Section 26, T3N, R68W LOCATION: Southeast corner of the intersections of I-25 and State Highway 66 SUBJECT: Final Plat - Farmers Mart Subdivision Planning Coi'imissio' " inates Page 2 June 6 , 1V78 DISCUSSION: Chuck Cunliffe stated that he had spoke with the applicant the morning of June 6 , 1978, at which time he was told the applicant is having problems with the application and did not plan to attend today' s Planning Commission meeting. Chuck Cunliffe then read the staff ' s recommendation for continuing the hearing to the Planning Commission meeting scheduled for June 20 , 1978. At this time Bob Rademacher, surrounding property owners to the south , stated he was concerned with the property value of his home and that since they have small children they would like to have the access only on State Highway 66 . He also feels there could be drainage problems as there is a low spot and he does not see how they could drain it . Some discussion followed. Chuck Cunliffe stated that a retention pond is proposed for the southeast corner of the property. The County Engineering Department at this time is requesting further clarification in this regard. He also stated that they have worked with the State Highway Department and they have approved an access on the frontage road on I-25. Some discussion followed regarding the drainage problem. MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to continue the hearing to the Planning Commission meeting scheduled for June 20, 1978, based on the staff ' s recommendation. Motion by Harry Ashley, seconded by Ben Nix. A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix, Frank Suckla, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , Bette Kountz, Irma White and Harry Ashley. Motion carried. APPLICANT: Town of Frederick CASE NUMBER: SUP-363 : 78 : 15 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . SEk NE*, Section 32, T2N, R67W LOCATION: l mile east of Frederick SUBJECT: Treated Water Storage Tank APPEARANCE : Bill Schuler, RockywMountain Consultants DISCUSSION: Mr. Schuler stated that the Town of Frederick desires to upgrade their existing water supply. The project includes enlarge- ment of the present raw water reservoir and construction of a 12" treated water line to the tank and construction of a 300, 000 gallon storage tank at a cost of $118, 000. The Town of Frederick has made application for and received approval of a grant from the Farmers Home Administration for this project . The new storage tank is badly needed by the town as the present one is undersized and very inadequate for future development of the town . This particular site was chosen because of the high elevation in respect to the town . As a result it will increase the water pressure to the town. This increased pressure will substantially upgrade the town ' s water service and provide much needed increased water pressure for fire protection . There are two existing tanks presently adjacent to the site owned by Central Weld Water Histricli which are directly south of the site. The tank will be constructed of reinforced concrete and will be landscaped with native grasses and trees with a securtiy fence around the area. It will be 52" diameter and 23" feet above the existing ground surface . Discussion followed in regard to where the watter will come from and the water pressure . Mr. Hiatt asked for an explanation of the preference of concrete over steel for the tank. Mr. Schuler responded that their firm believes concrete tanks are better for a longer period of time . Planning COMMI - io;' " InuLes Page 3 June 6 , 1978 - There also is very little maintenance problems with the linings , coatings and corrosion . A steel tank would be more economical if it were smaller than ; he one proposed. There being no further questions at this time, Chuck Cunliffe read the staff 's recommendation for approval and the Development Standards. Mr. Nix expressed concern with regard to the financial responsibility of the water district . No further discussion or comments. MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend approval with the Development Standards to the Board of County Commissioners based on the staff ' s recommendation . Motion by Jerry Kiefer, seconded by Irma White . A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix, Frank Suckla, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , Bette Kountz , Irma White and Harry Ashley. Motion carried. APPLICANT: Town of Severance Removed from Agenda - Applicant does not have legal interest in property. Presentation of the Master Plan for the Town of LaSalle APPEARANCE: Ann Thayer, Planner DISCUSSION: Miss Thayer presented copies of the LaSalle Master Plan to members of the Planning Commissioners for their review and then briefly outlined the physical features, population , community services and facilities, land use, transportation and housing sections of the plan with the use of the Future Land Use map . After the presentation Chairman Carlson asked whether or not there were any mobile homes in Town of LaSalle. Miss Thayer responded there are none , but there is one that has been incorporated onto a standard size lot with land- scaping and put on a foundation . It has the appearance of a conventional home . There are no provisions for a mobile home park in LaSalle . Discussion followed regarding the 1st Avenue road which crosses the Union Pacific railroad tracks. There was also some discussion regarding the School District of LaSalle and when plans are to become a separate school district . MOTION: Be it therefore recommended to endorse the policies included in the LaSalle Master Plan. Motion by Ben Nix, seconded by Jerry Kiefer. A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix, Frank Suckla, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , Bette Kountz, Irma White , and Harry Ashley . Motion carried. APPLICANT: Hill-n-Park, Inc . CASE NUMBER: S-147: 78:4 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 22 , Block 7 and Outlot B, Hill-n-Park 2nd Filing LOCATION: 4614 Grand Canyon Drive , IIill-n-Park Subdivision SUBJECT: Iteplat APPEARANCE: Joe Ramey DISCUSSION : Mr. Ramey stated that this property was given to Mrs . Virginia Schadegg seven years ago. She would now like to sell the property and have it replatted so it will all be one lot . There being no questions at this time , Chuck Cunliffe read the staff ' s recommendation for approval . Mr. Ranet stated that the property has been sold and was bought through Urban Renewal . No further discussion . Planning; Conunissiop °4i an Les Page 4 June 6 , 1978 MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend approval based on the staff ' s recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. Motion by Jerry Kiefer, seconded by Bette Kountz. A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix, Frank Suckla, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , Bette Kountz, Irma White , and Harry Ashley. Motion carried . - APPLICANT: City of Greeley CASE NUMBER: SUP-362 : 78 : 14 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . Nl SE*, Section 11, T5N, R65W LOCATION: Northeast of the intersection of East 18th Street and Holly Street SUBJECT: Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant APPEARANCE: Dennis Sandretto DISCUSSION: Mr. Sandrett , consulting engineering with CH2M Hill for the City of Greeley, presented the background information on the proposal by use of a slide presentation which included the site selection process, gravel deposits , floodplain , and the proposed layout of the plant . This particular site was selected because it is out of the 100 year floodplain , has good vehicle access roads , is the most cost- effective location for serving the region , is situated the farthest away from densely populated areas, stiff clay is less prevalent than at other sites in the delta area, the historic and archaelogical importance of the site appears insignificant and there are less gravel resources at the selected site than at other potential sites within the area. In regard to re-development costs, it was found that there was an economic value over the cost of mining at the present prices. Mr. Sandretto quoted a letter from Flatiron Paving which stated that it was not a deposit that would be economical to mine and also quoted from a letter by the President of Mountain Aggregates who mined at East 16th Street and gave it up after incurring a loss. Borings were taken at the site which indicated that there was not a significant amount of gravel at the location . There being no questions at this time , Tom Honn read the staff ' s recommendation for continuing the meeting to July 5 , 1978. Mr. Sandretto then comments that they have had difficulty working with the State of Colorado regarding commercial mineability. They have found that the only thing they can find with regard to commercial mineability is the overburden ratio which the delta area has a favorable amount of . Darrell Alleman stated that he feels they have already addressed the concerns of the staff already and do not see where else they could go to get new information . Chairman Carlson then asked for comments from the audience. Glenn Billings , representing the Greeley Chamber of Commerce and the Legislative Committee on Local Development comments that these groups unanimously endorsed the location of the proposed site. Ray Robert, attorney representing the Delta Environmental Protectio ssociation , stated that the approval Greeley has received from Dl contingent upon county approval of the site for the plant . The State Water quality Control Commission likewise did not approve the site or take any action until the county had a chance to review the application . He also stated that the gravel issue is not the only issue before the county and the Planning. . John Wheeler spoke in opposition of the Planning Commissior "inutes Page 5 • June 6 , 1978 proposed site because he feels the site is probably within the 100 year floodplain, the access roads are limited and in poor condition, expansion of the 1st Avenue site is an alternative equally cost effective, and the gravel resources of the site are considerable and therefore Colorado Revised Statute 34-1-305 will probably prohibit construction of the plant on that site . He also showed the Planning Commission members an aerial map indicating where the flood of 1973 occurred on the John Forester property and where the levee was built. As a result of this, Mr. Wheeler feels that the proposed site is in a floodplain area. He also commented on the diameter of the test holds which were used on the Dill property by CH2M Hill . They stated a 3" diameter auger was used for the borings, but Mr. Wheeler said that nothing could have been brought up larger than a 1" diameter because that was the largest diameter of the inside of the test pipe used. Elmer Jones , President of DEPA, spoke in opposition of the proposal because he feels there is a good market value for the sand and gravel . He also stated that the boring test taken was not accurate because the inside diameter of the sleeve that was not mentioned is only 1". He also found a considerable difference in the cost of pit run gravel . As stated by the applicant it is priced at $1. 10 to $1. 20 a ton and Mr. Jones found it to be priced at $1. 50 per ton . He also read a letter from the State Department of Highways which stated that material of the type found in the floodplain of the South Platte River contains abundant amounts of fine graded sand and gravel . IIe also read a letter from M. E. Davidson which stated that for the last seven years sand and gravel was taken from a pit mile south of the proposed site. Don Miller, representing the City Council and Town of Kersey, spoke in opposition primarily because of odors and also because of property values in the area. The City of Kersey recommends that the City of Greeley build at the 1st Avenue site. Other persons speaking in opposition of the proposal were Mrs. W. C. Matthews-primarily opposed because of possible flooding and health problems , that are possible . She was also concerned because only one person had contacted her in regard to the proposal ; Mary Scofield because of the ground water problem and sludge ; Glen Cobb because of possible flooding and possibility of fog; Charles Schmidt was concerned with sludge and where it will go; Robert Frank was concerned with the odor problem and that it is very close to the airport. Mr. Sandretto responded to the concerns of the above by stating that according to reports and studies they are not in a floodplain area, the test taken for samples of the area is a commonly used method, there will be no damage to the wells from the treatment plant because there will be no seepage from the units outward. There was some concern expressed about the water rights on Patterson ditch. Mr. Sandretto said that no water rights will be injured as they know they exist . He also commented that the Matthews had been contacted and that the city would like to purchase their property. Property values will probably be increased as a result of the plant ; the County is currently applying sludge to land and there will be very little fog involved. Mr. John Smith stated that Mr. Sandretto failed to make any mention of odor problems which might be expected. Mr. Sandretto stated that those facilities which typically cause odors will be covered and those facilities which do not need to be covered will be Planning Commission 7"-nutes Page 6 June 6 , 1978 designed to accept them if necessary. Dorothy Zabka stated she felt it should be moved away from the people, the city and agricultural - farm land as it was proposed in 1965. However, George Hall stated that at that time it was possible to, but not now because of cost . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to continue the meeting until the Planning Commission meeting scheduled for July 5 , 1978 , based on Lhe staff ' s recommendation. Motion by Ben Nix, seconded by Bette Kountz. A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix, Frank Suckla, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , Bette Kountz and Harry Ashley. Motion carried. / APPLICANT: Best-Way Paving Company, etal CASE NUMBER: SUP-347 : 77 :21 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . NE , Section 2, T5N, R66W LOCATION: Northwest of the intersection of 35th Avenue and 4th Street SUBJECT: Open( Cut Mining Permit for Gravel Pit APPEARANCE : Tom Connell DISCUSSION: Kay Norton briefly explained what has occurred with the application up to the present time. Tom Honn then explained to the Planning Commission members that a meeting was held on May 11, 1978, with representatives of Best-Way Paving Company, opponents of the proposal and the Planning staff to discuss and attempt to reach an agreement regarding the setback of the berm on the west side of the property; type, quality and number of trees regarding the landscaping of the berm; and type of fencing to be utilized. As a result of this meeting, the only agreement reached was the type and quality of trees for the landscaping which would be 6 ' pine-like trees at approximately 200 ' intervals with seedlings to be planted at approximately 30 ' intervals . The amended set of Development Standards was then read by Mr. Honn and shown in map from by Chuck Cunliffe. Tom Connell then stated that he understood the Development Standards and found them to be acceptable . Robert Foose, surrounding property owner, again expressed opposition because the proposal is in a residential area and feels the landscaping, berms , etc. are inadequate . Vicki Reed and Larry Wikholm expressed concern with the proposed buffering. Mariana Reed then asked for clarification of when the trees and seedlings will be planted and the berms are to be constructed. Tom Honn explained that construction will begin within six months of approval by the State Mined Reclamation Board. Discussion followed. Vicki Reed also asked if the fencing and the berms on 4th Street would be extended onto the Ruyle ' s existing property to the tree line which had previously been brought up at another hearing. Chuck Cunliffe stated that there is a letter in the Planning Commission packets which states that the Ruyle ' s have given permission to Best-Way Paving Company to extend the berms and fencing onto their property. 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 Jerry Kiefer, seconded by Ben Nix. A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt and Bette Kountz. Motion carried. tl A_ Planning Commission nutes . Page 7 June G , 1978 APPLICANT: Charles Ryberg CASE NUMBER: VI-63 : 77 : 11 Removed from Agenda There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Shirley A. Phillips The Weld County Planning Commission held a scheduled meeting on May 16, 1978 , at 10: 00 a.m. in the Weld County Centennial Center, County Commissioners ' Hearing Room, 915 - 10th Street , Greeley, Colorado. Roll Call was as follows : Chuck Carlson Absent , Ben Nix Present Jerry Kiefer Present Parry IIi ,iLL Present. Irma White Present Marge Yost Present Bette Kountz Present Harry Ashley Absent Frank Suckla Absent Also present were : Gary Z. Fortner, Director of Planning Chuck Cunliffe, Assistant Zoning Administrator Cathy E. Carter, Zoning Violation Inspector Kay Norton, Assistant County Attorney As a quorum was present, the meeting proceeded as scheduled. The minutes of the May 2 , 1978, meeting were unanimously approved. APPLICANT: Bernard Hoogland CASE NUMBER: SUP-358: 78: 10 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: NW Section 3 , T4N, R68W LOCATION : 4 miles west and 1 mile north of Jphnstown SUBJECT: Dairy Operation APPEARANCE : Gerritt Hoogland, father of Bernard Hoogland DISCUSSION: Mr . Gerritt Hoogland stated that he and his son are from Minnesota, and wish to start a dairy on the property due to the difference in weather between the two states. He also stated that this was an excellent location compared to that in Minnesota. There being no questions from the Planning Commission , Chuck Cunliffe read the staff ' s recommendation for approval and the Development Standards . There were no audience statements of approval or disapproval for this request . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend approval to the Board of County Commissioners based on the staff ' s recommendation . Motion by Jerry Kiefer , seconded by Bette Kountz. A vote of "aye" by Ben Nix, Percy Hiatt , Jerry Kiefer , Irma White, Marge Yost , and Bette Kountz. Motion carried. APPLICANT: Continental Pipeline Company CASE NUMBER: SUP-359 : 78 : 1l LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt. NW Section 20, T2N, R66W LOCATION: 2 miles north of Ft . Lupton SUBJECT: Oil Storage Facility/Amending SUP- 188 : 73 : 3 APPEARANCE: John Rollins , District Manager for Continental Pipeline DISCUSSION : Mr . Rollins stated that Continental Pipeline Company is operating a crude oil pipeline gathering and transportation system supplying the refineries in Cheyenne and Denver . He stated that they were requesting an amendment to SUP-l88 to allow them to expfi1cl the c:Ip;H• ILy of the station operated to handle the increa,;oci Planning Commiss Minutes May 16 , 1978 Page 2 , • amounts of crude oil gathered in the Ft . Lupton spindle fields. The tanks will provide additional storage and a service to the shippers. He also explained that they are a common, carrier regulated by a number of governmental agencies , and that the current facilities are in compliance with the regulations of these agencies . IIe emphasized that the proposed expansion would also be in compliance. The nature of the expansion is storage and pumping units to more efficiently and safely handle the volumes now gathered. There being no questions from the Planning Commission at this time, Chuck Cunliffe read the staff ' s recommendation for approval and the Development Standards. Staff comments were also read at this time stating that one letter of opposition had been received from Mr . f Mrs. Ralph Elliott , surrounding property owners, stating their reasons for disapproval those being : too close to their home and other buildings on the property , dangerous and hazardous , the existing tank is noisy and already blocks their view to the east . Irma White asked as to the location of the facility to the Elliott ' s property. Chuck Cunliffe stated that the property was located to the west of the facility between Highway 85 and the UPRR tracks. Mr. Nix asked Mr. Rollins if they had been made aware of the objection. Mr. Rollins stated that they were not aware of it until the morning of the meeting. Mr . Nix then questioned as to relocation of the site. Mr. Rollins answered that the current location or possible relocation would be difficult to accomplish without incurring conerns and objections from surrounding property owners. He also stated that the reasons for locating at this area was that expansion of an existing facility was less expensive in terms of investment , and that manpower already exists at this facility. IIe stated that Continental Pipeline felt that it would be in the community ' s best interest to expand an already established facility rather than having to develop in a new area. Mr. Kiefer asked if they had already obtained an SUP for the existing tank. Mr. Rollins stated that they had, and that this was simply for the addition of a tank. Mr. Nix inquired as to an addi- tional noise factor with this tank. Mr. Rollins explained that it would not , stating that the additional pumping unit was simply to accomodate the various kinds of crude oil. He also stated that the number of pumps running at the same time would remain at the current level . Percy Hiatt added that he had no objections to the proposed expansion . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend approval to the Board of County Commissioners based on the staff ' s recommendation. Moved by Percy Hiatt , seconded by Irma White. A vote of "aye" by Ben Nix , Percy Hiatt , Jerry Kiefer, Irma White, Marge Yost , and Bette Kountz. Motion carried. APPLICANT: Amoco Production Company CASE NUMBER: SUP-360: 78 : 12 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . SWi Section 34, T2N, R67W LOCATION: 1 miles east of Frederick - northeast corner of the inter- section of County Roads 14 and 19 Planning Commissi Minutes May 16, 197£3 Page 3 SUBJECT: Spindle Plant Enlargement/Amending SUP-311 : 77 : 19 APPEARANCE : Lou Gaskins , Attorney for Amoco Production John Lang , Senior Staff Engineer DISCUSSION: Lou Gaskins, Attorney , stated that the request was to expand the Spindle Gas Processing facility which will permit the additional processing of natural gas and increase the recovery of 1,1)G products . Mr. (;skins then introduced John Lang who further• explained their request , stating that the plant has been in exis- tence for 5 years. Mr. Lang stated that they worked on a closed system and that the only time hydrocarbons would be vented would be in the event of a problem in the plant resulting in emergency shut-down. He explained that they propose to add 1 compressor, dehydrator and regenerator, plus water protection systems for fires . He further stated that no additional water requirements or personnel would be necessitated by the enlargement . Chuck Cunliffe then read the staff ' s recommendation of approval and the Development Standards. Staff comments were also read at this time stating that the Tri-Area Planning Commission has recommended denial based on the following : they felt the additional buildings can be built on the existing property, the danger involved because of the increased capacity, more pipelines will be run across the countryside , an increase in pollution will exist , and increase in plant size will take away from the beauty of the land and the environment . Chuck Cunliffe explained that this property lies within the 3 mile radius of the Tri-Town area, and because of the meeting dates of the Planning Commission and town board, a referral was only sent to the Tri-Area Planning Commission which does have the representation of the three towns. Normally, with time per- mitting , referrals would have been sent to the three individual towns. Mr. Lang responded to the objections of the Tri-Area Planning Commission stating that Amoco felt that their objections were not justifiable. He further commented that the additional buildings would be built on the existing property, and that only 2 five acre tracts have been added for the two buildings; one of which was for the housing of the fire protection equipment , the other enabling them to spread out the operation, both for the purposes of addi- tional safety. Concerning the pipelines, Mr. Lang explained that the additional capacity being located at the existing site will tend to reduce the number of pipelines because they can utilize the existing pipeline system rather than having to add new lines if the facility were located in a different area. Mr. Kiefer asked about the exact location of the additional building. Mr. Lang stated that the building would actually be farther away from the Tri-Area than the existing facility is. Iie also stated that there would be minimal additional pollution resulting from the enlarge- ment of the facility. Mr. Hiatt questioned as to the noise increase along property lines. Mr. Lang stated that the fan proposed on the compressor would lessen the noise emission from the area. IIe also explained that Dr. Chanaud, with Dyna-Systems , Inc. , noise consul- tants in Boulder and Denver , surveyed the operation and concluded that there would be no noticable increase in noise immediately . adjacent to the compressor , with a 2 db or less increase. Mr . Hiatt asked i I' extra muffling was required on the present site. Mr . Lang Planning Commissi Minutes May 16 , 1978 Page 4 answered that it was, and certification of compliance had been presented to the Planning Commission . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend approval to the Board of County Commissioners based on the staff ' s recommendation. Moved by Marge Yost , seconded by Jerry Kiefer. A vote of "aye" by Ben Nix , Percy Hiatt , Jerry Kiefer, Irma White , Marge Yost , and Bette KorinL . Motion c•;rrr• ied. APPLICANT: Town of Severance CASE NUMBER: SUP-361 : 78 : 13 , LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . SE1 Section 2, T6N, R67W LOCATION: Adjacent to the southern boundary of the Town of Severance SUBJECT: Wastewater Treatment Facility APPEARANCE: Don Hoff , Attorney for the Town of Severance Bill Heller , Engineer representing the Town of Severance DISCUSSION: Mr. Heller explained that the application was for a waste- water treatment plant for the Town of Severance which, at this time, has only on-site disposal consisting of septic tanks and privies. Mr. Heller addressed the four issues stated in the staff ' s recommenda- tion, first stating the possibility of groundwater contamination explaining that bentonite seals will be placed on each of the two lagoons since a detailed soils investigation has been received by the town. Secondly, he mentioned that the exterior of the lagoons will be riff-raffed with rocks for flood protection , and that this will be shown on the final plans. Third, the Colorado Geological Survey and West Greeley Soil Conservation District submittal of recommendations , Mr. Heller stated, had been issued when the site plan was presented a year ago. He explained that the Town had been working closely with them and that he could see no problems from them. Concerning the Loup Reservoir Company allowing discharge into the ditch, Mr. Heller stated that the Town had been working with them and could anticipate no problems as they were obtaining an easement from them. Finally, regarding the documentation of legal interest in the property, he stated that the Town did not wish to start condemnation proceedings until they were certain that they could build the plant at this site. Mr. Nix asked Mr . Heller if the Town had reached an impass at this point with the property owners for acquisition of their property. Mr. Heller stated that , while it may not be an impass, that the matter is in the hands of the attor- neys. Kay Norton explained that in order for the County to grant any type of land use permit , the applicants must show some type of interest in the property, either through acquisition by sale or through initiation of condemnation proceedings. Don Hoff requested that the Planning Commission give some decision as to whether or not they would allow the Town to build the plant at this site even if the Board of County Commissioners could not issue the permit until legal interest could be shown. Kay Norton stated her disagreement with this request explaining that state statute required the Planning Commission to review the application and without legal interest in the land, they have no jurisdiction over review of the application. Chuck Cuniiffe read the staff ' s recommendation for continuance of Lhe SUI 'ciirvs L , ng:t i n L,r L i ng the concern:; ,rcicl re;; c'd by Mr . iie I I er Planning Commissi Minutes May 16, 1978 Page 5 previously. The floor was then opened for audience participation . Fred Felte, owning the property on which the plant is proposed, stated that he was against any proposal which would hinder agricul- tural production in the area. He also questioned as to why the Town could not put the plant on the north side of the lake due to the possibility of a flood. Carl Felte stated concerns similar to those of Fred Felte. Ron Scott , Town Council of Severance , explained that they did anticipate some growth , and that the plant would infringe upon some agricultural land, but stated that the need for the plant seemed to out-weigh the detriments. Marge Yost asked how many people the plant would accomodate. Mr. Heller stated that it is designed to handle 800 people, bu that the current population which would be handled by the wastewater treatment plant is 100. MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to continue the meeting to June 6, 1978 , to allow the Town of Severance time to address the issues presented by the staff in their recommendations. A vote of "aye" by Ben Nix , Jerry Kiefer, Irma White, Marge Yost , and Bette Kountz. Percy Hiatt abstained. Motion carried. Recertification of Section III .H. 5. a of the Weld County Building Code as amended by the Weld County Board of Commissioners DISCUSSION: Chuck Cunliffe presented Section III .H. 5. a. of the Weld County Building Code as amended by the Board of Commissioners. He explained that the context of the Section was the same, that the amendment by the Commissioners was simplay a change in the wording that required recertification by the Planning Commission . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recertify Section III .H. 5. a. of the Weld County Building Code as amended by the Weld County Board of Commissioners. Motion by Jerry Kiefer, seconded by Irma White. A vote of "aye" by Ben Nix, Percy Hiatt , Jerry Kiefer, Irma White , Marge Yost and Bette Kountz. Motion carried. 11 : 30 recess for Planning Commission Luncheon . APPLICANT: Best-Way Paving Company etal . CASE NUMBER: SUP-347 : 77 : 21 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . NEI Section 2, T5N, R66W LOCATION: Northwest of the intersection of 35th Avenue and 4th Street SUBJECT: Open Cut Mining Permit for Gravel Pit DISCUSSION: Kay Norton, Assistant County Attorney , explained that the Planning Commission received an order the morning of May 16th signed by Judge Jonathan Hayes, judp of the District Court in which Civil Action #29-8-68 is being heard relating to the rezoning action of the Board of County Commissioners on the Best-Way Paving application. The order stated that the Planning Commission is stayed from hearing further proceedings on this matter pending the hearing on the issuance or the rezoning. Planning Commissi Minutes May 16, 1978 Page 6 APPLICANT: George EL Eleann Roberts CASE NUMBER: VI-68 : 77 : 16 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 5, Carol Heights LOCATION: 2 miles east and 1 mile south of Erie SUBJECT: Junk Yard in Agricultural Zone District APPEARANCE: Eleann Roberts DISCUSSION: Cathy Carter read a summary if field inspections and reports on the property in question, and recommended that legal action be taken due to time involved in the existence of the viola- tion and an apparent lack of cooperation from the Roberts to clean up the property. Mrs. Eleann Roberts stated that the initial re- ports were wrong, stating that all vehicles have been moved off the property with the exception of 2 as of the 16th of May. Mr. Nix questioned Cathy Carter as to the last date of inspection of the property . . She answered that that was on April 13 , and that photo- graphs of July 28 , 1977 showed the same vehicles on the property as those located on the April 13th inspection. Mrs. Roberts viewed the photographs and explained that all of the vehicles pictured were removed with the exception of a van and a ' 52 Ford. Cathy Carter asked if these vehicles were licensed or if they were going to be in the near future. Mr. Roberts explained that her husband was going to restore these two vehicles before licensing and that they had complied with all other requests of the County. Marge Yost asked Mrs. Roberts about the number of vehicles on the property at the present time. Mrs. Roberts explained that all vehicles on the property were licensed and running with the exception of the van and the ' 52 Ford. Percy Hiatt asked Mrs. Roberts how long they had lived at this residence. Mr. Roberts replied that they had been here for 15 years. MOTION: Be it therefore resolved that due to the number of Vehicles moved off of the property, that it be recommended to the staff that an additional inspection be made and report of that inspection given to the Planning Commission so final decision can be made as to the status of the property. Motion by Jerry Kiefer, seconded by Irma White. A vote of "aye" by Ben Nix, Percy Hiatt , Jerry Kiefer, Irma White, Marge Yost , and Bette Kountz. Motion carried. APPLICANT: Walter and Pauline Thompson CASE NUMBER: VI-69 : 77 : 17 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Wz Lot 6, Carol Heights LOCATION: 2l miles east and 1 mile south of Erie SUBJECT: Junk Yard in Agricultural Zone District APPEARANCE : Walter Thompson DISCUSSION: Cathy Carter read a summary of field inspections and reports on the property in question, and recommended that legal action be taken due to time involved in the existence of the violation and an apparent lack of cooperation from the Thompsons to clean up the property. Mr. Thompson responded to the violation and explained that all vehicles on the property are currently licensed with the exception of a 1940 Willy, considered a classic , and a 1959 GMC Van used as storage and appraised by the assessor as an appurtenant building to the property. Also on the property Planning Commissi Minutes May 16, 1978 Page 7 is a 1965 Plymouth Baracuda, and all vehicles are operational and have all parts with the exception of batteries . Mr. Thompson also stated that he is willing to license the remaining vehicles to comply with the County ' s requests. Mr. Nix questioned as to the number of vehicles currently on the property. Mr. Thompson responded that there were 7 cars on the property, 2 of which are driven constantly, 3 other which are licensed , and the previously mentioned 2 which are the Van and the Willy , which are unlicensed . Mr. Thompson stated his willingness to clean up the property and Mrs. White asked as to the time needed to finish this process. Mr. Thompson stated that 30 days should be adequate time to complete this. MOTION: Be it therefore resolved that a 30 day time extension be given to Mr. Thompson to clean up miscellaneous materials and license the cars, with inspection of property to be done after this 30 day period to check on progress. Motion by Percy Hiatt , seconded by Jerry Kiefer. A vote of "aye" by Ben Nix, Percy Hiatt , Jerry Kiefer, Irma White, Marge Yost , and Bette Kountz. Motion carried. APPLICANT: Howard and Loree Scott CASE NUMBER: VI-70 : 77 : 18 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 8, Carol Heights LOCATION: 2L- miles east and 1 mile south of Erie SUBJECT: Junk Yard in Agricultural Zone District APPEARANCE: Loree Scott DISCUSSION : Cathy Carter read a summary of field inspections and reports on the property in question , and recommended that legal action be taken due to time involved in the existence of the violation and an apparent lack of cooperation from the Scotts to clean up the property. Mrs. Scott responded to the violation stating that an attempt has been made to remove two of the vehicles from the property, but to no avail . Mr. Nix asked Mrs . Scott if she would be willing to clean up the pro- perty and license the vehicles . She replied that she was told that if she moved the vehicles to the back of the property that this would satisfy the County. Marge Yost asked as to the number of vehicles not being used for personal reasons. Mrs. Scott replied that all are used with the exception of the 2 which they have requested be towed to a junk yard, but have not been as of this date. Marge Yost also asked about the tires and other miscellaneous junk located on the property. Mrs. Scott answered that all of this material had been cleaned up. Bette Kountz asked as to the number of vehicles on the property. Mrs. Scott replied that there were no more than that number on the property in 1977. Chuck Cunliffe stated that there are seven vehicles which are unlicensed, including 3 trucks and 4 cars. Mention of application for a Special Use Permit was made, and Mrs. Scott asked as to the requirements and method of applying for this. Chuck Cunliffe explained that she could come to the office of the Department of Planning Services to discuss this process if she wished to apply for the SUP. Mrs. Scott was informed that even with an SUP that the property would have to be cleaned up and things put in order. MOTION: Be it therefore resolved that 30 clays be given for submittal of an SUP application and/or clean up of the property , with inspec- tion to be made after this; time with pictures being taken . Motion • • Planning Commissi Minutes May 16 , 1978 Page 8 by Jerry Kiefer , seconded by Irma White. A vote of "aye" by Ben Nix , Percy Hiatt , Jerry Kiefer , Irma White, Marge Yost , and Bette Kountz. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned . Respectfully submitted, / I ;? ' _ -G‘l(C� Kathryn g. Hrouda 6 OD The Weld County Planning Commission held a scheduled meeting on May 2, 1978; at 1: 30 p.m. in the 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 Irma White Present Marge Yost Present Bette Kountz Present Harry Ashley Absent Frank Suckla Absent • Also present were : Gary Z. Fortner, Director of Planning Tom Honn, Zoning Administrator Chuck Cunliffe, Assistant Zoning Administrator Kay Norton, Assistant County Attorney As a quorum was present , the meeting proceeded as scheduled. The minutes of the April 18, 1978, meeting were unanimously approved. APPLICANT: Best-Way Paving Company, etal CASE NUMBER: SUP-347 : 77: 21 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . NE , Section 2, T5N, R66W LOCATION: Northwest of the intersection of 35th Avenue and 4th Street SUBJECT: Open Cut Mining Permit for Gravel Pit APPEARANCE: Tom Connell , Carl Hill , Robert Mathias DISCUSSION: Tom Connell , attorney for Best-Way Paving Company, first briefly stated that they have submitted all required plans, maps, etc. for consideration by the Planning staff and the members of the Planning Commission. He then introduced Carl Hill , President of Best-Way Paving Company, who gave a short presentation to the Planning Commission on the purpose of the application and why they are requesting the permit . Best-Way desires to expand their operation to include an additional 45 acres . He stated that this is a unique piece of ground in that they can extract the maximum amount of gravel from the site and all the material can be mined. Mr. Hill also stated that they have changed one item in regard to the berm and the fence on the southwest portion of the site. Two of the area residents along that side of the property expressed that they would rather not have a berm. They like the view to the east that they now have, so Best-Way has proposed to replace the privacy fence with a chain link fence . There being no questions or discussion at this time, Tom Honn read the staff' s recommendation for approval and the Operations Standards . Jerry Kiefer then asked for clarification of the of the recommendation by the City of Greeley and the Planning staff' s recommendatin regarding a berm and a privacy fence as opposed to a 100' setback. The Planning staff felt a berm and privacy fence would have a greater effect on buffering the operation from the existing residential uses rather than the 100' setback. Irma White also asked for clarificatio regarding the drainage of which Drew Scheltinga of the Engineering A Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 May 2 , 11378 Department responded. He stated he sees no problem at this time. \\ Chairman Carlson then opened the floor for audience participation. At this time Larry Wikholm, representing H.O.P.E. (Homeowners Opposed to Pit Expansion) , a group of surrounding property owners , again expressed his opposition to the gravel pit and asked Dick Keirnes of the Greeley Planning Commission to comment on the proposal . Mr. Keirnesi stated that the City of Greeley Planning staff recommendation was for a 200' setback from 4th Street and the City Planning Commission recommendationed a 100' setback he provided. Discussion followed among the Planning Commission members regarding the berm. Ruth Sens, II Chairman of H.O.P.E. , then presented to the Planning Commission other requests other than what the Planning staff recommended regarding buffering and area protection , maintenance of the buffers , the existing plant site , reclamation and monitoring and enforcement . Kay Norton, Assistant County Attorney , responded to the comment regarding monitoring and enforcement by stating that this would be unlawful delegation. Tom Ilellerich, attorney representing Mr. and Mrs. Ray Larson, expressed that there should be a setback, especially with regard to the Larson ' s property. He also stated the Larson ' s oppose a chain link fence along the west side of the property. They are in favor of a 6 ' privacy fence as recommended by the Planning staff and also a 6 ' berm. Mrs. White asked for clarification again as to where the berm would be located on the west side of the property. Discussion followed. At this time I Robert Mathias of R. V. Lord and Associates showed the Planning Commissioi an overlay which showed the property as it exists now and then how it would look with the berm and trees . Discussion followed regarding maintenance of the berm. Vicki Reed then read the motion by the City of Greeley Planning Commission regarding the 100' setback. Ray Larson I expressed some concern as to how high the berm would go on his property i line on the west side. His property extends 4' higher than Best-Way' s property . Mrs . Ray Larson also expressed a great deal of concern in opposition to the proposal by Best-Way . The Larson ' s presently own I; eight lots which abutts Best-Way ' s property. Donna Jackson stated she felt the trees proposed to be planted should be 6 ' high nursery stock. Chairman Carlson then asked about the irrigation ditch and how far it is away from property lines and how much fill will be needed there. l ti Discussion followed. Bette Kountz asked what size trees would be planted when they are planted. Discussion followed. MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to continue the meeting to May 16 , 1978, to receive further input regarding the setback on the west side, / height and quality of trees and type of fencing and where it is going / to be located on the property. Motion by Percy Hiatt , seconded by ;/ Irma White. A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix, Percy Hiatt , Jerry Kiefer, Irma White, and Bette Kountz. Marge Yost cast a vote of absention . Motion carried. A' Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 May 2, 1978 APPLICANT: Colorado Division of Highways CASE NUMBER: SUP-356: 78 : 8 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . NWI , Section 36 , T9N, R66W LOCATION: 21 miles east of Nunn SUBJECT: Amend SUP-271: 74 : 34 by expanding acreage for gravel pit APPEARANCE : Joe Intermill DISCUSSION: Mr. Intermill explained to the Planning Commission members that the gravel pit for SUP-271 is on property owned by Mr. and Mrs . Lynn Shipps. The Colorado Division of Highways have an option to purchase material from the Shipps as the need arises for the maintenance, repair and construction of highways in the area. The SUP they now have is for 5. 1 acres which was obtained in March of 1975 and they now want to enlarge the area to 9. 4 acres . They did not realize at the time they took out the SUP in 1975 that they needed to include a plant and stock pile area and now need more room to work. There is also a possibility that several years from now they may want to enlarge and remove more material , which is the reasons for their request . IIe stated that material hauled from the area will normally be on a private road owned by the owner to County Road 98 and then hauled west of U.S . 85. Gravel is being removed at this time from the creek bed area. A reclamation plan will be utilized if needed. Expansion will take effect immediately. There being no questions at this time, Chuck Cunliffe read the staff ' s recommendation for approval of this expansion. No further discussion . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend approval to the Board of County Commissioners based on the staff ' s recommendation . Motion by Percy Hiatt , seconded by Ben Nix. A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson , Jerry Kiefer, Ben Nix, Percy Hiatt , Bette Kountz, Irma White, and Marge YOst . Motion carried. APPLICANT: Colorado Division of Highways CASE NUMBER: SUP-357: 78 : 9 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . N , Section 33, T1N, RS5W LOCATION: 2i miles east of Lochbuie SUBJECT: Borrow Pit APPEARANCE : Ken Woods DISCUSSION: Mr. Woods stated that they propose a borrow pit on the Eichner property. It will he used for highway construction for banking. Present use of the area is a wheat farm. The mining plan is to remove the top 8" of soil and stock pile it , then excavate the material to an average depth of approximately 7 ' at a 15 to 1 slope . The material will be hauled down County Road 4 for 1. 1 mile to I-76 where the proposed project is . The reclamation plan after excavation is basically to replace the stock piled material and fertilize it with cow manure at the recommendation of the Soil Conservation Service. The staff contacted Mr. Wood with regard to concern about dust on County Road 4. Mr. Wood indicated they will take measures to control the dust with water or emulsified .asphalt . Mrs . Yost questioned as to how many homes were along County Road 4. Mr. Wood responded there were five . Some discussion followed regarding the scheduling involved to haul the bulk out . Chuck Cunliffe then road the staff ' s re(:ommendHLion for approval . No further discussion . P Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 May 2 , 1978 MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend approval based on the staff ' s recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. Motion by Marge Yost , seconded by Irma White . A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix , Percy Hiatt; , Jerry Kiefer , Irma White, Bette Kountz, and Marge Yost . Motion carried . APPLICANT: Robert Meddles CASE NUMBER: CUP-34 : 78: 3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . NWk, Section 15, T1N, R68W LOCATION: 2l miles east and 3/4 miles north of Erie SUBJECT: Horse stables and single family residence APPEARANCE: Robert Meddles DISCUSSION: Mr. Meddles stated that their intentions are to have a horse ranch in the business of selling, breeding, and training horses. When the operation is fully developed, they anticipate having 20 horses on the property . Of the 40 acres involved, three acres would be used for buildings, seven acres would be used for pasture and the remaining 30 acres would be used primarily for raising alfalfa and grain . He also said he does not feel the operation would he detrimental to the air or water or noise levels . Also, the existing roads are in good condition. Disposal of waste will be spread on the acreage . Bedding will be straw and cleaned daily or more if necessary. There being no questions at this time, Chuck Cunliffe read the staff ' s recommendation for approval of this request and the Development Standards . Mr. Carlson asked if the applicant was aware or notified of possible ground sub- sidence in the area. Chuck Cunliffe said the Colorado Geological Survey reviewed the application and have no problems with it . Mr . Meddles showed Mr. Carlson a map he had which showed that there would be no problem with subsidence. Mrs . White was concerned with Development Standard #2 and why it specified a certain number and kind of horse. She felt it should read simply 20 horses . Mr. Cunliffe stated that the applicant had submitted it to read specified numbers and kind of animals. Mr. Cunliffe said this could be deleted from the Development Standards . Mr Hiatt commended Mr. Meddles for his facts and figures regarding the application . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend approval based on the staff 's recommendation with the deletion of the last sentence in Development Standards #2 which reads, "This will include one stallion ; 2 brood mares ; 2 horses in training and 15 boarding horses. " Motion by Irma White , seconded by Jerry Kiefer. A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson, Ben Nix, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , Irma White , Bette Kountz, and Marge Yost. Motion carried. APPLICANT: John Valdez CASE NUMBER: S-146 : 78 : 3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: P L . NE 4 ,, Section 9, T1N, R68W I,OCATTnN: 2 miles east and 1 mile north of Erie SUBJECT: Rep l n t. of Lot 4 , Scott ' s Acres APPEARANCE : John Valdez ,/ Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 May 2 , 1978 DISCUSSION: Mr. Valdez is requesting to split Lot 4 of Scott ' s Acres and share it with Mr. Ignacio Vasquez . Tom Ilonn further explained that the property is presented owned by Mr. and Mrs . Valdez and Mr. and Mrs . Vasquez. It was divided in 1969 under the former regulations . The purpose of the replat is to clarify the ownership and properly describe within the subdivision plat the lots which exist as of 1969, but have never effectively been identified on the subdivision plat itself . IIe then read the staff ' s recommendation :for approval of the request . Mr . Carlson asked Mr. Valdez if he was aware that the property was over the Boulder Valley coal field. Mr. Valdez said he was aware of this . Mr. Carlson recommended the applicant invesitage this further before building a home on this property. MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend approval to the Board of County Commissioners based on the staff ' s recommendation . Motion by Jerry Kiefer, seconded by Bette Kountz. A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson, Ben Nix, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , Irma White, Bette Kountz, and Marge Yost . Motion carried. APPLICANT: Eaton Ford, Inc. CASE NUMBER: VI-76 : 77 :24 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . Ez SE , Section 25 , T7N, R66W LOCATION: 1 mile north of Eaton on west side of U.S . Highway 85 SUBJECT: Auto and truck sales in the Agricultural District and sign violations APPEARANCE : Jay Steinberger, owner of Eaton Ford DISCUSSION: Cathy Carter, Zoning Inspector, read the background history of the zoning violation giving specific dates and occurrences up to the present time. Mr. Steinberger stated he was not ignoring the requests and has been pre-occupied with his business. He intended that his attorney would be able to help in getting better organized. He said now that he has contacted C. E. Tech to work on the rezoning application . He feels if he could have until June 8, 1978, that the change of zone application will be submitted before that date. Discussion followed regarding the time involved to proceed with the change of zone . Mrs. Kountz asked why they would not annex to Eaton. Mr. Steinberger indicated the property in question is not contiguous to the existing town .limits of eaton . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend a time extension to June 8, 1978, to allow Mr. Steinberger to submit an application for a change of zone to the Planning staff . If not received by then , the matter will be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners for legal action. Motion by Ben Nix, seconded by Irma White. A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson, Ben Nix, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , Irma White, Marge Yost and Bette Kountz. Motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Shirley A. Phillips The Weld County Planning Commission held a scheduled meeting on February 21, 1978 , at 1 : 30 p .m. in the Weld County Centennial Center County Commissioners Hearing Room, 915 10th Street , Greeley , Colorado. Roll Call was as follows : Percy Hiatt Present Ben Nix Present Frank Suckla Present Chuck Carlson Present Jerry Kiefer Present Marge Yost Present Irma White Present Harry Ashley Absent Bette Kountz Absent Also present were : Gary Z. Fortner, Director of Planning Tom IIonn, Zoning Administrator Chuck Cunliffe, Assistant Zoning Administrator Ken McWilliams , Senior Planner Kay Norton, Assistant County Attorney As a quorum was present , the meeting proceeded as scheduled. The minutes of the February 7, 1978 , meeting were unanimously approved. APPLICANT: Best-Way Paving Company etal /f CASE NUMBER: Z-294 : 77 : 12 / . LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . NEY, Section 2 , T5N, R66W LOCATION: Northwest of the intersection of 35th Avenue and 4th Street \SUBJECT: Change of Zone from "E" to "A" APPEARANCE: Robert Mathias , Tom Connell DISCUSSION : Chairman Carlson first called for the staff' s recommendation regarding the application since presentations have already been heard ,` from both sides . Chuck Cunliffe then read the staff ' s recommendation for denial . There being no questions by the Planning Commission, Robert Mathias answered several questions that were raised at the last Planning Commission meeting. One question was whether or not there was asbestos in the rocks . He read a report from the Asphalt 1 Institute , 1975 , regarding the Asphalt Hot-Mix Emission Study which i stated that there is no serious air pollution or employee health problems resulting from the use of petroleum-derived asphalt in hot- mixes . He also had several tests run to see if asbestos could be found in the rocks and he received responses back that there was not enough asbestos to run a test on . He also stated that gravel is used by everyone, so there is a need for it . He also discussed the water table situation and property values . Noise will not have an impact on the neighborhood and the site will not be visible because of the proposed 4 ' vegetated berm and 6 ' high privacy fence. Mr. Kiefer expressed J his concern about how long the property has been owned by Best-Way . I Mr . Suckla asked how many complaints had been received regarding a health hazard because of the operation. Mr. Mathias responded by saying that to the best of his knowledge only one person has con- sistently complained about a health problem. Mr. Kiefer also questioned the difference between F-1 and '1'-1 . Tom Ilonn responded that the F , meant floodplain and T meant Terrace with 1 meaning the high quality . ' Planning Commission Alinutes Page 2 February 21 , 1978 1 / Tom Connell then read a memo from the Community Relations Committee f of the Greeley Board of Realtors regarding aggregate deposits and the economic advantages of having mineable aggregate deposits in the area. Chairman Carlson then opened the floor for audience partici- '' pation. Kent Jackson expressed his concern regarding the value of the gravel resource and his opposition to the site . IIe went on to 'i, state that the residents in the immediate area considered their neighborhood as a valuable resource which should be protected in the years to come . He then presented a map entitled "Miscellaneous Investigations Series - Boulder , Fort Collins , Greeley Area, Colorado , Map I-855-D" which identified the Best-Way Paving Company 's property ' as having a source of low quality concrete aggregate . The map further defined large deposits of better quality aggregate in the region which currently have Agricultural zoning. He also presented a list which identified 11 other different gravel operations that are in the immediate area. Mr. Suckla commented about what effect this would have on the area after it was mined out . Gary Fortner responded by saying that it could be an asset 15-30 years after it is mined out if it is done correctly . Discussion then followed on what standards could be put on Development Standards for the operation. Jackie Foose, surrounding property owner, stated that she was concerned for ,; children of the area and their safety. Vicki Reed stated there is j a limited choice for the use of the land and after it is mined out there is no guarantee as to the future use of the land. No further ; discussion . MOTION : Be it therefore resolved to deny the application based on the staff' s recommendation . Motion by Jerry Kiefer, seconded by Percy Hiatt . A vote of "aye" by Percy Hiatt , Jerry Kiefer, and Irma White . A vote of "No" was cast by Ben Nix, Frank Suckla, and Chuck Carlson. Marge Yost cast a vote of abstention. Split decision - 3 to 3 . MOTION : Be it therefore resolved to approve the application . Motion by Ben Nix, seconded by Frank Suckla. A vote of "aye" by Frank Suckla, Ben Nix, and Chuck Carlson. A vote of "No" was cast by Percy Hiatt , Jerry Kiefer, and Irma White . An abstention vote was cast by 1 Marge Yost . Split decision - 3 to 3 . Chairman Carlson stated this application would be forwarded to the County Commissioners as a split decision among the Planning Commission f% members . Included in this action is their individual comments for ,reaching their decision : �i1 b II Percy Hiatt : "I fully agree with the staff ' s recommendation here that 4 i it is the opinion of the them that the zoning was not i II faulty , so I will have to go along with that and let it !; go at that . " Ben Nix : "I think previously I have made it quite clear my feeling as I' regards the County Comprehensive Plan referring to mineral ' I, deposits of which we have a limited amount . Now it ' s debatable about how long these supplies can and will last , but I feel that eventhough this cannot be needed for even as long as 50 years then we ' re amiss to allow housing develop- ment or any other kind of development to develop on this particular gravel or mineral site and this is the reason for my voting the way I have . I have a real concern for the , Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 February 21 , 1978 feelings of the people living in the area. I also would like to say that I think Development Standards can \: be required so that these people will have to develop this in such a way as not to be a nuisance and if this couldn ' t be done then I would not be favorable, but I ". know it can and I think that we must preserve the minerals that are available to us in this area. " Frank Suckla : "My reason is pretty much such as Ben Nix ' s . I believe I, our natural resources should be preserved whether it be gravel , coal or other natural resources . After they � are depleted, this particular site could be made into a park or open space or other uses and I would like to lq see some strict land use put in this so it would be presentable and be a good open space for the area and my reason also--as far as noise level and health hazards , I don ' t think that the health hazards from the gravel pit would be significant and the noise level--probably most homes have more noise in their homes than you have in the gravel pit . With you stereo or television going your decibels get pretty high sometimes and I would like to see some good standards put on the land use permit . " Irma White : "I have gone along with opinion of the staff. They have y said that original zoning was not faulty and I believe that and I see no change in conditions that justify a new a° classification. I would, however--if the Development Standards had been voiced into a motion differently , I may have voted for it . I have some questions that haven ' t been answered and one of them is how valuable is gravel in our area, how much do we have? Both sides have presented evidence both ways and I haven ' t been satisfied with an answer to that . " Jerry Kiefer : "I agree, too , with the staff ' s recommendation primarily I suppose on two points . One is I also have not been convinced of the need, although I understand the value of the mineral deposit . I feel that the negative impact to me on the surrounding neighborhood outweighs the benefit from the mineral deposit and part of that then, my second concern rests with the property values of the land surrounding . I feel that even with diligent care then the majority of the residents could not have been made to realize the future plans for that piece of property. " Chuck Carlson : "For myself, being in agriculture and knowing the value of gravel in all forms of business and knowing the fact ' that we have good grave] in this country , knowing the fact that in 1957, ' 58 and ' 59 when I was in college we ti repeatedly said we would never run out of energy and that ' s not even 20 years ago and here we are looking at it straight in the face. Another thing about the gravel . It is the same difference . We are never going to run out of gravel ? I just cannot he made to believe' that . Another point , the asbestos point that was brought up I thought was irrelevant , didn ' t have any , Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 February 21 , 1978 foundation to it--none whatsoever because the rocks in this country around here have no asbestos particles such as that what was presented to us and I think that 4 was not relevant to this situation. Also, I think along with the fact that the value of gravel that we have to us in this immediate area with the growth e that we are facing today and with the gravel that has ' been asked for from this area to others , it is a very valuable thing to protect and I think it ' s something we need to look head-on into with a very clear mind and I think this can also be a great asset to this area rather than a detriment to this area because I believe that this can be dealt with through our rules U and regulations , through our health and reclamation projects that it could be entirely lived with. I don ' t think the people would even know the thing was being there with the aspect that clearing the air which i is very strictly controlled and patrolled by the State d Health Department and this can be done . " i APPLICANT: Charles Peterson etal / CASE NUMBER: S-142 : 77 : 15 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . SW7, Section 16 , T5N, R66W LOCATION: Northwest of junction of U.S . 34 By-Pass and 71st Avenue SUBJECT: Preliminary Plan - Peterson/Alexander Subdivision APPEARANCE : Harlan Stientjes DISCUSSION: Mr. Stientjes did not feel it necessary to review again the proposal by Peterson/Alexander as previously presented to the Planning Commission on December 20, 1977 , but did state that the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission at that time have now been resolved. There being no questions at this time , Ken McWilliams then read the staff 's recommendation for approval . Mr. Stientjes commented that he was not in full agreement with the staff regarding the method of handling the 230' stub portion of the proposed 26th Street . He desired to discuss other possible alternatives with the applicants before the County Commissioners decide on the matter. A great deal of discussion followed regarding who is to pay for the paving costs of the construction of the 230' stub portion of the proposed 26th Street and when it would occur. Commissioner Dunbar indicated it was difficult to arrive at a figure for bonds because of inflation . Joe Hastings , surrounding property owner to the east , was asked by Chairman Carlson to express his feelings regarding this matter. Mr. Hastings indicated he was concerned more with the drainage from the property , but said that at this time he does not need the access . Alice Hastings said that she felt it would be Peterson ' s responsibility to develop roads within their property to the east and they should not be held liable for the cost of the roads within Peterson/Alexander Subdivision . Planning Commissio" minutes Page 5 February 21 , 1978 MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to approve the application with the recommendation that the method of handling the 230 ' stub portion of the proposed 26th Street to be worked out between the applicant and the staff for a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners . Motion by Jerry Kiefer, seconded by Ben Nix. A vote of "aye" by Percy Hiatt , Irma White , Ben Nix , Frank Suckla, Chuck Carlson , Jerry Kiefer, and Marge Yost . Motion carried. APPLICANT: Stan Rech CASE NUMBER: SUP-348 : 77 : 22 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt W SW , Section 22 , T2N, RGGW LOCATION: 1L- miles north and 2 miles east of Ft . Lupton immediately north of Artisocrat Ranchettes SUBJECT: Oil Recycling and Disposal Site APPEARANCE : Stan Rech DISCUSSION: Mr. Rech again briefly reviewed his proposal for the oil recycling and disposal site . There being no questions at this time , Chuck Cunliffe then read the staff ' s recommendation for denial of the application. Mrs . Yost asked if , according to the Weld County Health Department ' s letter, something could be done so this would not be denied. Chuck Cunliffe responded by saying that the Health Department ' s letter was based on information submitted by Mr . Rech . Mr. Rech indicated, however , he could change his method of disposal if necessary to get approval . Discussion followed regarding the depths of wells in the area. Mr. Hiatt expressed concern about contamination of wells from salts ,etc. in the Town of Platteville ' s water. John Hall of the Weld County Health Department expressed concern regarding disposal of salts and possible contamination over a period of time . Linda Rech indicated that they have been trying to get the questions answered, but at this point they do not know where to go to get any more answers . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend denial to the Board of County Commissioners until questions can be answered regarding quality of the water being disposed of, potential contamination of surface and subsurface water, whether there are active wells in the area, whether the 45 wells referred to in the State Engineer' s letter are actually being used, which direction does the surface and groundwater flow, what is the possibility of contaminating the Fox Hills Sandstone aquifer, and is the proposed method of waste water disposal a reliable and effective method to use . Motion by Ben Nix, seconded by Irma White . A vote of "aye" by Percy Hiatt , Ben Nix , Chuck Carlson , Jerry Kiefer, Irma White . A vote of "no" was cast by Marge Yost and an abstention vote was cast. by Frank Suckla. Motion carried 5 to 1 . - Planning Commissio- Minutes Page 6 February 21 , 1978 SITE APPROVAL FOR SEWAGE TREATMENT WORKS GILCREST SANITATION DISTRICT LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . NW}, Section 27, T4N, R66W APPEARANCE : Dick Leffler of Western Technical Services DISCUSSION: Mr. Leffler gave a brief presentation on the proposal for expansion and indicated there would be no discharge from the facility . Mr. Hiatt asked how much the horse power will be increased with the expansion . Mr. Leffler responded that it will be increased by the area capable of increasing it . Mr. Suckla asked how the water is going to be disposed of and was told the recommended use is by percolation/evaporation ponds . There being no further questions , Tom Honn read the staff ' s recommendation for approval . Chairman Carlson said he was in favor of the expansion this time , but feels Mr. Leffler should notify Gilcrest that in the future they should look for additional sites elsewhere . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend approval to the Board of County Commissioners . Motion by Ben Nix, seconded by Jerry Kiefer. A vote of "aye" by Percy Hiatt , Ben Nix, Frank Suckla, Chuck Carlson, Jerry Kiefer, Marge Yost , and Irma White . Motion carried. There being no further business , the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Shirley A. Phillips Planning Commissior inutes Page 4 February 7 , 1978 DISCUSSION: Mr. Downing only stated that he wishes to have a junk and salvage yard on the proposed location . Chuck Cunliffe then read the staff ' s recommendation for denying the application . Mr . Downing said he did not think it would hurt the Town of Carr as in the past six years only three families have moved into the town and it has not grown that much. He did not feel it would depreciate the value of anyone ' s property. Mrs . White said that she had talked with several persons in the area and questions a junk yard in the middle of town . Larry Batman , representing Hazel Slater , surrounding property owner , voiced his opposition for the proposal indicating Mrs . Slater did not want to look out her front window and see a junk yard. He also felt there would be a possibility of fire . Arnold Ivie also expressed his opposition because of depreciation of property values. Mr . Nix asked if he could locate elsewhere , but Mr . Downing responded by saying there was no where else to go. Also felt there would be no more noise there than the train that goes through and • also does not feel there would be a fire danger . He said he also proposed to fence the area. MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to deny the application based on the staff ' s recommendation. Motion by Irma White , seconded by Ben Nix. A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix, Frank Suckla , Percy Hiatt , Bette Kountz, and Irma White. Motion carried. APPLICANT: Lyle Picraux CASE NUMBER: Z-295 : 77 : 13 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . SW4i Section 32 , T1N, R68W LOCATION: 3 miles west of the intersection of State Highway 7 and I-25 SUBJECT: Change of Zone from "A" to "C-UD" APPEARANCE : Lyle Picraux DISCUSSION: Mr . Picraux said he purchased 30 acres of land several years ago with the intention in mind of developing the land into a construction business yard selling building materials to general contractors and a contract company that constructs concrete base- , ments for new homes . The building on the property was built for a show home only . Now he wishes to have it as a construction yard, office , shop and place to store materials for construction sites . He plans to fence the yard in from the traffic and build many storage type units on the north property to buffer it from the residential area. There being no questions from the Planning Commission , Chuck Cunliffe read the staff ' s recommendation for denying the application . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to deny the application based on the staff ' s recommendation and primarily based on the information sub- mitted by the Erie Planning Commission ' s recommendation for denial . Motion by Percy Hiatt , seconded by Bette Kountz. A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix, Frank Suckla, Percy Hiatt , Bette Kountz, and Irma White . Motion carried. There being no further business , the meeting adjourned . Respectfully submitted , Shirley A. Phillips Planning Commissior inutes Page 3 February 7, 1978 have a storage shed for building materials and an office area for sales and administration. There being no further questions, Chuck Cunliffe read the staff ' s recommendation for continuing the hearing to March 7 . Discussion followed regarding the future plans for use of the remaining 2 acres owned by Mr. See. Mr . See indicated his plans could possibility be construction of duplexs and horse pasture. Mr. Carlson then asked for audience participation . Elinor Rogers spoke and said that she is opposed because the property in question goes 25 ' beyond the south boundary of Lot 4 . Ed Berliere , who did the engineering work on the plan indicated there was no reason for this other than the fact that it provided an easy survey . Bette McWilliams expressed her concern for the 2 acres involving egress and ingress , water , and septic system if it is developed into duplexs and horse pasture as indicated by Mr . See that he might possibly have in the future . Mr . Carlson indicated that the Planning Commission is not concerned with the 2-; acres at this time , only the 1l acres being considered at this time. MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to continue the hearing to March 7, 1978 , based on the staff ' s recommendation . Motion by Percy Hiatt , seconded by Frank Suckla. A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix , Frank Suckla, Percy Hiatt , Bette Kountz, and Irma White . Motion carried. APPLICANT: Ronald Heitman CASE NUMBER : SUP-349 : 73 : 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . SE1 SE , Section 9 , T5N, R65W LOCATION: 3 miles south and 2i miles east of Ft . Lupton SUBJECT: Hog Farrowing and Finishing Operation APPEARANCE : Ronald Heitman DISCUSSION: Mr. Heitman stated that he and his brother jointly own the property and Ron wants to help his brother get the hog operation started so that eventually the operation will belong to him. Ron would like to stay in the operation on a management basis . His proposal is to finish 300 head and farrow 200 head for a total of a 500 head operation . Chuck Cunliffe then read the staff ' s recommendation for approval and the Development Standards for the operation . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to recommend approval with the Development Standards to the Board of County Commissioners based on the staff ' s recommendation with a change in the Development Standards to read 500 head instead of 300 head . Motion by Ben Nix, seconded by Percy Hiatt . A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson , Ben Nix , Frank Suckla, Percy Hiatt , Bette Kountz, and Irma White . Motion carried . APPLICANT: George Downing CASE NUMBER: SUP-350 : 78 : 2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION : Lots 3-7 , 20-24 , Block 8 , Town of Carr LOCATION: Town of Carr SUBJECT: Junk and Salvage Yard Operation APPEARANCE : George Downing ` Planning Commissior inutes Page 2 February 7, 1978 on pit noise and ambient conditions and the scrapper operation . The pit noise and ambient conditions are within State limits and the scrapper operation will be controlled by Best-Way so that any noise will not be objectionable to surrounding neighbors . Mr. Mathias also indicated that there will be no more dust from the gravel pit operation than there is with the farming operation. Tom Connell , attorney for Best-Way, then reviewed the request for the change of zone and how the property in question was zoned several years ago. Chuck Cunliffe then read the motion by the Planning Commission made on January 17, 1978, and then read the staff ' s recommendation for tabling the application. The floor was then opened for comments from the audience. At this time, Tom Hellerich, representing Ray Larson, surrounding property owner, again spokein opposition of the proposal primarily because of the need for the change of zone and was very critical of Lord ' s supp- lemental report . He indicated the report was inconclusive and totally vacant to any of the questions asked by the Planning Commission at the last meeting regarding drainage between the berms and the street . Vicki Reed then presented two more petitions to the Planning Commission in opposition of the proposal and supported Mr . Hellerich ' s comments regarding the need for the change of zone. She also reviewed the mining plan in the 10th phase of operation and showed by use of a map that of the 45 acres will be a major dis- turbance. She also reviewed the noise study taken by Lord and Associates and felt it was not accurate. Tara Frank, Dr . Larry Wikholm, Robert noose, Esther Rempel, Keith Tanner and Margaret Ruhl all expressed their opposition to the proposal . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to continue the meeting to February 21, 1978, for further testimony. Additional information also requested to be heard at this meeting include: More input .from the City of Greeley as requested by Ben Nix, further information as to whether or not the rocks contain asbestos as requested by Mr. Carlson, and further drainage information as requested by Irma White. Motion by Frank Suckla, seconded by Bette Kountz. A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson, Ben Nix, Frank Suckla, Percy Hiatt , Bette Kountz, and Irma White. A vote of "no" was cast by Jerry Kiefer and an abstention vote was cast by Marge Yost . Motion carried 6 to 1 . APPLICANT: Robert See CASE NUMBER: Z-296 : 77: 14 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . SE SE*, Section 9, T5N, R65W LOCATION: East of Greeley on East 18th Street SUBJECT: Change of Zone from "E" to "C" APPEARANCE: Robert See DISCUSSION: Mr. See presented his request for a change of zone in that he is looking for a home for his business which is See Farm Buildings and feels this is a good location. The proposal involves 11 acres only on U . S. 34 . The function of the proposal would be to The Weld County Planning Commission held a scheduled meeting on February 7, 1978, at 1 : 30 p.m. in the Weld County Centennial Center County Commissioners Hearing Room, 915 10th Street , Greeley, Colorado . Roll Call was as follows : Ben Nix Present Chuck Carlson Present Jerry Kiefer Present Percy Hiatt Present Marge Yost Present Bette Kountz Present Irma White Present Larry Ashley Absent Also present were : Gary Z. Fortner, Director of Planning Tom Honn, Zoning Administrator Chuck Cunliffe, Assistant Zoning Administrator Ken McWilliams, Senior Planner Kay Norton, Assitant County Attorney As a quorum was present, the meeting proceeded as scheduled. The minutes of the January 17, 1978, meeting were unanimously approved. APPLICANT: Rolanda Feeds, Inc. CASE NUMBER: SUP-335 : 77: 9 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . E NE , Section 31, T2N, RG4W LOCATION: 3 miles east and 1A miles north of Hudson SUBJECT: Chicken manure dehydration facility DISCUSSION: There was no further discussion or input from the applicant or the audience regarding the application. Ken McWilliams then read the staff 's recommendation for denial of the application . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to deny the application based on the staff 's recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. Motion by Ben Nix, seconded by Irma White. A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson, Ben Nix, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , and Irma White. A vote of "no" was cast by Frank Suckla and abstention votes cast by Marge Yost and Bette Kountz. Motion carried 5 to 1. APPLICANT: Best-Way Paving Company etal CASE NUMBER: Z-294 : 77 :12 and SUP-347: 77: 21 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . NEE , Section 2, T5N, RGGW LOCATION: Northwest of the intersection of 35th Avenue and 4th Street on northwest perimeter of Greeley SUBJECT: Change of Zone from "E" to "A" - Open Cut Mining-Gravel Pit APPEARANCE: Robert Mathias and Tom Connell DISCUSSION: Robert Mathias of R. V. Lord and Associates briefly reviewed the meeting of January 17, 1978, by use of a map presentation . At the last meeting, the Planning Commission was concerned about the details regarding the mining plan and reclamation plan. The map presentation briefly re-capped Best-Way ' s proposal . A supple- mental report was prepared by Lord and Associates in answer to con- cerns of the Planning Commission . This report includes test results The Weld County Planning Commission held a scheduled meeting on January 17, 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: Ben Nix Present Harry Ashley Present Chuck Carlson Present Frank Suckla Present Irma White Present Jerry Kiefer Present Percy Hiatt Present Bette Kountz Absent Marge Yost Absent Also present : Gary Z. Fortner, Director of Planning Chuck Cunliffe, Assistant Zoning Administrator Ken McWilliams, Senior Planner Kay Norton, Assistant County Attorney As a quorum was present, the meeting proceeded as scheduled. The minutes of the January 3 , 1978, meeting were unanimously approved. APPLICANT: Stan Rech CASE NUMBER: SUP-348: 77 : 22 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . Wz SW*, Section 22, T2N, R66W LOCATION: 1Z miles north and 2 miles east of Ft. Lupton immediately north of Aristocrat Ranchettes SUBJECT: Oil Recycling and Disposal Site APPEARANCE: Stan Rech DISCUSSION: Mr . Rech presented his request for an oil recycling and disposal site, that being having a water truck go to a lease to suck water out of a pit or tank and disposing of the fluid into a pit . The fluid is then pumped into tanks where any oil which may be in the water will be separated. The water then goes into a leach field. According to referrals received back in the office, this could not be allowed because the water exceeds state limits regarding water being placed back into the sursurface. There being no questions at this time, Chuck Cunliffe then read the staff ' s recommendation for tabling the application. John Hall of the Weld County Health Department was then asked to explain the analysis of the sample taken from Mr. Rech' s site, this being 12, 000 PPM. Mr. Hall stated that the test run indicated there was 12, 390 PPM total dissolved solids which is approximately 1/3 saline solution. Discussion followed regarding how this would compare to ordinary surface water . Mr. Suckla said he felt Mr . Rech ' s request would be an asset for_ those concerned. Mr. Kiefer asked what the procedure would be to assure the City of Ft . Lupton that the ground water would not be contaminated and was told that documentation is all that is needed. Jim Brannen of Jim ' s Water Service indicated he feels there is very much a need for this type of proposal . • Planning Commissio [inutes _ Page 2 January 17, 1978 MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to table the application pending concerns posed by different referral agencies and the staff and to provide time for the State Engineer and Weld County Health Department to adequately evaluate and comment on the application . Motion by Ben Nix, seconded by Jerry Kiefer. A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson, Ben Nix, Harry Ashley, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , and Irma White. A vote of "no" was cast by Frank Suckla. Motion carried 6 to 1 . APPLICANT: Best-Way Paving Company etal CASE NUMBER: Z-294 : 77: 12 and SUP-347: 77: 21 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt. NMI, Section 2, T5N, R66W LOCATION: Northwest of the intersection of 35th Avenue and 4th Street on northwest perimeter of Greeley SUBJECT: Change of Zone from "E" to "A" - Open Cut Mining Permit for Gravel Pit APPEARANCE: Bob Mathias, geologist of R. V. Lord and Associates DISCUSSION: Mr. Mathias first presented his program to the Planning Commission by use of a map presentation illustrating exactly where the site is located, which involves 45 acres proposed to be rezoned, in regard to 35th Avenue and 4th Street. Best-Way has been in operation intermittently since 1965. He then showed a slide present- ation which showed the entrance to the pit looking north across the agricultural land, Friendly Village Mobile Home Park, a church site, Johnson Subdivision and the City subdivisions on the south side of the street . He then explained in great detail the mining plan and different phases of the operation and the reclamation plan for the area. Two public meetings were held by Best-Way for surrounding property owners to explain to them their proposal and allow them to express their opinions in regard to the operation. Items of concern brought out at the meetings were that landowners want the berm removed from the southwest side of the site, they would like to have a privacy fence around the area so that the pit is not in view, they were concerned about their health regarding dust and noise pollution, devaluation of their property, and a secondary access onto 4th Street . Best-Way has agreed to build a 4 ' mound with a 6 ' fence around the area and they have no desire for a secondary access onto 4th Street . Mr. Kiefer asked if Best-Way has had a deed to the property only since March of 1977. Mr. Mathias indicated that this was correct , but that Best-Way had an unrecorded contract with Norman Ruyle since 1971 to sell the property to Nest-Way . There being no further questions from the Planning Commission, Chuck Cunliffe read the staff ' s recommendation for tabling the application . Discussion followed regarding the need to use the mineral deposits prior to development . The planning process was explained by Gary Fortner and legally by Kay Norton . Mr. Carlson then called for comments from the audience. At this time Vicki Reed presented to the Planning Commission the original petitions with 167 signatures of landowners opposed to the request. which :;he indicated represents 80`,'x, O1' Lhe landowners. She also presented the Planning Commission with a copy of C.R.S . 1973 law Section 34-1-305 which covers preservation ' Planning Commissio inutes Page 3 January 17, 1978 of commercial mineral deposits for extraction. She also sited several items in the Lord plan that were very vague and unclear in her opinion. Linda Vasenius also presented the Planning Commission with petitions of 54 signatures representing landowners opposed to Best-Way' s proposal . She also pointed out the numerous health hazards that can be associated with gravel pit operations. Tom Hellerich, attorney for Ray Larson, landowner, said that in reviewing the application he feels there is no need for the rezoning and that the existing plant on 35th Avenue is a non-conforming use in the Agricultural zone. He also feels that a 100 ' wide strips on the west edge of the property carries a covenant which forbids its use for anything but residential development. Other comments by Mr. Hellerich were that he feels the plans by Lord and Associates is very vague and inadequate regarding the control of dust , where the water will come from for the operation, and drainage. Norman Ruyle, however, had no objections to the proposal and feels there would be no dust or noise problem. Several other persons, including Ray Larson, Keith Tanner, Mariana Reed, and Robert Foose also indicated their strong opposition to the proposal . MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to table the recommendation pending a detailed plan for adequately buffering the two land uses, develop- ment of a safety improvements plan, submission of evidence that liability coverage has been obtained of not less than $100, 000, clarification of the proposed use of the access onth 4th Street , method of controlling the drainage between the proposed 4 ' berm and 35th Avenue and between the 4 ' berm and 4th Street . Motion by Jerry Kiefer, seconded by Ben Nix. A unanimous vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson, Ben Nix, Harry Ashley, Frank Suckla, Jerry Kiefer, Percy Hiatt , and Irma White. Motion carried. APPLICANT: Rolanda Feeds, Inc. CASE NUMBER: SUP-335: 77 : 9 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . E NEB, Section 31 , T2N, R64W LOCATION: 3 miles east and 1'i miles north of Hudson SUBJECT: Chicken Manure Dehydration Facility APPEARANCE: Stanley Stolte, Anthony Zarlengo DISCUSSION: This application was tabled at the June 21 , 1977, Planning Commission meeting pending the receipt of an air pollution permit from State authorities . The permit was granted in November after Rolanda installed a $100, 000 anti-pollution scrubber. Anthony Zarlengo, representing Rolanda Feeds, briefly reviewed the application and indicated the scrubber that was installed has now eliminated odor according to State standards. The final permit was issued by the State Health Department on November 30, 1977, which states that - Rolanda has passed the visual opacity test and the emissions test. Copper emissions were also of concern and cannot now be detected according to State officials. Stanley Stolte of Rolanda Feeds, Inc. stated that work was begun to install the scrubber on June 22 and the operation began in mid August . An odor test was taken by the State the clay or the final permit . Ron Stow of the Weld County Health Department explained Lo the Planning Commission the standards set by Planning Commissio [inutes Page 4 - January 17, 1978 the State regarding the emissions permit in regard to the operation and the opacity test . Discussion followed regarding the frequency of the tests and complaints received. Mr. Stow was asked by Gary Fortner to read the ten conditions required by the State to operate and control the operation . There being no further discussion, Ken McWilliams then read the staff ' s recommendation for tabling. Chairman Carlson then called for audience participation. A great deal of opposition was expressed by George Shaklee, Allen Alter, Bob Fritz_ler, James Bell, Dorothy Gertner, Mrs. Jim Bridgewater, Bob Denning and Russell Hays. These people all represented many people also in the audience who are opposed to Rolanda' s operation . All indicated the odor was just as bad as before the scrubber was installed to eliminate odor. The odor is still just as offensive and unbearable as it was before the scrubber was installed. Those in the audience opposed to the operation asked the Planning Commission to make a decision soon so they would know what they would have to live with in the future. Chairman Carlson asked if there were any chemicals that could be used to eliminate the odor. Ron Stow indicated that there were other ways, but Rolanda chose the scrubber. MOTION: Be it therefore resolved to table the application with a decision to be made on February 7, 1978. Motion by Harry Ashley, seconded by Jerry Kiefer. A vote of "aye" by Chuck Carlson, Ben Nix, Harry Ashley, 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 /sap Date: _- - May 2, 1978 I NUMBER: SUP-347: 77:21 .MME: Best-Way Paving Company etal REQUEST: Special Use Permit - Open Cut Mining Permit for gravel Pit LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt. NE4 Section 2, T5N, R66W LOCATION: Northwest of the intersection of 35th Avenue and 4th Street THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THIS REQUEST BE approved FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS : 1. Since the property in question is zoned agricultural , present and future access to the mineral deposits underlying the property for the purpose of extraction is guaranteed under the provisions of Colorado Statutes and the Weld County Mineral Resources Extraction Plan. The Colorado Revised Statutes state : "After July 1, 1973, no board of county commissioners, governing body of any city and county, city, or town, or other governmental authority which has control over zcning shall, by zoning, rezoning, granting a variance, or other official action or inaction, permit the use of any area known to contain a commercial mineral deposit in a manner which would interfere with the present or future extraction of such deposit by an extractor. After adoption of a master plan for extraction for an area under its jurisdction, no board of county commissioners , governing body of any city and county, city, or town, or other governmental authority which has control over zoning shall, by zoning, rezoning, granting a variance, or other official action or inaction, permit the use of any area containing a commercial mineral deposit in a manner which would interfere with the present or future extraction of such deposit by an extractor. " Section C. 1 of the Weld County Mineral Resources Extraction Plan states : "Access to future mineral resource development shall be considered in all land use decisions. In accordance with with Colorado Statute, no Weld County governmental authority which has control over zoning shall, by zoning, rezoning, A Best-Way Paving Company etal SUP-347: 77 :21 STAFF RECOMMENDATION May 2, 1978 granting a variance , or other official action or inaction , permit the use of any area known to contain a commercial mineral deposit in a manner which would interfere with the present or future extraction of such deposit by an extractor. " It is thus the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff , that in those instances where a parcel of land is underlain by commercial mineral deposits and is zoned in such a manner as to permit the extraction of those resources , the extraction of such resources must be accommodated so long as adequate protection of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the area in questions is provided. In the current application, it is the opinion of the staff that the applicant has demonstrated through submitted plans and oral statements that adequate protection of the health, safety and welfare of area residents will be provided as extraction of the resource and reclamation of the site occurs . In addition , it is the opinion of the staff that the plans submitted by the applicant serve to substantially mitigate adverse impacts of the proposed operation on surrounding uses . 2. The request is in compliance with Section C.2 of the Weld County Mineral Resources Extraction Plan which states : "Open cut mining operations shall be discouraged on prime irrigated agricultural lands until such time that alternative resource deposits within less productive land areas are depleted. Only when detailed extraction and reclamation plans accompanied by economic and environmental impact statements, prepared by recognized experts justify the sacrifice of these agricultural assets will such request for open-cut mining operations received favorable consideration . " Under the provisions of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan and the Greeley Comprehensive Plan the property in question is designated for urban uses. Thus, through the basic premises set forth in these documents the use of the property in question for other than agricultural use is justified. Finally, the fact that these plans designate the property in question for low and medium density residential use does not override the provisions of Colorado Statute (referred to in Item 1 of these comments) which guarantee present and future access to commercial mineral deposits when land is zoned in such a manner as to allow the extracting of such deposits. Best-Way Paving Company etal SUP-347: 77 :21 STAFF RECOMMENDATION May 2, 1978 3. The proposal is in compliance with Section C.4. of the Weld County Mineral Resources Extraction Plan which states : "In all requests for open-cut mining operations, the broad effect of these operations on surface and under- ground water supplies, and on water distribution and drainage systems shall be taken into account . " It is the opinion of the Staff that the applicant, through submitted plans and oral statements, has: a) Taken into account the effects of the proposed operation on surface water supplies and on water distrubtion and drainage systems, and b) Has shown that any negative impacts on such supplies and/or systems will be mitigated to the extent feasible. With reference to underground water supplies, Colorado Statute places jurisdiction over the matter in the Division of Water Resources, State Engineer's Office. It is thus felt that consideration of factors relating to underground water supplies would be inappropriate in the current application. 4. It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that this proposed operation is in compliance with the provisions of Sections 3. 3(E) (2) and 6. 1(3) of the Weld County Zoning Resolution. The proposed use will be compatible with the surrounding area, in harmony with the character of the neighbor- hood and existing agricultural uses, compatible with the future development in the area and will not adversely affect the health, safety, and welfare of the inhabitants of the area and the county. This determination is based upon the following: A. It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that open-cut mining operations as outlined and con- trolled in the Operations Standards will minimize impacts on surrounding uses and the area to the greatest extent possible and provide adequate protection of the health, safety, and welfare of the inhabitants of the area and the county. B. The City of Greeley Planning Commission has indicated the city has no objections to the proposed operation of the mining of gravel provided that a buffer of approximately 100 feet be left in its natural state with excavation beginning beyond the buffer. However, it is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff the buffering with berms immediately adjacent to property or easement lines, privacy fences and landscaping will more adequately buffer the proposed gravel operation from the existing residential uses than the 100' setback recommended by the city. Best-Way Paving Company etal SUP-347: 77 :21 STAFF RECOMMENDATION May 2, 1978 C. The Colorado Geological Survey has not been able to identify any serious geological problems involved with this operation. D. The Weld County Health Department has indicated certain recommendations and concerns for this request as indicted in letters dated December 28, 1977, February 6 and 16t1978, and March 2 , 1978. These concerns and recommendations have been satisfied and included in the Operations Standards. E. The Weld County Engineering Department has indicated that their concerns as listed in a memo dated January 12, 1978, for this request have been answered. See memos dated February 8 and 16, 1978. The Department of Planning Services staff recommendation for approval is conditional upon: 1. The mining plan map being amended to show the location of the berms, the type of fence, the setback distances from the center line of the berm to adjacent property lines or easement lines, the additional 20 feet of right-of-way dedication along 35th Avenue, and deletion of the secondary entrance onto 4th Street . These changes shall be accomplished prior to the scheduled County Commissioners Hearing. 2 . The attached amendments to the Operations Standards being recommended and approved for this request . 3. The mining plan map being amended to show the Operations Standards on the plat prior to recording the maps in the Weld County Clerk and Recorder' s Office. The Department of Planning Services staff recommends the following Operations Standards as defined in Section 6. 1(3)E. of the Weld County Zoning Resolution being amended to read: #1 By the addition of the following : A four-foot high, ten-foot wide or wider perimeter berm shall be constructed of overburden and topsoil materials immediately adjacent to property lines or easement lines located along the entire length of the east edge of the site, with the exception of one entrance onto 35th Avenue, the entire length of the west edge of the site and the entire length of the south edge of the site. No berm shall be constructed along the Greeley No. 3 Ditch. The height of the berm on the east edge of the site shall be four feet above the existing centerline eleva- tion of 35th Avenue. The height of the berm on the west edge of the site shall be four feet above the existing elevation of abutting property lines . The height of the berm on the south edge of the site shall be four feet above the existing centerline elevation of 4th Street . Landscaping of the berms shall be in accordance with the recommendations of the Soil Conservation Service as out- lined in the supplemental materials dated January 31 , 1978, on Pages 4 through 7 prepared by R. V. Lord and Associates, Inc. All berms shall be constructed with landscaping completed within six months of approval by the State Mined Land Reclamation Board. #5 Access to the site will be limited to one entrance on 35th Avenue, south of the Greeley No. 3 Ditch. #7 BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY AND GILSABIND- CONVIDAR shall construct a six-foot high, solid wooden privacy fence along the entire length of the west edge of the site, the entire length of the east edge of the site and the entire length of the south edge of the site. No fence will be built along the Greeley No. 3 Ditch. A six- foot high chain link fence may be substituted on the east edge of the site for a distance not to exceed 200 feet south of the entrance onto 35th Avenue. All fencing shall be constructed on the centerline of the four-foot high, ten-foot wide or wider berm. BEST-WAY PAVING AND GILSABIND-CONVIDAR shall have the responsi- bility for maintaining the fences in good repair and free from debris. All fences shall be constructed within six months of approval by the State Mined Recla- mation Board. #9 The gravel plant , asphalt plant and scale shall remain in their present location. The rock crusher shall re- main within the approximate limit of the existing pit as shown on the mining plan map. #11 A fugitive dust emission permit shall be applied for and obtained through the Weld County Health Department . #12 A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System waste discharge permit shall be applied for through the Colorado Department of Health for any discharge of groundwater. #13 Garbage and refuse on the property shall be disposed of in a sanitary manner. #14 All phases of the operation must conform to maximum permissible noise levels as stated in 25-12-103, CRS, 1973. All loaders and scrapers shall be muffled when areas 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 10 through 14 are mined. Noise levels shall not exceed 55 db(A) between the hours of 7: 00 a.m. to 7: 00 p.m. and 50 db(A) between the hours of 7: 00 p.m. and 7: 00 a.m. at the property lines. #15 A water spray bar shall be installed on the existing rock crusher for dust control. #16 The stockpiles shall be located within the approximate limit of the existing pit as shown on the mining plan map. #17 All references to BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY AND GILSABIND- CONVIDAR shall include its heirs, successors, , and assigns. #18 The Special Use Permit shall be limited to the plans shown hereon and governed by the Operations Standards stated above and all applicable Weld County Regulations. Any material deviations from the plans and/or Operations 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 Operations Standards shall be permitted. Any other changes from the plans and/or Operations Standards shall be filed in Office of the Department of Planning Services. i Date : Febr'in ry 21 , 1978 JE =MET' : Z-294 : 7712 -1''•7L : Best-Way Paving Company etal :�;'C'ui:5T: Change of Zone from "E" to "A" T ''', LIT, DESCRI7TION: Pt . NE4 Section 2 , T5N, R66W Comments : To date our office has received one letter in favor of approval this request , twenty-four letters of opposition and petitions containing approximately 300 signatures in opposition to this request from people within 500' and the immediate area. Best-Way Paving Cot__ __iy etal STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Page 2 February 21 , 1978 Further, it is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services Staff that the changing conditions in the area that have trans- pired since the establishment of the original Estate zoning in 1961 support the determination at this point in time not to rezone the property to another classification. In fact , these changing conditions in the area only reinforce the decision in 1961 to establish the Estate zoning. Since 1961 , the area to the west and south has developed into intensive residential uses. Also, the property located to the east is zoned for residential development in the future. Further , the adjacent property onwers , as indicated, have relied on the future development of this property being residential in nature due to the existing Estate Zone. As presently zoned, the property in question is eligible for residential development which would be compatible with the uses in the surrounding area. Approval of the rezoning has the potential of reducing the values of sur- rounding property. Section 8 . 3 further states : "There must be definite proof that the area requested for change had unique characteristics which distinguish it from surrounding lands and thus make its zoning essential . " It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services Staff that the applicant has not demonstrated that the area requested for change has unique characteristics which distinguishes it from surrounding lnads and thus make its rezoning essential . The applicant has argued that the property in question is unique due to the underlying mineral resource deposit and that this makes it ' s rezoning essential . It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services Staff that mineral deposits are not unique to the property in question and therefore, the rezoning is not essential . The Weld County Extraction Plan Map generally identifies other areas of Weld County containing gravel deposits. The "Atlas of Sand, Gravel , and Quarry Aggregate Resources - Colorado Front Range Counties" identifies existing gravel deposits located in Weld County in greater detail . These documents demonstrate the existance of numerous other gravel deposits in the County. 2. The purpose clause of the Weld County Zoning Resolution states : "By the use of well established legal principles , zoning makes possible the safe guarding of resi- dential areas-business areas are protected for development in logical areas-and industrial dis- tricts may be preserved in locations with good access to main traveled routes and utilities . " Said Section further states : "Property values are protected since uses which would lessen values are not allowed in areas where conflict would occur. " Best-Way Paving Comr-_iy etal STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Page 3 February 21 , 1978 It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services Satff that approval of this rezoning would not be safe guarding the existing residential area. Further, it is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services Staff that approval of this rezoning request would have the potential of creating adverse impacts on surrounding property values . Comments : To date our office has received one letter in favor of approving this request , sixteen letters of opposition and petitions containing ap- proximately 300 signatures in opposition to this request from people within 500' and the immediate area. Date : ruary 7, 1978 CASE NUMBER: Z-294 : 77: 12 and SUP-347 : 77:21 NAME: Best-Way Paving Company etal REQUEST: Change of Zone "E" to "A" and Special Use Permit for Open Cut Mining - Gravel Pit LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . NE , Section 2 , T5N, R66W LOCATION: Northwest of the intersection of 35th Avenue and 4th Street THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THIS REQUEST BE tabled FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS : Since the Planning Commission meeting on January 17, 1978, the applicant submitted material on the morning of February 1 , 1978, with additional material being submitted on the afternoon of February 6, 1978 , addressing the concerns posed by the staff and additional con- cerns of the Planning Commission members. Referrals containing the submitted materials were sent to the Weld County Health Department, the County Engineering Department and the Soil Conservation Service for their review and comments. On the afternoon of February 6 the staff had received written comments from only the Health Department with verbal comments from the Soil Conservation Service. Nothing had been received from the Engineering Department. It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that the time remaining between February 6 and today ' s scheduled Planning Commission meeting was not adequate time to prepare final comments and recommendation for these applications. In addition, final Development Standards for the project have yet to be drafted. Therefore, the Department of Planning Services staff recommends these applications be tabled until the Planning Commission meeting scheduled for February 21, 1978, to provide time for the staff to adequately review the application materials and formulate final recommendation; to the Planning Commission. Date: Jar.i ,ry 17, 1978 ASE NUMBER: Z-294 : 77 : 12 & SUP-347: 77 : 21 NAME: Best-Way Paving Company etal REQUEST: Change of Zone "E" to "A" - Open Cut Mining Permit for Gravel Pit LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt. NE4, Section 2, T5N, R66W LOCATION: Northwest of the intersection of 35th Avenue and 4th Street on northwest perimeter of Greeley THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THIS REQUEST BE tabled FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS : 1 _ Tt is the npininn of the Department of Planning Services staff that the plan as presented in the application for buffering the existing residential Uses from the proposed gravel operation is inadequate The Department of Planning Services staff recommends that the application be tabled until the applicant presents a detailed plan for adequately buffering the two land uses. It is recommended the plan include some combination of beaming, landscaping, solid fencing, and/or setback. The details of the buffering plan should be identified on the plans and in the Development Standards on the plans. 2. It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that the applicant should develop a safety improvements plan in conjunction with the buffering plan. It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that fencing of the areas to be excavated with 6 ' chain link fence should be recruired as part of the safety improvements Man. 3. The applicant needs to submit evidence that he has liability insurance coverage of not less than ;'3100, 000. 4. The applicant needs to clarify the proposed use and status of the proposed access onto 4th Street . These items should be identified as Development Standards on the plans. 5. As requested by the County Engineer, the applicant needs to indicate the method of controlling the drainage between the proposed 4 ' berm and 35th Avenue and between the 4 ' berm and 4th Street. DI PAR I MFN1 OF PLANNING SERVICES PHONE 1303)3564000 EXT 404 015 10TH STREET GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 4 h 3 1-14 • COLORADO October 19, 1978 A. M. Dominguez, Jr. Attorney at Law 1220 11th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Subject : Letter of October 9, 1978 regarding Best Way Paving Company, Special Use Permit Dear Mr. Dominguez: Pursuant to your request outlined in the above referenced subject , the Board of County Commissioners requested the Department of Planning Services to investigate your concerns. I have enclosed a copy of the report presented to the Board for your information. At this time , no violation of the Operation Standards has been observed. The Environmental Health Department and Department of Planning Services will continue to monitor the site for any vio- lations. If you have additional questions, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Very truly y9urs, z("_4(, '4'n Thomas E. Donn Zoning Administrator TEH/csd Enclosure r '1S1'EC TOIL REPORT Name : Best-Way Paving No : — - _ --- Legal Desc'rJp1 ion of Property : NEA Section 2 , T5N , 11.66W -- - Date : October 12 , 1978 Time : 9 : 30 AM This inspector field checked_ the above- Parcel-_wi,Lh_ Tor-ilonn7-_-Yonin€; Administrator , to determine if Best-Way_ isin -yiolaLios-of the Sp.ecia1 Use Permit issued to them on June 7, 1078 . On October ll,197€5 , the Board of County Commissioners received a letter from A. M. Dominguez, attorney for II.O.P .E. , Inc_, an association of homeowners adjacent to the property being mined by Best—Way Paving Company. Said letter sets forth 6 items believed to be in violation of the Special Use Permit . Tom IIonn and this inspector walked the property , spoke to employees operating equipment , and spoke to Carl Hill , Jr . , president of Best-Way. The following itemizes the complaints set forth in the October 11 , 1978 letter and further sets forth the results of the inspection . 1. Best-Way Paving Company has been operating before daylight hours in violation of Operations Standard No. 2 , "All sand and gravel operations shall be conducted during the hours of daylight . . . " - Carl Hill informed this inspector that for an approximate period of one week, : the asphalt plant operation was being conducted before daylight hours . IIe said iL would not continue to be operated before daylight hours. However, the Operation Standards refer specifically to the sand and gravel operations not being conducted before daylight hours. Therefore, no violation exists at this time concerning Item #1 . / lllf�r l l 11- , ZonapVg Inspector Note : Al tach this sheet to the complaint report pertaining to this zoning Violat. iun . r 2. Refuse and garbage is not being disposed of in a sanitary manner, in violation of Operations Stan, '. rd No . 13 , "Garbage and refuse on the property shall be dispose of in a sanitary manner. " - On October 5 , 1978 , the Health Department received a complaint from a property owner concerning improper disposal of refuse and garbage . On October G, 1978 , Harry Collier of the Weld County Health Department inspected the property noting that garbage had ' not been covered properly. On October 11 , 1978 , Harry Collier returned to the property noting the problem had been corrected. A copy of this report is available at the Weld County Health Department . 3. No five foot steps have been made where overburden cuts do not naturally assume a 2 : 1 slope in violation of the mining plan submitted by Best-Way Paving Company, in particular, page 29. "Places where overburden cuts will not naturally assume a 2 : 1 slope they will be benched back from the top of the gravel in five foot steps to insure that a person . . . " - It is the opinion of the Weld County Department of Planning Services that this item is not under the County ' s jurisdiction , but rather falls under the authority of the Mined Land Reclamation Board. This item refers to the plan to extract the gravel which was submitted to explain the intended method of mining . From the information sub- mitted, the Operation Standards , which control the operation, were developed. The item described is not associated as part of the Operation Standards in the Special Use Permit . 4 . There is presently ponding of water at the mining site in violation of the mining plan as submitted by Best-Way Paving Company, in particular , page 30. "There will be no ponding of water at the site until Phase XII . . . " - It is the opinion of the Weld County Department of Planning Services that this item is not under the County' s jurisdiction , but rather falls under the authority of of the Mined Land Reclamation Board. This item refers to the plan to extract the gravel which was submitted to explain the intended method of mining. From the information submitted, the Operation Standards , which control the operation , were developed . The item described is not associated as part of the Operation Standards in the Special Use Permit . . 5. To the best of our knowledge and belief , loaders and scrapers have not been muffled and are being operated in Areas 1 and 14 , in viola- tion of Operations Standard No. 14 . "All loaders and scrapers shall be muffled when Areas 1 , 2 , 3 and 9 through 14 are mined. " - Carl hill noted that the 1978 model scraper owned by Best-Way and operated in Areas 1 and 14 has passed the E.P. A. ' s permissible noise level tests. All loaders and scrapers observed this date were muffled. The Department t of Planning Services has requested the Health Department to take its noise equipment to the Best-Way site and check for compliance with the Operations Standard . G. To the best of our knowledge and belief a water spray bar has not been installed on the existing rock crusher for dust control , in violation of Operations Standard No. 15 . "A water spray bar shall be installed on the existing rock crusher for dust control . " - f' - The Rock Crusher was put into cq rat ton specifically for this inspection . The spray bar is lh Palled and being used . Therefore, no violation of Operations Stan, , rd 15 of the Special Use Permit exists at this time . Igor comparison ' s sake , this inspector re- quested that the rock crusher be operated both with the spray bar emitting water and without water being sprayed . The dust was quite noticeable within minutes after the spray of water was discontinued . The overall inspection would indicate the activity relating to present applicable Operation Standards of the Special Use Permit appears to be in conformance. • A. M. DOMIN(:U1?!,, A fTORNFY Al LAW 1220 11TH AVENUE LitlINTY C0i4tIISSI[I% OPEC-LEY, COLORADO 90631 4 �1 M1Ir�K 'I r/ll 1�'I� (303) 356-1562 (1'1 j, Fritt 111'j 1 )I O CT 1 1 1878 o,C ', �Si October 9 , 1978 U t ]�, 0 C 1cJ1$ Gf1=FLrv. c'ni n ti %Bid Ccu°ly Board of County Commissioners \-r- P1anAin�C°mmissio° Weld County Colorado v'r �`LL Centennial Center L`�`81LZ92CAZa Greeley, CO 80631 Re : Bestway Paving Company, et al. Special Use Permit Dear Commissioners : I represent 11.0.P.E. , incorporated, an association of homeowners adjacent to the property which is being mined by Best-Way Paving Company and on which a Special Use Permit was issued by you on June 7 , 1978 . This letter is in the form of a complaint and we hereby set forth that Best-Way Paving Company is not complying wiLli the Special Use Permit and request that the Board of County Commissioners shall investigate as per the Weld County Official Zoning Resolution 6 . 1 (3) G. , page 48 , for the purpose of requiring complete compliance with said Special Use Permit or cancellation of said permit. It is hereby set forth that Best-Way Paving Company is in viola- tion of the Special Use Permit and of the development standards which were made part of that Special Use Permit in the following particulars : 1 . Best-Way Paving Company has been operating before daylight hours in violation of Operations Standard No. 2 , "All sand and gravel operations shall- be conducted during the hours of daylight. . . " 2. Refuse and garbage is not being disposed of in a sanitary manner, in violation of Operations Standard No. 13 , "Garbage and refuse on the property shall be disposed of in a sanitary manner. " 3 . No five foot steps have been made whore over- burden cuts do not naturally assume a 2 : 1 slope in violation of the mining plan submitted by Best-Way Paving Company, in particular, page 29 . "Places where overburden cuts will not naturally assume a 2 : 1 slope they will be benched back from the top of the gravel in five foot steps to insure that a person. . . " i 1 j Page 2 1 lard. County Commissioners 10-9-78 4 . There is presently ponding of water at the mining site in violation of the mining plan as submitted by Best-Way Paving Company, in particular, page 30 . "There will be no ponding of water at the site until Phase XII . . . " 5 . To the best of our knowledge and belief loaders and scrapers have not been muffled and are being operated in Areas 1 and 14 in violation of. Operations Standard No. 14 . "All loaders and scrapers shall be muffled when areas 1 , 2 , 3 , and 9 through 14 are mined . " 6 . To the best of our knowledge and belief a water spray bar has not been installed on the existing rock crusher for dust control, in violation of Operations Standard No. 15 . "A water spray bar shall be installed on the existing rock crusher for dust control . " The alleged violations listed above, numbers 3 and 4 , are violations of the mining plan which was presented to the Board of County Com- missioners and where representations were made to the County Com- missioners of operating standards . These representations were part of the basis for the decision to grant the change in zone and to grant the Special. Use Permit. My clients request that the Board of County Commissioners invoke the provisions of Section 4 , 6 . 1 (3) Open Mining, G, page 48 , of the Official Weld County Zoning Resolu- tion and determine whether the alleged violations exist and if so to take the necessary steps to correct the violations or cancel and revoke the Special Use Permit issued to Best-Way Paving Company in this matter . As interested parties in this matter, my clients request that they be kept informed of the steps being taken in regard to this com- plaint and also to receive notification to my office of any hearings which may be held for the purpose of acting on this complaint . Please tivise. Very t my yours, } A:M. Dominguez, Jr. / At-Lorney at Law i AMD/msr cc: II.O.P. E. Ed Dunbar Norman Carlson Victor Jacobucci June Steinmark r� Leonard Roe • .Y.y ][-C:DIZI13 R. V. LORD & ASSOCIATES INC. 3250 Walnut St./P.O. Box 335/Boulder, Colo. 80302 (303) 443-0413 ROBERT V. LORD, JR., P.E. February 17, 1978 JAMES S. HILLHOUSE, A.I.A. DALE D. SHREVE, Arch./Planner ROGER M. BURTON, Arch./Planner Tom Honn Zoning Administrator Weld County P.O. Box 758 Greeley, Colorado Re: Bestway Paving Company, Rezoning and Special Use Permit Dear Mr. Honn: The purpose of this letter is to reiterate some facts that have been presented to the Weld County Planning Commission previously and to answer some questions raised at the last Planning Commission meeting. Perhaps I should have spoken up at that meeting when the question of asbestos pollution was raised by neighbors adjacent to Bestway property because asbestos is a metamorphic mineral which is not found in the igneous type rocks which are contained in the Bestway gravel deposit. There is certainly a problem with asbestos back in the East where they are crushing metamorphic rock. In order to remove all doubt concerning asbestos content, we submitted a sample of the Bestway gravel to the Colorado Department of Health for analysis. The Colorado Department of Health staff told me that there is no feasible method for determining asbestos contents of granitic rocks. They suggested that I get a geologist to talk about asbestos in granitic gravel : I am a geologist. Take my word on it: asbestos simply does not occur in the kind of rocks contained in the Bestway gravel deposit. Another question was raised concerning which detection scale should be used for noise measurements made at the site, A, B, or C scales. The point was made in the meeting that the A scale de-emphasizes low frequency noises. The noises emitted by construction equipment have a relatively low frequency. It must be noted, however, that when the FAA measures noise levels of aircraft in studies for new or existing airports, it uses the A scale. Also, agencies such as the Colorado Division of Mines and OSHA use the A scale. Finally, the State law concerning noise emissions specifies maximum noise levels using the A scale. One can argue philosophically about which scale to use but we took the standard, practical approach. (I:O1415 14 j8,J F `-o co Lv ARCHITECTS - ENGINEERS - PLANNERS � BOULDER, COLORADO SHERIDAN, WYOMING �� l£0£6Z%1\ ' Tom Honn, Weld County February 17, 1978 Re: Bestway Paving Company Page 2 The question was also raised at the last Planning Commission meeting regarding the capability of the R. V. Lord and Associates, Inc. staff in measuring noise levels in the field and interpreting the results. I would like to point out that the people involved in conducting the noise level study for Bestway Paving Company Rezoning and Special Use Permit Application also conducted noise level studies for the Jackson Hole Airport Master Plan. Our studies were approved by the FAA and Sierra Club after very close scrutiny on their part. A question has been raised by neighbors in Johnson Subdivision concerning the quantities of dust which will be generated during the mining operation. I think we have discussed that aspect adequately, and I would only like to raise one question. If those individuals are so concerned with dust levels, why have they not insisted that the developer of Johnson Subdivision pave the streets in that subdivision? Unpaved streets generate incredible quantities of fugitive dust. A question was raised concerning a permit for the rock crusher in the existing Bestway operation. To the best of my knowledge, that rock crusher predates the regulations that require permits for rock crushers and as a result it does not require a permit. A satisfactory agreement has been reached between Bestway Paving Company and the Weld County Engineer concerning drainage at the perimeter of the site and berm construction relative to road easements. You should have by now, in writing, a copy of the agreement between Bestway and the Weld County Engineer. Also at the Planning Commission meeting, one of the members suggested getting more feedback from the City. We have already gone through the Greeley City Planning Board with this project and received a unanimous recommendation for approval . I am not sure how much stronger encouragement one could expect from the City. Finally, to reiterate our basic stance on the propriety of rezoning, it is our opinion that the original zoning of the land to rural residential was done without adequate knowledge of the valuable gravel deposits that underlie the site. We feel that State law as well as common sense required the removal of those gravel deposits prior to their being covered up by develop- ment, which would prohibit extraction of those gravels at any later time. To do so would be extremely short-sighted and not in the County' s best interest. I will be meeting with you in the next couple of days to work out mutually agreeable operations and reclamation standards in addition to those normally required by the County. If you have any questions or if we may be of further service, please call . Very truly yours, R. V. D AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Robert F. Matthias, Geologist Project Manager RFM:ss W.O. 2824 * 0 r . ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW TEAM January 4 , 1978 VI . REFERRAL FROM COUNTY: ZONE CHANGE AND MINING PERMIT LOCATION: 4th Street and 35th Avenue (N. E . Corner) Developer: Best-Way Paving Co . Carl V. Hill, Jr. Represented by: Lord F, Associates Best-Way Paving is requesting a zone change from Estate to Agriculture in order to commence what is estimated to he a 16 year commercial mining of gravel on a 45 acre tract northwest of the 4th Street- 35th Avenue interchange . The property just north of the proposed mining operation is the Best-Way plant and storage area. To the south is 4th Street which is scheduled for widening to an 80 foot collector status . Across 4th Street is a fully developed single family residential neighborhood within City limits . The property adjoining to the west is largely undeveloped, however lots are platted. The proposed zone change is not necessitated by the Colorado Open Mining Land Reclamation Act (House Bill 1529) since the zoning currently is not agricultural . However , mining would comply to the extent of the law which is to preserve gravel resources by mining them prior to a change in use . The mining will he done in 16 phases in which each completed pit will be filled with overburden from the current operation. There will be 4 foot berms constructed around the perimeter of the entire operation . The reclamation plan indicates return of the land to an agricultural state with a pond in center. Mining will begin in the northwest corner of the tract with the final phases along 4th Street . The primary and existing access is at 35th Avenue . A secondary access will he onto 4th Street . Ed Powers commented that his evaluation of the plans has found that adequate environmental safeguards have been taken to reduce noise and dust . However, he would note the following impacts : -possible deterioration of roads due to truck travel - ground water will he temporarily affected for about 1 mile -The impact on neighborhoods is likely but indeterminable It was noted that a mining permit is up for renewal on a five year basis . If impacts are severe , then strict conditions could be imposed or operations shut down . Max Karner commented that 4th Street could handle any increases in truck traffic if it is constructed accordingly. . . 0 w ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW TEAM January 4 , 1978 ' Item VI , Page 2 Bruce Forbes noted the proximity to the developed and developing neighborhoods . He has concerns for problems arising with the safety of children who might play in the area of excavation . Max Karner noted that the mining will eventually occur right up to 4th Street . He recommended and staff concurred that a 200 foot buffer be established between the mining operation and 4th Street . This will provide further protection to the neighborhood to the south . DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES PHONE (303) 356-4000 EXT 400 915 10TH STREET .\ "h GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 COLORADO December 13, 1977 Carl Hill President Best-Way Paving Company P.O. Box 820 Greeley, Colorado 80631 RE: Requests for a Change of Zone from "E" Estate to "A" Agricultural and a Special Use Permit for a Gravel Pit on a parcel of land described as Pt. of the NE- of Section 2, T5N, R66W of the 6th p.m. , Weld County, Colorado Dear Mr. Hill : Your application and related materials for the above described requests are complete and in order with the exception of the submission of a Power of Attorney form to permit Robert Matthias to sign in your behalf . Please complete the enclosed Power of Attorney form and return it to our office prior to the Planning Commission hearing indicated below. I have scheduled a meeting with the Weld County Planning Commission for January 3, 1978, at 1 : 30 p.m. Said 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. It is the policy of Weld County to refer an application of this nature to any municipality lying within three miles of the property in question. Therefore, our office has forwarded a copy of the materials submitted to the City of Greeley for their review and comment . According to our records the City of Greeley will review and comment on your a Carl Hill Page 2 December 13, 1977 applications at their Planning Commission meeting on December 27, 1977. Please contact John Given of the Greeley Planning Department for further details in regard to the Greeley Planning Commission meeting. Ifyou have any questions with regardtothis matter, please do t g tt not hesitate to contact our office. Respectfully, ,-,t//d l f,c/ i.niw.„,i__. Ken McWilliams Assistant Zoning Permit KI\I:sap cc : Robert Matthias R. V. Lord and Associates, Inc. 3250 Walnut Street P.O. Box 335 Boulder, Colorado 80302 r, vv, • SENDER Complete items I,2,and 3 P Add your address an the "RETURN TO" space on 3 reverse. 1. The following service is requested (check one). .ka O Show to whom and date delivered 1517 O ¢ Show to whom, date, & address of delivery.. 35¢ RESTRICTED DELIVERY. �I, —I e7 i7 ',a Show to whom and date delivered 65? • 2 -, _ c: JJ i ti,i 0 El RESTRICTED DELIVERY. I r'` c • ,'c",'f�'l i , Q'I�I Fq Show to whom, date, and address of delivery 85¢ c\_ "T T k 2. ARTICLE ADDRESSED TO: V1 a:,✓i ' y� Y 1 ...\\4...\—_ �'�\� R� \O��1` , rn =r1 «✓ r �7 g 3. ARTICLE DESCRIPTION: /,. r' r , .-.' L di-} � REGISTERED NO. CERTIFIED NO. INSURED NO. Pi `J -I • •• a"' -•`" "— K"' • n (Always obtain signature of addressee or agent) , I. _..I_4 r_ _. / I!i I have received the article described above. Firrr }; 'i I r .=" to SIGNATU ❑ Addresse ❑' e .Authorized agent . 72(' //j .I" i / �: 1 IV Y; I ca z DATE OF DELIVERY POSTMARK i- Z 5. ADDRESS (Complete only if r ue �,JA, ,r1 i� t7 y rOn �/ i ;; °o oo -0 f 6. UNABLE TO DELIVER BECAUSE: CLERK'S `� 1 CD --, p IN I " 70 F. *GPO.,475--0-568-047 r ' l I - Y1 4.Pla ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW TEAM MEETING August 18, 1976 Cl jb Jbt.) III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY BY BEST-WAY PAVING FOR GRAVEL EXTRACTION Location: North of 4th Street and west of 35th Avenue Developer: Carl V. Hill Geologist: Bob Mathias Best-Way Paving Company Lord and Associates , Inc. P.O. Box 820 3250 Walnut Street Greeley P.O. Box 335 Boulder, Colorado 80302 Weld County Planning Representative: Ken McWilliams Weld County Centennial Center 915 - 10 Street Greeley This proposal is to extract gravel deposits located south of the No. 3 Ditch between 35th Avenue and the Johnson Subdivision and 4th Street. At present the Best-Way Paving Company, who is proposing this development, has been located for a number of years just south of the No. 3 Ditch at 35th Avenue. At this time, they are using the existing pit for storage of material from other sites. This item was brought before the ART to provide an initial reaction to the proposal and to establish a basis for participation in the planning process. Planning staff members commented that a determination should be made as soon as possible as to the commercial mineability of the gravel deposits. Mr. McWilliams of the County Planning and Zoning Department commented that the deposit is located in a T-1 area as designated by the Colorado Geologic Survey, which means a terrace deposit of high-quality gravel . Planning staff members questioned the quality of the gravel since the pit across 35th Avenue at the No. 3 Ditch had some problems with sulfate interaction with the gravel deposit at that area as a result of ground water interacting with coal deposits in the area. The sulfate coating on the gravel deposits does not adhere to concrete and asphalt mixtures , making an unsatisfactory bond. Mr. Mathias commented that currently Best-Way Paving is using the gravel deposits in the existing pit for base course materials. The existing zoning on the property is agricultural on the north portion and estate residential on the south portion. Planning staff members questioned if it would be necessary to rezone the property in order to have a gravel extraction operation. Mr. McWilliams indicated that it may be possible to incorporate the entire development into an A-UD zone, which means an agricultural unit development. This would allow the County to tie together both the extraction and eventual reclamation of the area. Planning staff members questioned if this would be a dry pit. Mr. Mathias indicated that the present operation is dry to the level that the gravel has been mined. It would be wet if the gravel was mined to a deeper depth. Mr. Mathias indicated that there was a 50-foot depth to bedrock and that there were 10-foot of overburden and 40-foot of gravel resources. He further commented that it may be uneconomical to operate a wet pit, but at this time he had no further answers because of the preliminary phase that they are in. Planning staff members questioned how close to 4th Street that the proposal would come to. Mr. Mathias indicated that at this time he did not know and Administrative Review Team Meeting August 18, 1976 Page 2 of Item III that plans had not been worked out to a sufficient detail to indicate the areas that would be mined. Mr. Mathias indicated that he would be desirous of getting any concerns that the ART members might have. Planning staff members commented that they were concerned about the southern limit of the development in relation to 4th Street, that access onto 35th Avenue would be more desirable from the development, and that such an access be evaluated from a safety standpoint. Additionally, the pit may cause the stopping of develop- ment of properties to the east of the proposal across 35th Avenue. Develop- ment proposals have been submitted to the ART for review east of the proposal . Planning staff members questioned the effective length of time that a subdivision preliminary plat be in effect for the County as indicated in the letter to the Greeley Planning Commission. Mr. McWilliams answered that a preliminary plat is effective for a 12-month period; however, he feels that the A-UD zoning could provide the answer. Planning staff members commented that the determination of the commercial mineability of the gravel resource by the County would be the key to the development proposal . Mr. Ross of the Police Department commented that there are children in the area who may be enticed to use the proposed development for a play area. In addition, many of these children walk to the nearby schools and that he is concerned as to the protection they would be afforded during the times these children are going to and coming from school . Mr. Mathias indicated that this would be something that would have to be worked into the final development plans. Planning staff members questioned what type of reclamation would be done on the property after mineral deposits had been extracted. Mr. Hill of Best-May Paving Company commented that it was their intention to put estate residential size lots around the edge of the lake that would be created by the extraction operation. Planning staff members questioned if, after excavation had been done, it would be done so that it could be built on at the end. Mr. Mathias commented that there may or may not be foundation problems involved with the development; however, the goal is for eventual residential development of the area. Mr. Kane of the Building Inspection Department commented that there may be problems in getting FHA approval because of the existence of a former gravel extraction operation nearby, that being problems with the foundations. Mr. Mathias indicated that it may be necessary to go to caissons to have a stable foundation; however, this may be too expensive and prohibit residential development. Planning staff members indicated there was a concern as to the establishment of a time frame for development and'reclamation of the area. Mr. Mathias commented that this would dependent upon the demand for the product and that there were many variables involved in establishing a time frame. He further commented that this would of prime concern to the beginning of the planning process. Planning staff members questioned if the County would be requiring a permit for open cut mining on this property. Mr. McWilliams answered that the County would require a permit to be issued prior to the development of the , Administrative Review Team Meeting August 18, 1976 Page 3 of Item III mineral resources. Mr. Mathias indicated that, at this time, the State of Colorado may or may not require permits and that it was his understanding legislation had not been reenacted to require the issuance of permits in the State prior to mining. MEMORANDUM TO: WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RE: BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE FROM E-ESTATE RESIDENTIAL TO A-AGRICULTURAL ON A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NE1/4, SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 66 WEST, 6th P.M. Gentlemen: Best-Way Paving Company respectifully submits the following reasons in support of the Company' s requested change of zone. 1. The original zoning of the property to E- Estate Residential was faulty. At the time the property was zoned Estate the Weld County Planning Commission had no staff available to investigate such matters as existing gravel or mineral deposits, nor the extent or quality of those deposits. The zoning, at that time, encompassed larger areas of land, without particular consideration being given by the Planning Commission to individual parcels. The existing gravel pit on the property was in operation at that time, as were other pits in the area. Had the Planning Commission had the appropriate resources and staff available it is unlikely that the E-Estate zone would have been granted. At the time the Estate Zone was granted there was minimal development in the area. Most of which was to the South of the existing property. It should be noted that quite probably because of the manner in which the area was zoned at the time substantial gravel deposits have already been covered or excluded from potential extraction. 2. By granting the change of zone requested, the County can insure itself of the preservation and use of the natural resources on the property, and ultimately, development of the property into an area which would enhance the entire neighborhood. If I can provide any further information, please contact me. Very truly yours, TELEP ONNELL & TELEP ' _ :,14--i.. -C\ `------;V: / omasPl. o 'n TAC:llb ,3t,5676 c FEB 1978 RECEIVED os €Veld Dimly Flaming Commission l a1 , FIELD CHECK ljtz/ -2 ''') NA I•1 - -----�5 JA -- -'11t,_11.1. e7___-- --- ----- - REQUEST 007 ( -@ S LI: 1 [GA I. HI SCRIP11UN ---- -- -- --- ---- - - - - -•- ------ 10 E _- Polo ; / )4a ,e N\-- ,. t--.g- , sE - c 5) 4 _ ._______ ___- --------------- 41 _ `_ Q , . 70NINC ti LOCATION _l��A -4 E 6-;-Pf ---ir_ ----- - II -- --- — - ('OI•itlr ,1Tc_, : /1-!. .,„!t_ __ ____________-_eice____- ' 2}F)4_--- .zyue,, ---Z4.__a-c.-__,6J_-- ,...- _,6A-e_xl-t./ _akii___ e-1-42._ - t - .--ir!_�) f" _' i��I�L _.d_'r�_�__._�—_-- 1. ---- 1h ≤ L % - - i ---- c --- , - - -- 1_i" --- Lam_!. -J 22 ,, ,z.,: �- �� - --mac - �.Zr �/ e fir),-,) It , ..c--,7- e.,L 7/761r20),die-citAt:,r NOTICE 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. #78-34 Best-Way Paving Company P. O. Box 820 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Date: June 7 , 1978 Time: 2: 00 P. M. Request: Special Use Permit, Open Cut Mining Permit, Gravel Pit LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A tract of land located in the Northeast Quarter (NE4) of Section 2 , Township 5 North, Range 66 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Weld -County, Colorado and being further described as follows: Commencing at the Center Quarter Corner (Cen4Cor) of said Section 2 , and considering the South Line of the Northeast Quarter (NE4) of said Section 2 to bear South 89°55 ' 53" East, with all bearings herein being relative thereto: Thence South 89°55' 53" East, along the South Line of the Northeast Quarter (NE4) of said Section 2, a distance of 1242 . 80 feet to the True Point of Beginning, said Point being the Southeast Corner (SECor) of JOHNSON SUBDIVISION, as platted and recorded in the records of Weld County, Colorado; Thence along the Easterly boundary line of said JOHNSON SUBDIVISION by the following two (2) bearings and distances; North 13°44 ' 30" West, 1300 . 19 feet; North 09°12 ' 16" East, 1040 . 61 feet to a point on the South bank of Greeley Canal No. 3 ; Thence along the South bank of said Greeley Canal No. 3 by the following nine (9) bearings and distances : North 84°39 ' 18" East, 81. 45 feet; South 89°00 ' 30" East, 254. 37 feet; South 75°18 ' 29" East, 125. 79 feet; /f/.: /(. :-',/ South 66°09 ' 38" East, 380 . 46 feet; South 63°20 ' 48" East, 230.77 feet; South 49°27 ' 12" East, 458 . 03 feet; South 69°28 ' 12" East, 214 . 99 feet; South 80°30' 45" East, 112 . 96 feet; South 73°04 ' 44" East, 266. 46 feet; Thence South 06°10 ' 17" West, along the East line of the Northeast Quarter (NE4) of said Section 2 , a distance 886 .39 feet; Thence North 89°55' 53" West, along the North Line of an 11. 540 acre tract of land, 766. 69 feet; Thence South 06°10 ' 17" West, along the West Line of said 11. 540 acre tract of land 659 . 36 feet to the South Line of the Northeast Quarter (NE 4) of said Section 2; Thence North 89°55 ' 53" West, along the South Line of the Northeast Quarter (NE 4) of said Section 2, a distance of 851. 81 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Said tract of land contains 75. 000 acres and is subject to any Rights-of-Way or other Easements as granted or reserved by instruments of record or as now existing on said tract of land. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO BY: MARY ANN FEUERSTEIN WELD COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER AND CLERK TO THE BOARD BY: Jeannette Ordway, Deputy DATED: May 1, 1978 PUBLISHED: May 4, 1978 and May 25, 1978 in the Johnstown Breeze NOTICE 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 arc 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. 78-34 Best-Way Paving Company P.O. Box 820 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Date: June 7, 1978 Time: 2:00 P.M. Request: Special Use Permit, Open Cut Mining Permit, Gravel Pit LOCATION: A parcel of land adjacent to the Northwest Greeley City limits and bounded on the East side by 35th Avenue and the South by West 4th Street. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO BY: MARY ANN FEUERSTEIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER AND CLERK TO THE BOARD BY: Keitha Hubbard, Deputy DATED: May 1, 1978 t't HI IC'OTI('E VOTICE aws o,the State of Colorado and l the Weld County Land Use Code a public hearing will be held in the Chambers of the Board of Count., Commissioners of ti,1d County Colorado,Weld County Jen'ennial Center, 918 10th Street, Gr 'ley, Colorado,at the time speciftea All persons in any manner Interested in qu d e Special ieste to i att attend and may i be r Use 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. 78-34 Best-Way Paving Company 210 Greeley,Coloradoo80631 6 Date June 7, 1978 Time: 2:00 P.M Request• _Special Use Permit II Open Cut g Permit, Gravel LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A tract of land located in the ;Nest for a distance of 800.00 feet to the point of beginning. AND That part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 36 l'owriship 4 North, Range 66 West, Weld County Colorado being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the South line of said Northwest Quarter; said point being North 87 Degrees 45 Minutes 12 Seconds East on an assumed bearing a distance of 909.20 feet from the Southwest Corner of said Northwest Quarter; thence North 02 Degrees 14 Minutes 48 Seconds West for a distance of 33.00 feet to a point; thence North 87 Degrees 45 Minutes 12 Seconds yEast and North of and paralllel lto the South line of said Northwest Quarter for a distance of 1784.40 feet to a point on the East line of said Northwest Quarter; thence South 00 Degrees distance ta �o 43 Seconds 0 eet e to fothe Southeast Corner of said North- west Quarter; thence South 87 s 12 Seconds West Degree r a distancs 45 e of 1783.03 feet to the point of beginning. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY,COLORADO BY:MARY ANN FEUERSTEIN WELD COUNTY CLERK ECORD AND CLERK AND BOARD BY Rita Jo Kummer,Deputy DATED• May 1, 1978 PUMay a 25878 in a the Johnstown Breeze Co T.cral 78-32-Clerk to Bd June 7 , 1978 I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated May 1, 1978, duly published May 4, 1978 and May 25, 1978 in the Johnstown Breeze, a public hearing was held to consider the request of Best-Way Paving Company for a special use permit for an open cut mining permit for a gravel pit. Assistant County Attorney, Kay Norton, explained to the Board that in a decision handed down by the courts on June 6, 1978 the Commissioners, at their discretion, are allowed to hear this request and to make a decision thereto. The courts did however, restrict the applicant from proceeding with implementation of the SUP, should it be granted by the Board, until and if the courts ruled in favor of Best- Way on the zoning question. Mr. A. M. Dominguez, Attorney representing the opposition to the granting of the SUP, requested that the Board table consideration of this request until after the zoning issue has been decided by the courts. The Board discussed Mr. Dominguez ' request and then Commissioner Carlson made a motion to proceed with the SUP hearing. Commissioner Jacobucci seconded the motion and it carried with Commissioners Carlson, Jacobucci and Chairman Dunbar voting aye. Commissioners Roe and Steinmark voted nay. Attorney Tom Connell, representing the applicant, presented their request for a SUP. Mr. Dominguez presented testimony for the opposition. Testimony was also received from members of the audience and from Attorney Tom Hellerich, representing Mr. and Mrs. Ray Larson. Commissioner Steinmark questioned the operational standard regarding the fencing to surround the property. Mrs. Steinmark made a motion to add to the operational standard that fencing also be placed along the N. Orman Ruyle Property. Commissioner Carlson seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. It was a consensus of the Board that the fence is to be a six foot high wooden privacy fence as is required for the rest of the area. After all testimony was received and all evidence presented, Commissioner Jacobucci made a motion to grant the special use permit with the recommendations of the Weld County Planning Commission and the operational and development standards. Commissioner Carlson seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. All five commissioners were present for the hearing. c// tai t ,A0 j Chairman Board of County Commissioners Weld County, Colorado Attest: ‘6711€14TavulA;AAliveli Weld County Clerk and Recorder and Clerk to the Board By: De u y I22 my Clerk Docket #78-34 Tape #78-60, 61, and 62 Affidavit of Publication STATE OF COLORADO NOTICE SS, pursuant to the zoning laws of the State of Colorado and the Weld County Land Use County of Weld, Code,a public hearing will be held in the Chambers of the Board of County Com missioners of Weld County, Colorado, Weld County Centennial Center,915 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado, at the time I, Vickie H TWccci of specified All persons in any manner in terested in the Special Use Permit are said County of Weld, being duly sworn, say that I am requested to attend and may be heard BE IT ALSO KNOWN that the text and an advertising derk of maps so certified by the Weld County Planning Commission may be examined THE GREELEY DAILY TRIBUNE, and CCo the Office the Clerk to the Board of THE GREELEY REPUBLICAN County Commissioners, located m the Weld County Centennial Center,915 10th Street,Third Floor,Greeley,Colorado that the same is a daily newspaper of general Docket No 78 34 Best Way Paving Company,P O Box 820,Greeley,Colorado circulation and printed and published in the City of 80a"Date June 7,1978 Greeley, county in said and state; that the notice or Time 2 00 PM advertisement, of which the annexed is a true copy, has Request Special Use Permit,Open Cut Mining Permit,Gravel Pit been published in said daily newspaper for consecutive LOCATION A parcel of land adiacent to the Northwest Greeley City limits and (days) (weeks); that the notice was published in the bounded on the East side by 35th Avenue re ular and entire issue of every number of said and the the South by West 4 4th Street g THE BOARD OF COUNTY newspaper during the period and time of publication of COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY,COLORADO said notice, and in the newspaper proper and not in a BY MARYANNFEUERSTEIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER supplement thereof; that the first publication of said AND CLERK TO THE BOARD notice was contained in the issue of said newspaper BY Keitha Hubbard,Deputy DATED May 1,1978 bearing date twenty-ni nPth The Greeley Daily Tribune May 29,1978 day of May A.D. 19 78 and the last publication thereof; in the issue of said newspaper bearing date the twenty-nineth day of Nay A.D. 19 78 that said The Greeley Daily Tribune and The Greeley Republican, has been published continuously and uninterruptedly during the period of at least six months next prior to the first issue thereof contained said notice or advertisement above referred to;that said newspaper has been admitted to the United States mails as second-class matter under the provisions of the Act of March 3, 1879, or any amendments thereof; and that said newspaper is a daily newspaper duly qualified for publishing legal notices and advertisements within the meaning of the laws of the State of Colorado. May 29, 1978 total charges $11 .02 i'ek.--1 ,-,/ /' 22.-4---w, ertising Clerk Subscribed and sworn to before me this 29th day of May A.D. 19 78 My Com 'ssio expires 117 COrGP ss'on og..),ra.; ,'-1) Go, 15)82 Notary Public �' L' AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION THE JOHNSTOWN BREEZE STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss COUNTY OF WELD ) I, Eugene Thomas, do solemnly swear that I am publisher of The Johnstown Thence along the Easterly Sauna- Breeze; that the same is a weekly ary line of said JOHNSON newspaper printed, in whole or in part,and SUBDIVISION by the following published in the County of Weld, State of two (2) bearings and distances; PUBLIC NOTICE Colorado, and has a general circulation N130019 f e degrees 44' 30" West, therein; that said newspaper has been Pursuant to the zoning laws of the North 1fee degrees t 1h East, published continuousland uninterrupted- Pursuant on the South p State of Colorado and the Weld bank of Greeley Canal No 3, ly in said County of Weld for a period of County Land Use Code a public hearing will be held in the Thence along the South bank of more than fifty-two consecutive weeks Chambers of the Board of County aidGreeley Canal No 3 by the prior to the firsi publication of the annexed CommissionersColorado, Wld oo Weld ennifollowing nine (9) bearings and legal notice or advertisement, that said Colorado,Weld County Centennial distances Center, 915 10th Street, Greeley Colorado,at the time specified.All North 84 degrees 39' 18" East, newspaper has been admitted to the persons in any manner interested 81 46 feet; United States mails as second-class matter in the Special Use Permit are South 89 degrees 00' 30" East, requested to attend and may be 254.37 feet, - under the provisions of the Act of March 3, heard. , South 75• 125.79 feet; 1879, 18' 29" East, 1879,or any amendments thereof,and that BE IT ALSO KNOWN that the text South 66 degrees 09' 38" East, and maps so certified by the Weld 380 46 feet; said newspaper is a weekly newspaper County Planning Commission South 63 degrees 20' 48" East, duly qualified for publishing legal notices they Clerk examined-in Boa d of OCounty South 49 feet; 27' 12" East, and advertisements within the meaning of Commissioners, located in the 458.03 feet, the laws of the State of Colorado. Weld County Centennial Center, South 69 degrees 28' 12" East, That the annexed legal notice o r 915 10th Street, Third Floor, 214 99 feet, Greeley, Colorado. South 80 112 96 feet, 30' 45" East, advertisement was published in t h e Docket No. 78-34 South 73 degrees 04' 44" East, Best-Way Paving Company' 268 48 feet; regular and entire issue of every number of P.O Box820 said weekly newspaper for the period of Greeley,Colorado 80631 Thence South 06 degrees 10' 17" West, along the East line of the o?-.•epq-sp insertions; and that the Date: June 7, 1978 Northeast Quarter(NEB/)of said Section 2, a distance 8839 feet; first Time: 2.00 P M. publication of said notice was in the Thence North 89 degrees 55' 53" / Request• Special Use Permit West, along the North Line of an issue of said newspaper dated. � !.7 el , Open Cut Mining Permit, Gravel 1e 11 540 acre tract of land, 768.89 It A.D. 197$ , and that the last publication LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Thence South degrees 10' 17" of said notice wa in the issue of said Wealong West Line of said A tract of land located in the 11 540 acre tract of land 659.38 feet Northeast Quarter (NE Quarter(NE,) said ) of to the South Line of the Northeast newspaper dated / ,A D 19 7 . Section 2, Township 5 North, of Section 2; In witness who eof I hav hereunto set Range 66 West of the Sixth Thence North 89 degrees 55' 53" /J Principal Meridian,Weld County, West, along the South Line of the my hand thise2 .day of.. "'!"/"y', Colorado and being further de- Northeast Quarter(NEy)of said •, scribed as follows Section 2,a distance of 851 81 feet 7 C to the True Point of Be U Commencing at the Center Said tract of land contains 75 0000 A.D. 19. ... Quarter Corner(Con )of said' acres and is subject to Section 2, and considering the any South Line of the Noreast Rights-of-Wray or other Ease- Quarter (NEva) of said Section 2 nstruments oft record reserved r as e now to bear South 89 degrees 55' 53" existing on said tract of land. •East, with all bearings herein Publisher being relative thereto. THE BOARD OF COUNTY Thence South 89 degrees 55' 53" WELD COUN Y COLORAE O Subscribed and sworn to before me a East along the South Line of the Northeast Quarter(NE14)of said BY•MARY ANN FEUERSTEIN Notary Public in and for the County of Section 2 a distance of 1242 80 feet WELD COUNTY CLERK to the True Point of Beginning AND RECORDER said Point being the Southeast AND CLERK TO THE BOARD Weld,State of Colorado, this — day Corner ISECor) of JOHNSON SUBDIVISION,,as platted and BY•Jeannetted-, .4.,,_.. ...recorded in the records of Weld Y.Deputy of A D 19 �� County, Colorado, DATED• May 1, 1978 ��/ e'- PUBLISHED: May 4, 1978 and • +L �' �y` ' June 1, 1978 in the Johnstown Notary Public Breeze. Co. Legal 78-34-Clerk to Bd. // My commission expires SPEC I Ali .UH: TN.:1011T i W, fN,,, A AS FLOW SHEET•nl I I,ICnN'I': QO � ..,-,., , (:n,�l., „5REQUEST: GYO\i-e_A PA• LEGAL: Pk.. N C4- t 1,T511.1, ZDkoW y DATE BY Application Received ` j-1_Jii TE\\ Application Fee - Receipt # bci205 12..Recording Fee lt,. LI11 'Ter\ Application Complete 1 IL :1 fill t< P.C. Hearing Date: \ 14 be) d11,, 0 pi KI ‘ '� p Letter to Applicant Drafted 12 "1 r,11 ��A Referrals Listed 11, ill I 1 14(Mi Field Check by D.P.S . Staff t2 frL11 File Assembled 1I, � It !II Referrals Mailed t2 hb 1 ll SI Chaindexed IL/ Vb iii 5? Notification of Applicant , 1`# 1 G ;rill %V) Surrounding Property Owners Researched ,\7,, 11411 PE W Airphoto/Vicinity Map Preapred 1/ i 71 VV(\4\/It/ tcl Property Owners Notified by : \ , A 2 p Agendas Mailed by : �j ,17,, , p `�" 1-1-i c Legal Approved by County Attorney 1"IlD 6i T O D e Referrals - Complete , Li & le 0,1a Preliminary D.P.S . Staff Comments 412.5 I m Clit Staff Conference 4, '+I'M, C.ht. D.P .S . Comments VO 1-1iait " V11-14b 4b P.C. Hearing Action :-N r: ,-:-N% � , ,7%:\ck P.C . P.C. Resolution �eQ��v % � �� .. �`r� • `' o‘ (Z , Case Sent to Clerk to Board C.C. Hearing ,,%:.:.\--,\.‘, Action : ' W %.'::\ N AS, Q . C.C. Resolution Received A:��\, R . History Card Complete C''4 \F Nt &-. C.C. Resolution Sent to Drafting \ i 7�\ % Drafted on Mylar I i Document Sent to Clerk and Recorder \ -- \ \\ �;- P.C. Minutes k-«"1e. , Z"1-19 1.-'�.1®lEb /1G/7 �d +' .1.4. .. 'a.=\' N %4 \� .% REZONINGIllig ' ' ! . f FLOW SHEET Z7�U 7 p APPLICANTR Wa`�/s//- ojv� Ti , 1 CASE #E. CASM:11'12- REQUEST eni E -v® \ LEGAL: 1 .- 4- 2.. T5 DatE I By Application Received 1#1,0 7:i 11 i E\ Application Fee Receipt # 1511.E5 vz- vrn TE\-k Recording Fee 110. 1411 MIA Application Complete �� P.C. Hearing Date : 1�1� It Iloil K 1 MIA Letter to Applicant Drafted ' 1,41.-N 911 i< Referrals Listed 1141 111 14 Public Notice Drafted if 1 11. 11111 t(141,2\ Field Check by D.P.S . Staff tl Sign Posted by: VL 1.1 Vri IV 'Ip,1 11 Oy‘ N vH-1-1 i<Th File Assembled a 11.1 Referrals Mailed MI 11 SV Chaindexed bV Notification of Applicant a C� n Public Notice Sent out by: D �� itilia r 11 SV Sign for P.C. Meeting Prepared C1211111 p %‘\;:p , : Surrounding Property Owners Researched 1 1tg -n PM Airphoto/Vicinity Vicinit Map Prepared P Y116 hb PEKNN Property Owners Notified by : It 1A ) .1-1 1201‘qh1 , c) Agendas Mailed by : \L 1 ?-0$ 1 `41 a le SP Legal Approved County Attorney pP by Mitt -1-1 To Referrals - Complete L / 62 lib aiko_. Preliminary D.P .S . Staff Commentslb ' Staff Conference 21 ^ )1F3 �� D.P.S . Comments �C� 'fable.& a��-1s 1Z LI6lib Q,Pio P.C. Hearing Action: To0okexi. `t.- 1 - `1t P.C. Resolution �' ?..% I' ' 1.17.1 lib CIPte_, Case Sent to Clerk to Board 11#1.1 : le) Sign Posted C.C. Hearing 5 "At) ActionPcpproveL— C.C. Resolution Received History Card Complete C.C. Resolution Sent to Drafting Drafted on Mylar Document Sent to Clerk and Recorder P.C. Minutes A NA al Ail 111 A Ali A APPENDIX 8 WELD COUNTY, COLORADO SPECIAL USE APPLICATION For OPEN CUT MINE PERMIT (gravel pits , etc. ) Weld County Planning Commission 1516 Hospital Road, Greeley, CO For ZONING DEPARTMENT Use Only Case Number: Applicant: PC Hearing Date: CC Hearing Date: Section: , Township: - North, Range: West Zoning District: • Acreage Involved: /,1.`-a..i/J(1y{ . (2b -{_,) Permit Fee: -' )( ;'( {;, c\ Receipt Number: V?�T • - Legal Description Approved By , Weld County Attorney , , • Site Entrance/Exit Points and Off-Site Transportation Routes Approved By , Weld County Engineer Recommended Road/Bridge Fee: /Not Required Refer To: 1 ) Date: 2) _ Date: - ----- 3) Da te: 4) Date: ---- ------- 5) -- Date: — Application Reviewed By Weld County Zoning Department Fa Be Completed By APPLICANT In Accordance With Procedural Guide Require- ments: 1 . I (we) , the undersigned, hereby request a hearing before the Weld County Planning Commission concerning a proposed Open Cut Gravel . (gravel , coal , borrow pit, etc. ) mining operation for the following described unincor- porated area of Weld County: LEGAL, DESCRIPTION: 45.91 acres in the NE'r, of Section 2 , Township 5 North, Range 66 West of the 6thime Meridian. A detailed description is attached— as Appendix 2. TOTAL ACREAGE: 75 2. Surface owner(s ) of area of land described Name: BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY Address: N.35th Ave. Greerb9ne: 353-1654 flame: GILSABIND-CONVIDAR Address: N.35th Ave.GreeP99ne: 353-1654 3. Owner(s) of'mineral rights to substance to be mined Name: BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY Address :N. 35th Ave. GreePOne: 353-11654 Name: Tal_SABIND-CONVIDAR Address:N.35th Ave.Gree1E one: 353-1654 4. Source of applicants Legal Right to enter and to mine on the land de- scribed: Property Titles attached as Appendix 7 (Attach Certified Copy of any Document noted to the Back of This Form yn ' woad iiikkai MA INA I 5. Address of applicant, and general office Applicants address: P.O.Box 82.0, Greeley, Colorado Phone:353-1654 General Office address:N-35tH Ave.—Greeley Coloradphone:353-1b + - 6. Identify any prior permits for open cut mining held by applicant or affiliated person: NONE 7. Description of Operation a: Types and number of operating and processing equipment to be employed: 3 loaders , 2 scrpaers , 10 tandem trucks , 10 tractor trucks, 1 gravel plant with crusher, 1 asphalt plant (these last two are on existing plant site) . b. Maximum number of employees: 55-100 , and number of shifts: 1 c. Number of stages to be worked: 16 , and periods of time each is to be worked: approximately 1 year per stage. d. Thickness of mineral deposit: 30-40 feet, and thickness of the over- burden: 5-15 feet. e. This will be a Un/dry pit operation f. Site entrance/exit points and county roads and bridges to be utilized between site and delivery point(s) (must be coordinated with County Engineer) : Primary entrance to be existing entrance. Secondary entrance will be onto Fourth Street at SE corner of property. Roads to be used will be primarily Fourth Street and 35th Avenue. 8. Description of Rehabilitation a. Proposed rehabilitation land use(s) : Agriculture-pond-plant site b. Source of technical advice for reclamation: Soil Conservation Service and R. V. Lord and Associates, Inc. ' —c. Explanation of Reclamation Process: This is explained in detail in Section D. Generally, after mining, overburden wi lFTe repTaceT, covered by 18-3G inches of topsoil . Corn or alfalfa will be planted on approxrmately 25 acres on the flatter portion of the site. Trees, shrubs and erosion-resistant grasses will be planted on the steeper, perimeter slopes. I hereby depose and state under the penalities of perjury that all state- ments , proposals and/or plans submitted with or contained within this applica- tion are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. COUNTY OF WELD STATE OF COLORADO R. V. LORD AND ASSOCIATES, INC. -Si-nature: Owne Authorized Agent Subscribed and sworn to before me this , day of lg 7, NOTARY PUBL I C SEAL My Commission expires B'Ue1"Z / ', /97 1 f I I �r R. V. LORD 6 ASSOCIATES INC. - ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGNERS I I I I f-' • l s. • • c;Wc 8(95 III I. L3 • _3 • �4ilm\\\\�c X44/IIU ' . R. V. LORD Cr ASSOCIATES INC. 3250 Walnut SL/P.O. Box 335/Boulder, Colo. 80302 (303) 443-0413 January 31 , 1978 Mr. Tom Honn Department of Planning and Zoning Weld County - P.O. Box 758 Greeley, Colorado 80631 • Re: BESTWAY PAVING COMPANY Application for change in Zoning and Special Use Permit Dear Mr. Honn: Enclosed are fifteen (15) bound copies of the Site Development Report filed to obtain the referenced County action. This report discusses aspects of the proposed operation at the site for which the Weld County Planning Commission requested additional data. Topics covered in this supplementary report include noise pollution, dust pollution, fencing, berm construction and vegetation, methods of operation, site access and water availability. . If you have any questions concerning any of the data, or the conclusions presented, please contact me. Very truly yours, R. V. ORD AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Robert F. Matthias Geologist, Project Manager .I , •i Enclosures - RFM/sdk W.O. 2824 ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGNERS requests from the owners of the immediately adjacent properties. Here a six-foot high, chainlink fence will be constructed so as not to obstruct those individuals' view of the city to the east. Along the eastern edge of the site immediately adjacent to 35th Avenue, a four-foot high, ten-foot wide berm will be constructed with a six-foot high, chainlink fence constructed on its outer edge. This berm and chainlink fence will extend from the entrance and gate of BESTWAY PAVING COMPANY southward to connect with the corral on the rural property. A portion of this fence and berm will also cross the Ruyle property, and permission has been obtained to do this. All fences will remain the property of BESTWAY PAVING COMPANY who will have responsibility for maintaining them. The fences will be constructed as soon as is practicable. BERMS Berms constructed of overburden and topsoil materials will be located as described in the previous section. BESTWAY PAVING COMPANY had initially proposed to plant very dense vegetation on the berms in order to create as effective a visual barrier as a wooden privacy fence, in hopes of saving the construction cost of that fence. That same density of vegetation is no longer appropriate to portions of the berm where the privacy fence is to be constructed. That same density of vegetation, however, is still considered appropriate along the eastern edge of the site, that is, along 35th Avenue as originally proposed. Along this portion of the perimeter berm, the vegetation will consist of the following: East Exposure Seeding Rate: 40 pure live seed (PLS)/Sq. Ft. Western wheatgrass 30% = 4.8 lbs PLS/Ac. Blue grama 30% = 0.6 lbs PLS/Ac. Side oats grama 40% = 3.5 lbs PLS/Ac. DRILLED TOTAL = 8.9 lbs PLS/Ac. BROADCAST TOTAL = 17.8 lbs PLS/Ac. -4- This will result in twelve- to fifteen-inch high grass. In addition to those grasses, Russian Olives, HoneyLocusts, Ponderosa Pines, and Easter Red Cedar trees will be placed in a density not less than five feet between trees. The precise mixture will be selected on the basis of the types of trees available at time of planting and to assure the greatest chances for survival , as well as the densest foliage possible in the shomtest amount of time. As with the fences, these trees • will be maintained by BESTWAY PAVING COMPANY. On the west-facing slope of the same berm, grasses will be planted as follows: Recommended Seeding Rate: 40 pure live seed (PLS)/Sq. Ft. Blue Grama 30% = 0.6 lbs PLS/Ac. Side oats grama 70% = 6.2 lbs PLS/Ac. DRILLED TOTAL = 6.8 lbs PLS/Ac. BROADCAST TOTAL = 13.6 lbs PLS/Ac. This same mixture of grasses will be planted on the three to one slope formed as this portion of the pit is mined and reclaimed. As described in the original report, these areas will be covered with sufficient top soil to permit the establishment of erosion-preventing grasses. Prior to planting of grasses and while the seeds are germinating, the slopes of the pit, as well as those of the berms, will be mulched as the Soil Conservation Service recommended to minimize erosion to the maximum extent possible. On the berm along 4th Street which supports the six-foot high, wooden privacy fence will be planted the following mixture of grasses: Northside and down into pit Seeding Rate: 40 pure live seed (PLS)/Sq. Ft. Western wheatgrass 30% = 4.8 lbs PLS/Ac. Blue grama 30% = 0.6 lbs PLS/Ac. Side oats grama 40% = 3.5 lbs PLS/Ac. DRILLED TOTAL = 8.9 lbs PLS/Ac. BROADCAST TOTAL = 17.8 lbs PLS/Ac. -5- South side of Berm Seeding Rate: 40 pure live seed (PLS)/Sq. Ft. Blue grama 30% = 0.6 lbs PLS/Ac. Side oats grama 70% = 6.2 lbs PLS/Ac. DRILLED TOTAL = 6.8 lbs PLS/Ac. BROADCAST TOTAL = 13.6 lbs PLS/Ac. As indicated, the density of herbaceous plants will be selected for its aesthetic value rather than as visual barrier (to be provided by the fence) . As a result, trees of the following types will be planted at intervals averaging five feet: Caragana, Hackberry, Cottoneaster, Russian Olive, HoneyLocust, Rocky Mountain Juniper, Eastern Red Cedar, Ponderosa Pine, American Plum, Russian Apricot, Stuffed Bush Sumac and Siberian Elm. The berm supporting the wooden privacy fence at the north portion of the west property line will be planted will the following grasses: East-facing Seeding Rate: 40 pure live seed (PLS)/Sq. Ft. Western wheatgrass 30% = 4.8 lbs PLS/Ac. Blue grama 30% = 0.6 lbs PLS/Ac. Side oats grama 40% = 3.5 lbs PLS/Ac. DRILLED TOTAL = 8.9 lbs PLS/Ac. BROADCAST TOTAL = 17.8 lbs PLS/Ac. West-facing Seeding Rate: 40 pure live seed (PLS)/Sq. Ft. (extending down into pit) Blue grama 30% = 0.6 lbs PLS/Ac. Side oats grama 70% = 6.2 lbs PLS/Ac. DRILLED TOTAL = 6.8 lbs PLS/Ac. BROADCAST TOTAL = 13.6 lbs PLS/Ac. The density of herbaceous plants will be as described above and will consist of numerous species. All trees planted will be seedlings obtained from the Colorado -6- State Forest Service. These species and seeding rates are as recommended by the West Greeley Soil Conservation District. NOISE GENERATION It is beyond the scope of this report to present a detailed discussion of the theory of noise measurements. Briefly, however, noise is measured using the decibel scale. The decibel •is a measurement of sound pressure. Because audible sound pressures vary in intensity by several orders of magnitude, the decibel scale was devised to condense the audible range into a small numerical scale by using logarithms. A sound pressure increase of three to four decibels represents a doubling of sound pressure. This is very difficult to relate, however, to a doubling of perceived, or audible, noise levels. The frequency or pitch of sound affects the perception of that sound, and as a result, it is most common to use the A range of frequencies in sound measurement. The A decibel scale was used in all sound measurements discussed herein. Figure 2 shows common sound levels more meaningfully than it is possible to discuss. In order to relate the noise levels shown in Figure 2 to the legal aspects of operations, a section of the Colorado law dealing with noise pollution is as follows: 25-12-103. Maximum permissible noise levels. (1) Every activity to which this article is applicable shall be conducted in a manner so that any noise produced is not objectionable due to intermittence, beat frequency, or shrillness. Sound levels of noise radiating from a property line at a dis- tance of twenty-five feet or more therefrom in excess of the db(A) established for the following time periods and zones shall constitute prima facie evidence that such noise is a public nuisance: 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. to Zone next 7:00 p.m. next 7:00 a.m. Residential 55 db(A) 50 db(A) Commercial 60 db(A) 55 db(A) Light industrial 70 db(A) 65 db(A) Industrial 80 db(A) 75 db(A) -7- (2) In the hours between 7:00 a.m. and the next 7:00 p.m. , the noise levels permitted in subsection (1) of this section may be increased by ten db(A) for a period of not to exceed fifteen minutes in any one-hour period. (3) Periodic, impulsive, or shrill noises shall be considered a public nuisance when such noises are at a sound level of five db(A) less than those listed in subsection (1) of this section. A General Radio 1565-B Sound Level Meter was used to measure noise generated by different aspects of gravel mining operation at the site. Enough noise level measurements were obtained from the crusher, loader, and scraper over a two-day period to permit detailed evaluation of the noises which will be generated by those pieces of machinery operating at different locations on the site. It was considered beyond the scope of this study to make highly detailed and accurate noise studies of traffic along 35th Avenue and 4th Street. This was because of the very limited time between the Weld County Planning Commission meetings and because any such detailed noise surveys should be taken at random times throughout the year. Suffice it to say with respect to truck noise however, that in the calendar year 1977, BESTWAY PAVING COMPANY conducted a number of paving operations within the city limits of Boulder which has very stringent noise regulations. All of the BESTWAY PAVING COMPANY equipment operating in Boulder was found to meet those standards. A. Pit Noise. Drawing No. 7 shows the contours of the noise levels created within the existing gravel pit. The sources of those noises include the crusher and gravel plant, the front-end loader, and miscellaneous equipment operating in that pit. It can be seen in studying the drawing, that the noise levels drop off rapidly to the south to a point approximately 550 feet north of the centerline of 4th Street. At this point, the background noise levels increase as a result of -8- traffic noise from 4th Street. This type of breaking point in sound levels was not as obvious at the eastern edge of the site along 35th Avenue. Such a breaking point is certain to occur but it was not as easily detectable. Analysis of these data indicate that the pit operations will remain in their present locations and will not be heard above normal street traffic. B. Scraper Noise. Measurement of the noise emitted (and meaningful representation of those data) by the paddle-wheel scraper as it removes overburden is highly complex because, at some time or other, the scraper will be operating all over the site. In addition, as the scraper removes overburden at greater depths, it will disappear from site and the noise levels will be reduced correspondingly. Drawing No. 8 shows our findings with respect to the noise levels generated by the scraper-overburden removal operation, diagrammatically. Analysis of noise level measurements shows that the overburden and topsoil in the central portion of the site can be removed by the paddle-wheel scraper while generating noise levels less intense than those generated by traffic on both 35th Avenue and 4th Street. The area shown in the stippled pattern are areas where the overburden can be removed, generating noise levels competing with those generated by traffic noise. The area shown outside of the stippled pattern represents overburden whose removal will require extra muffling of the equipment. Two factors should be pointed out here: (1) These noise levels represent the scraper working directly at the surface and do not reflect the noise attenuation which will occur as the scraper drops below the surface as more overburden is removed. (2) As was noted in an earlier section concerning operational methods, the overburden stripping operation will occur for a two-week period every six months. -9- C. Loader Noise. As was explained previously, the front-end loader which does the actual mining of the gravel , will operate strictly on the floor of the pit and never will operate at the level of the ground surface. Noise levels were measured from outside of the pit while both the loader and crusher were in operation. At this point, the loader was immediately at the base of the gravel slope while the crusher was approximately 4Q0 feet distant. It should be pointed out that the crusher will remain in its present location. Effectively, the noise level measurements obtained in this study are higher than will actually be observed during the mining operations, particularly when that operation is conducted at the perimeter of the site. It is this point in the actual mining operation that is of most concern to adjacent residents. Standing outside the pit and as close to it as was possible, maximum noise levels ranged from seventy-two to seventy- six db(A) . Fifty feet back from the edge of the slope, noise levels ranged from forty-eight to fifty-six db(A) . One hundred fifty feet back from the edge of the pit, noise levels were approximately forty-six db(A) which was essentially the ambient or background condition. At this point, the machine noise from the loader or crusher was not detectable by the human ear, and that noise level represents background noise from sources such as distant traffic, birds, air- planes and the wind. The conclusion that must be drawn from the measurements of noise generated by the loader are that this piece of equipment will not generate illegal noise levels outside of the pit which can be heard on adjoining public or private property and that further, it is improbable that the mining equipment (loader) will even be heard off the BESTWAY site itself. -10- In general , we conclude that the pit operations, that is, those operations including the gravel crusher, gravel plant and asphalt plant, will not be heard off site. In addition, the front-end loader, which does the actual mining of the gravel , will not create noise levels in excess of those legally permitted under Colorado State Law and, indeed, probably will not be audible off the BESTWAY site at all . Stripping of overburden from the majority of the site can be accomplished without exceeding the noise levels presently generated by traffic in the area. In those small portions at the site's perimeter, it will be necessary to provide additional exhaust muffling for the very short time duration of the stripping operations. It should be stressed at this point that all noise measurements reported herein are maximum values and that actual noise levels generated by mining operations at the site will be somewhat less. The maximum values were selected for purposes of discussion to present essentially a worst case analysis. It should be noted that the already difficult task of obtaining meaningful noise level measurements was increased by the high noise levels generated by con- struction of a storm sewer along 4th Street. In addition, it was found that the residential traffic in the area generated noise levels frequently exceeding the state standards. AIR POLLUTION The type of air pollution most commonly associated with mining operations is the generation of suspended particulates or as more commonly termed, fugitive dust. The County and State Health Departments as well as the U.S. EPA are charged with enforcing the ambient air quality standards legislated by Congress. This standard is difficult to relate to the quantity of dust generated by a mining -11- . operation. Suffice it to say, however, that to violate the ambient air quality standards by itself, a mining operation has to generate a volume of particulates approximately equal to that volume generated by a two-million ton per year coal strip mine on the arid Western Slope of Colorado. The volume of suspended particulates generated by the existing BESTWAY PAVING COMPANY operations at the site, as well as those of tie proposed operation in the future are so minor that it was concluded at the beginning of the design studies (in September 1976) that detailed monitoring of the volume of particulates generated at the site was not necessary. This was determined through discussions with the U.S. EPA and the State Health Department. As a result, it is difficult to accurately quantify the amount of particulates currently being generated by the mining operation, as well as to project the quantity of particulates that will continue to be generated by a mining operation at the site. The only method at present of quantifying the amount of particulates generated from such an operation is to use emission factors found in various publications. The emission factors estimate the quantity of particulates generated by a particular type of activity. Most of the emission factors listed below were found in U.S. EPA publications. Fugitive Dust Present Maximum of Sources Emission Factor Condition Proposed Operation Agricultural Land 0.25 tons/acre/yr. 59 acres 33 acres Earthmoving 0.8 tons/acre/mo. 4 acres x 1 mo/yr. Aggregate Crushing 0.1 lbs/ton of product 70,000 140,000 TOTALS 18.25 tons/yr. 18.5 tons/yr. Based upon these estimated emission factors and the current site conditions where approximately fifty-nine acres are devoted to agriculture, and the rate of aggregate production is approximately 70,000 tons per year, the total particulate emission from the site is estimated to be approximately 18.25 tons per year. -12- • If the mining operation continues as proposed, during the time of maximum land disturbance, approximately thirty-three acres will be devoted to agricultural uses and approximately four acres will be stripped of overburden per year. If gravel production is approximately doubled, (worst case analysis) the estimated suspended particulate production from the site is projected to be 18.45 tons per year, a decrease of approximately 0.2 tons per year below present levels. This is due to the removal of some agricultural land from productivity temporarily by the mining operation. If aggregate production is maintained at present levels, the fugitive dust emission could be expected to decrease. It is difficult to quantify this when production quantities are not predictable however. It should be noted again that these figures are based upon estimated emission factors but are the best data available. They do confirm intuition, however, because it appears reasonable to expect a decrease in dust generation as less farmland is left bare during Winter and Spring, as stripping operations are less extensive than farming operations, and as the land surface is lowered. The estimated emission factors discussed above do not take into account the use of water to suppress dust. BESTWAY PAVING COMPANY proposes to utilize water trucks during the overburden stripping operation to minimize dust generation to the maximum extent possible. BESTWAY PAVING COMPANY agrees to apply as much water during the stripping operation as is possible without hindering the removal of those materials by making them excessively wet and, therefore, muddy and difficult to handle. In addition, the interior haul roads will be oiled and/or sprayed with water as necessary to minimize dust generation as far as possible. It is antici- pated that the net result of dust suppression methods will be to limit dust generation from the operation below levels presently generated by land development in the area. -13- POND As indicated in the Reclamation Plan in the original report, a pond of approximately fourteen acres will be created near the end of the mining operation. The pond will be formed by removal of gravel normally below the water table in Areas 4, 5, 7 and 8 (see Sheet 3) . This will occur in Phase No. 12. Considering there are a total of fifteen mining phases in the proposed operation, the pond will appear rather late in the operation. The groundwater situation at the site is such that if the existing pit were deepened, a pond would form. The lower- most ten to fifteen feet of gravel is below the water table. There is no question that a pond will form at the site as sufficient material is removed from below the water table. This is not a case where water introduced at the surface will soak into the coarse and permeable gravels, but rather a pond will remain due to the normal movement of groundwater. The maximum depth of the pond will be approximately fifteen feet at its center. The edges will be graded at a slope of five to one (horizontal to vertical ratio) in order to provide a safe perimeter and a safe grade below the water level . This will eliminate the possibility of someone falling into the pond inadvertently. In addition, there is significant movement in the groundwater at the site, and the pond water will be continuously changed. DRAINAGE Questions have been raised concerning the drainage along 4th Street at the south edge of the site. The north edge of 4th Street has no curb and gutter. A storm sewer is presently being constructed along the southern edge of that street. BESTWAY PAVING COMPANY is severely limited in what it can do about storm drainage along 4th Street because of the concrete-lined irrigation ditch -14- which must be allowed to remain between the street and the Bureau of Reclamation power line, and by the presence of the Bureau of Reclamation power line easement itself. Drainage problems along 35th Avenue at the eastern edge of the site should be taken care of by the recently installed storm sewer. The berm to be built along that edge of the site will be made to conform with the borrow ditch at the west edge of 35th Avenue. CONCLUSION It was the intent of this report to provide the Weld County Planning Commission with the supplemental data it requested concerning the proposed development at the site. It should be recognized that the data provided were generated using normal engineering techniques and that the methods of interpretation used were those standard to the industry. It should be noted that this report was written to provide the layman with a basic understanding of the details of the proposed operation and as a result, some aspects have been simplified considerably. Respectfully submitted, R. V. L D AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Robert F. Matthias Geologist, Project Manager RFM/sdk W.O. 2824 I OJ 02 CA = L O 4-I ‘03A-p • O C 4-, CO Cif -a = O -O = CSC = — CM co a s rn d t. c ��* C .6 fill 614 4-- 3'Tas1. o cm ve 0-4 f� ,?,ai• �.�� d a.... s•'S�3iw �� +) CCI 4144421s.44:4414.1.41. a) tn Pto ',010.a4011110:Sd7 OS c) / la . . �' i* 1i O2� ilr p'dG� h•a r+ skiff *'~Aim s a`��1A�,;�'\ ;:.:�,• LCD 0 c o s 114.)t. 02 i..... 102 s"t�iw�• s %%' sw Ate• . I irp,,,,,,,.• . z:P. ‘-\\;Zeirig41441eitittle c •!s��!iifj0w�r•r.48t4:es HUMAN LILA- RELATIONSHIPS . -' - -_� - - - - - - _____ • 4 PAINFULLY LOUD - - , - - - ' Q 120 D' 5HGZ2 EXPOSURE 5OUti- AT LE y - ' o OVE 817 V ' _ AT 150 DECIBELS - 155 DEC?arLc L f iq LIMIT AMPLIFIED SPEECH Q GSEA-; .):__,4 - - 'CAN CAUSE C4N BURN Th=S=:1:d (rj; 7 s O r Lc4.57 HEARI,-(G L055 ' i I TAKEOFF ` _ > de) _ THRESHOLD OF PAIN T a - MAXIMUM VOCAL EFFORT ZC=_ � p i x"01: THRESHOLD OF w _� "'d + 'f �� `=' t DISCOMFORT a . 4=� - - w • ACCELERAT JET PLANE = LOUD CUTOM;31LE t MOTOnCYC s - ENGINE ROOM OF SUBMARINE BORN (3) PASSE'JacR RAMP AT FULLS?EED (?I7 dB) SHOUTING IN EAR (I04 dB) (II5dB) _ (II6d"o) - VERY ANNOYING o \ ` y i rT ^_ ��=r SHOUTING AT o ' 1 g_- _�� -;�_- r ,�� 1 F 'iA� fGA w P1EU11AT - DIESEL-ELECTRIC - TRAIN INSIDES23.1AY 1 > JACi(HA,'!',9 - GENERATOR - WHISTLES (50O) TRAIN (.N.Y.) VERY LOUD CONVERSATION (2 FT.) L (8212) , - (94 dB) - (95 dB) - (95=2) IANNOYING —_ ,T-_`_ _= - _-" — _-- _- T — a - - ' III:7, - .. 4I ra f - c - _ 4 x - LOUD CONVERSATION (2 FT.) o - lij!l�!;� � ,t�/ ice ` � p. _ - - P C'l' TELEPHONE USE DIFFICULT o . - -__.;a �� a - - - FOOD - _ - - - - - GARBAGE. AVER BLENDER _= ALARM CLOCK - • DISPOSAL ' p_ f..(7512) (78 dB) _ ' - - (soda) _ 4 INTRUSIVE - --_ NORMAL CONVERSATION (12 FT.) a '�`a `NS - • - _ � E --:--- ---___:_____:,_.______ ,1 1 w . —=≥TORE - r_ QUIET o ') - . - o _ 4 TYPICAL _ - _ - QUI - _ - - _ BUSINESS OFFICE AIR CONDITIONING (5516) UNIT(20`) •�� I, WHISPER - - � ? - o�� - - �, - - _ • QUIET HOME - _ QUIET RADIO i BEDROO 2 - (37dB) IN HOME - (39dB) - - - - - .. ' ? 4 universities at the present time that offer a degree or program in noi: I I : JUST AUDIBLE a --tics. On the brighter side, there are numerous one-two week courses a‘ } _ rding recognition, evaluation and control of noise problems. One noi. w faker. Consideration of others or just plain courtesy will help elim - HUMAN BREATHING > S 1__6 1 THRESHOLD OF HEARING ' __; T R. V. LORD 6. ASSOCIATES INC. I1 I--c3DEZJ1:3 rl ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGNERS i . • V i� I ` 4 • iiii r l__1 • C6g qc) i—. 8043 , , w ijo.: I iii-, qmA II ____ ....fl, - . _ i Li r,ii APPLICATION FOR CHANGE IN ZONING AN D SPECIAL USE FOR AN OPEN PIT GRAVEL MINING OPERATION WELD COUNTY, COLORADO Submitted By: BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY P. 0. Box 820 Greeley, Colorado December 2, 1977 R. V. LORD 6. ASSOCIATES INC. 3250 Walnut S ./P.O. Box 335/Boulder, Colo. 80302 (303)443-0413 ROBERT V. LORD,JR., P.E. December 2, 1 977 JAMES S. HILLHOUSE, A.I.A. DALE D. SHREVE, Arch./Planner ROGER M. BURTON, Arch./Planner Mr. Tom Honn Mr. Ken McWilliams Department of Planning and Zoning Weld County P. 0. Box 758 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Gentlemen : Enclosed are 10 bound copies of APPLICATION FOR CHANGE IN ZONING AND SPECIAL USE FOR AN OPEN PIT GRAVEL MINING OPERATION, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO submitted by BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY, Greeley, Colorado. Enclosed, but unbound, are the plat and legal description for the site, the originals of the SPECIAL USE APPLICATION AND REZONING APPLICATION, a list of property owners wit.' 500 feet of the site and their addresses, and a check for the amount of 2 ��, to cover application and recording fees. The list of property owners was compiled by the staff of R. V. Lord and Associates, Inc. and is accurate to J� the best of our knowledge. If you have any questions or need additional information, please call . Very truly yours, R. V. LORD AND ASSOCIATES, INC. yI _r Robert F. Matthias, Geologist Project Manager RFM:ckd Enclosures W.O. 2824 ARCHITECTS - ENGINEERS - PLANNERS BOULDER, COLORADO SHERIDAN, WYOMING TABLE OF CONTENTS A. INTRODUCTION 1 1 . Proposed Action 1 2. Application Materials 1 3. Justification for Change in Zoning Request and Special Use Review 2 4. Public Response 6 B. PRESENT SITE CONDITIONS 8 1 . Location 8 2. Ownership 8 3. Topography and Present Land Use 8 4. Present Environment 10 5. Geology and Groundwater 12 6. Flooding and Drainage 13 7. Soils 13 8. Climate 14 C. PROPOSED MINING OPERATION 16 1 . General Operating Methods 16 2. Duration of Operation 18 3. Equipment and Personnel 19 4. Operations Phasing and Site Disturbance 20 5. Groundwater and Well Protection 26 6. Environmental Protection and Safety 27 7. Site Access and Traffic 30 D. RECLAMATION PLAN 33 1 . Goal of Reclamation 33 2. Land Form 33 3. Operating Methods 35 4. Topsoil 37 5. Re-vegetation Plan 37 6. Time Element 39 LIST OF APPENDICES 1 Legal Description - overall 75.0 acre site 2 Legal Description - 45.91 acre site for rezoning and Special Use Review 3 Invitation to Public Meeting 4 Traffic Counts 5 Pavement Mix Design Report 6 Water Analysis Results 7 Source of Legal Right to Enter and Mine (property deeds) 8 Weld County Special Use Application 9 Weld County Rezoning Application 10 Soil Descriptions 11 Water Resource Management Plan 12 Soil Conservation Service Recommendations ACCOMPANYING DRAWINGS 1 Location Map 2 Vicinity Map 3 Mining Plan Map 4 Geologic Cross Sections 5 Test Hole and Geologic Cross Section Location, and Existing Soils Map 6 Reclamation Plan Map A. INTRODUCTION 1 . Proposed Action : In the following report BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY of Greeley, Colorado proposes to expand an existing gravel mining operation presently located in the Northeast one-quarter, Section 2 Township 5 North, Range 66 West , 6th P.M. , at the Northwest corner of the City of Greeley, in Weld County, Colorado. A detailed legal description of the overall 75.0 acre BEST-WAY site is included as Appendix 1 . Drawings No. 1 and 2 show the site location. BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY is currently conducting an open-pit gravel operation and asphalt plant on the northern half of that property. That portion of the overall site is currently zoned A-Agricultural . The gravel and asphalt operations are considered pre-existing, non-conforming uses for this zoning. BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY is seeking a change in zoning for the southern half of the overall property from E-Estate Residential to A-Agricultural . The legal description of the property for which a change in zoning is being sought is included as Appendix 2. In addition to seeking a change in zoning for this portion of the site, BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY is seeking a Special Use Review to permit the mining of gravel from that portion of the site. It is considered critical that the Special Use Review be conducted I simultaneously with the review for change in zoning because a request is being made to down-zone that portion of the site. In the event that a gravel operation not be permitted on the 45.91 acres for which the Special Use Review is being sought, the rezoning request will be withdrawn. 2. Application Materials: The following report contains the materials required for change of zoning , as well as for the Special Use Review. These materials describe the current site conditions and the proposed I -1 - mining and reclamation plans. A set of six drawings is also included with the text. Questions regarding the technical data contained should be directed to Robert F. Matthias, R. V. Lord and Associates, Inc. , P. 0. Box 335, Boulder, Colorado 80302, or Carl V. Hill , Jr. , President , BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY, P. 0. Box 820, Greeley, Colorado 80631 . In addition to this application for change in zoning and Special Use Review, some of those same materials are being submitted to the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board as an application for a regular (112) mining permit. 3. Justification for Change in Zoning Request and Special Use Review: The following are answers to questions posed to all petitioners in Weld County for change in zoning. a. "Is it impracticable, impossible or undesirable to develop this land according to its current zoning classification?" It is impossible to develop the land as an open-pit gravel mine under its current zoning CE-Estate Residential ) . That zoning classification does not provide for this type of land use. b. "Would the proposed re-zoning benefit the entire County by allowing a typical development which is needed and cannot locate in other parts of the County?" Yes, because gravel is a natural resource deposited by geological processes and cannot be found in all locations within the County. By allowing BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY to utilize its own aggregate in its paving operations, competition for paving projects in Greeley and Weld County will be maintained. Because the majority of BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY's actual work is performed for county residents either directly as private individuals or corporations , -2- or indirectly through the municipalities, the re-zoning is considered to benefit the entire County. c. "Would the proposed re-zoning Benefit land adjoining the area requesting the change?" The reclamation plan has been developed to result in a site whose perimeter is lined with trees in an area where trees are not now growing. It is considered that this will enhance the aesthetic value of the area. In addition, the response of some residents adjacent to the site at the Public Meeting discussed below, to this request for re-zoning was positive, because of the effect such re-zoning would have on delaying residential development on the site. Most individuals at that meeting indicated a clear preference for the i proposed gravel mining operation compared to the potential for develop- ment of homes on the portion of the site currently zoned E-Estate Residential . If there are other residents in the area who dispute this stated preference, it can Be stated that the mining activities proposed for the site will not adversely affect the area. The operations plan discussed below contains a detailed discussion of the safety measures proposed for the operation. In addition, it is considered that the pond remaining at the site will actually enhance the property values at the remainder of the site and surrounding area. , d. "What features apply to the property requesting re-zoning that make it logical to re-zone this tract and not to re-zone in a similar manner surrounding properties which might have like land use characteristics?" This particular site has been proved to contain a very large quantity of valuable gravel resources. Surrounding properties do not contain -3- these gravel resources. To allow any other type of development to occur at the site would essentially prohibit forever the extraction of this valuable resource. At the point in the future when the region becomes critically short of sand and gravel supplies, it will be still uneconomical to mine gravel resources in the areas that have already been highly developed. As a result, it is critical that these resources be removed prior to the occurrence of development of any other type. e. "Why are other areas in the County already zoned according to the requested classification?", unsuitable for the development which is proposed?" Other sites are not necessarily unsuitable but in some cases are less suitable than the site under consideration. This site has a very high aggregate-to-overburden thickness ratio. This will allow more aggregate to be removed per acre of disturbed land than in other areas where the aggregate-to-overburden ratio is not nearly so favorable. In addition to minimizing total land disturbance, this results in lower operating costs which, in turn, are reflected by lower paving costs to both private and public customers. Because of the site configuration and the reclamation plan which is proposed in a following section, a pond only one-fifth of the size of the overall site will remain at the conclusion of reclamation operations. In gravel pits located along rivers, it is common for nearly 95 percent of the site to be left as pond. The amount of evaporation from a body of water in a given climate is strictly dependent upon the size of that body of water, independent of its I depth. (A 45 acre pond evaporates three times as much water as a 15 acre pond.) Because evaporation results in a permanent loss of that -4- water, (that water is no longer available for irrigation) , it is obviously in the long term public interest to minimize pond size and water lost to evaporation. The site under consideration will allow extraction of a far greater volume of gravel compared to the amount of pond remaining, than will nearly any other site in the Greeley-Weld County area. Because the site of the pond will be only one-fifth of the entire site, it has been located to enhance the aesthetic value of the surrounding site and of the area. The site is closely adjacent to areas within the City of Greeley and Weld County which are growing and will be developed for residential uses. These areas will require paving and the closer to these areas that the gravel source and asphalt plant are located, the less expensive the paving will be. This is reflected in the prices of the houses themselves, directly benefiting the consumer. In addition, as described above, there is presently on the northern portion of the overall site under consideration, an asphalt plant and gravel plant. Other areas in the county obviously do not have this advantage. It would be necessary to invest large amounts of capital to provide similar facilities at other sites where gravel could also be mined. f. "What proof or evidence is available that the original zoning is faulty or that changing conditions in the area justify re-zoning at this time?" The original zoning of this site as E-Estate Residential was not necessarily faulty because it was not possible to forsee the demand for aggregate in the Greeley-Weld County area, the -5- changing state laws and the Weld County mineral resource resolutions. Subsequent to adoption of the Weld County Zoning Resolution, the Colorado Legislature has enacted House Bill 1529 which requires the removal of gravel or other mineral resource prior to development of a given site for any other purpose. The intention of the legis- lature was very clearly to preserve mineral resources, including gravel , from being covered by other types of development which would completely eliminate the future development of those natural resources. This request for a change in zoning for the site under consideration to permit gravel extraction prior to other development meets perfectly with that legislative intent. 4. Public Response: R. V. Lord and Associates, Inc. held a public meeting at the Franklin School in Greeley on November 16, 1977 to discuss the change in zoning, mining, and reclamation plans discussed herein. A copy of the invitation which was hand-delivered to 160 homes within a 500 foot radius of the site is included as Appendix 3. Twenty-one residents attended that meeting. In addition to informing the residents of BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY' s proposal for mining and reclamation operations at that site, comments from those attending were solicited concerning methods for eliminating or at least reducing perceived adverse impacts, or for enhancing the aesthetic values of the neighbor- hood beyond other measures which had been proposed in the reclamation plan. Subsequent to that meeting, private interviews were held with those residents most interested in providing input into the mining and reclamation plans. This included four families whose homes are located immediately west of the site in Johnson' s Subdivision. The overall -6- response in those public meetings to BEST-WAY' s proposal was positive, because as indicated above, the majority of area residents voicing their opinions were interested in preserving the open space environment of the site rather than allowing additional residential development to occur on the site in the near future. I -7- B. PRESENT SITE CONDITIONS 1 . Location: The site under consideration for the proposed gravel extrac- tion operation consists of 75.0 acres overall , located in the northeast one-quarter of Section 2, Township 5 North, Range 66 West, 6 P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. The site is in an unincorporated portion of Weld County immediately adjacent to the extreme northwestern corner of the City of Greeley, Colorado. This site has been designated as the BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY Pit No. 1 . A detailed legal description of the site is found in Appendix 1 . 2. Ownership: Both the surface rights and mineral rights to the property are owned by BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY and GILSABIND CONVIDAR, both of whose address is P. 0. Box 820, Greeley, Colorado and whose street address is North 35th Avenue, Greeley, Colorado. The President and General Manager of both companies, and the individual to be contacted regarding this application, is Carl V. Hill , Jr. The telephone number for both companies is (303) 353-1654. The applicant has held no other open cut or other type of mining permit. The lands herein do not effect any lands described in Section 1 .56(9) of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board Regulations. Water rights sufficient for the proposed use are owned by BEST-WAY/ GILSABIND CONVIDAR. A detailed discussion of water rights is contained in Appendix 2. 3. Topography and Present Land Use: The site varies in elevation from approximately 4728 ft. above mean sea level to an elevation of approximately 4680 ft. , resulting in an average slope of approximately 1 .5 percent to the northeast, or 84 ft. per mile. The site is located on the south bluff -8- of the Cache la Poudre River. It is bounded on the east by North 35th Avenue, on the south by West Fourth Street, on the west by Johnson's Subdivision, and on the north by the Greeley No. 3 irrigation ditch. Adjacent to the site on the east is a church surrounded by agricultural land to the north and east. South of the site are existing residential developments lying within the city limits of Greeley. Johnson's Subdivision immediately west of the site, is an unincorporated portion of Weld County. A few lots immediately west of the site in that subdivision are vacant at present. Immediately north of the site and topographically lower, is agricultural land and the physiographic flood plain of the Cache la Poudre River. Northeast of the site and also topographically below it is the Friendly Village mobile home park. Outside the southeastern corner of the site is an eleven acre parcel on which are located four occupied residences. The northeast portion of the BEST-WAY site consists of a gravel pit which has been operated intermittently for the past 20 to 30 years. In this existing pitare located the asphalt plant, office, and operations area of BEST-WAY PAVING .COMPANY. The area which has been disturbed by past mining operations and by a limited amount of recent mining includes approximately 15.6 acres. The operations area and plant have been used largely for the production of bituminous concrete for street and highway paving. The majority of the raw aggregate used in the production of bituminous concrete has, in recent years, been trucked to the site from gravel pits located along the river approximately one mile to the south and processed in BEST-WAY' s gravel plant. The resulting graded aggregate is then combined -9- I with asphaltic cement in BEST-WAY's asphalt plant to produce bituminous concrete mix, which is then trucked away to construction projects within the City of Greeley, Weld County, and in surrounding counties. Limited amounts of gravel have been produced from the BEST-WAY site itself. Equipment presently in use or stored at the site includes three loaders, one scraper, a gravel plant including crusher, an asphalt plant, numerous trucks, graders, and asphalt paving machines. The latter three types of equipment are stored at the site but are used on the paving projects. Existing buildings at the site include an office and scale which were built in 1973, the asphalt plant which was built in 1971 , a large shop building which was built in 1976, a smaller older shop and miscellaneous small garages, sheds, etc. The operation presently employs 55 people including the office staff located at the site. The majority of the employees spend the bulk of their working day at the paving projects rather than at the BEST-WAY site. 4. Present Environment: The majority of the site is presently used for the raising of irrigated crops. For the last five to ten growing seasons the majority of the site was planted in corn. The northwestern portion of the site was allowed to lie fallow in recent years. This area has a ground cover of volunteer wheat and miscellaneous annual forbes. Although the general area of the site was orginally a plains, short grass eco-system of grama grass, buffalo grass, western wheat , sedges, and sand sage, none of these species was found on the property during field analysis. Plains Cottonwood trees (Populus sargentii ) border the property on the north along the Greeley No. 3 irrigation ditch. American -10- elms (Ulmus americana) , Siberian elms (Ulmus paruifolia) , and Boxelders (Acer negundo) are located around the farmstead on the north and west sides. Black birds, magpies, starlings, and numerous song birds inhabit the tree biome. The ring-necked pheasant is found in the area when the corn fields are in full stock prior to harvest. Small mammals found in the general area include skunks (Mephitis spp.) , raccoon (Procyon lotor lotor) , field mice (Microtus spp.) , rats (Pettus spp.) , and cotton tail rabbits (Sylvilagus floridanus similis) . Due to the heavy cultivation of the land, most mammals are visitors. Soil disturbance and insufficient ground cover do not permit nesting and burroughing by small mammals. No evidence of prairie dogs (Cynomys ludouicianus ludovicianus) was found. Intermittent flows of water in the Greeley No. 3 irrigation ditch occur during the irrigation season. There is no fish habitat on the property at present. The weed and grass habitat along the No. 3 ditch and the smaller ditches around the site supports garder snakes, toads, and frogs. Insects found at the site generally include grasshoppers, leafhoppers, moths, butterflys, bees, wasps, beetles, ants, flies, mosquito, and other miscellaneous species. The intense farming on and adjacent to the site, and the adjacent sub- division developments have taken their toll of the various biomes originally found in the area. There are no designated endangered species within or adjacent to the property. i -11 - 5. Geology and Groundwater: As noted above, topographically the site forms the southwest bluff of the Cache la Poudre River. Actually, however, the site consists of an old alluvial terrace probably deposited during the much higher flows of the ancestral Poudre River during the Pleistocene or Ice Age. The stratigraphy at the site includes overburden varying in thickness from five to twenty feet, overlying 35 to 145 feet of gravel . This, in turn , overlies claystone bedrock of the Pierre Shale Formation of Cretaceous age. The overburden was largely deposited by a combination of stream deposition, slope wash, and eolian or wind action. The gravel itself was obviously deposited by a major stream because of its relatively coarse-grained nature. The gravel at the site has been used historically as base course beneath pavements. Both detailed testing and long experience have indicated that this material is very satisfactory for this use. More recently the Colorado Highway Department has tested aggregate from the site for suitability as aggregate in bituminous (asphaltic) concrete. The Colorado Highway Department has determined that aggregate produced from the site is suitable for use in paving mixes which meet that Department's rigid construction specifications. A report from the Colorado Department of Highways asphalt lab is included as Appendix 5 The water table at the site is approximately 25 feet below the ground surface resulting in a saturated gravel thickness of approximately 15 feet. The 13 test borings drilled at the site indicate that the direction of movement of the groundwater at the site is north or northeast. The groundwater at the site is of high quality. An analysis of groundwater from the site is included as Appendix 6 . Drawing 2 shows the 1 -12- locations of wells most closely adjacent to the property. From the data supplied by the Colorado State Engineers Office it appears that these wells are obtaining water from the alluvium (sand and gravel ) rather than the underlying bedrock. As shown on that drawing, a significant number of the surrounding wells are not presently in use or have been totally abandoned. The wells which are presently in use are generally north and east of the site, lying much closer to the river than the site is. A more detailed description of groundwater conditions is found in the water management plan, included as Appendix 11 . 6. Flooding and Drainage: In addition to handling its own on-site drainage the site under consideration receives storm runoff from subdivisions located to the south and southwest. This runoff is of such volume that it crosses West 4th Street which has no curb or gutter on its north side, overtops the concrete-lined irrigation ditch along the south edge of the property, and flows down through the site. A storm drain has recently been constructed down North 35th Avenue and it is anticipated that when West 4th Street is re-constructed sometime in the future with adequate curb and gutter, the off-site drainage problem may be alleviated. At present however, both the site drainage and off-site drainage flow down the tailwater ditch on the site and flow into the Greeley No. 3 ditch immediately west of 35th Avenue. 7. Soils: The soils at the site include the Otero Sandy Loam and Ustic Torriorthents. The distribution of these soils is shown on Drawing 5. These are generally deep, well drained soils consisting of sandy loams. -13- The permeability is rapid in these soils, with available water capacity rated as low to noderate. Detailed descriptions of these soil types were supplied by the Soil Conservation Service and are included as Appendix 10. 8. Climate: The site is located in an area of temperate climate with low annual precipitation. The high mean maximum temperature in the Summer is approximately 91°F. , while the low mean minimum temperature in the Winter is approximately 7°F. Annual precipitation averages 11 .28 inches, The prevailing wind is easterly at 12 mph. More specifically, data selected from 22 years of observations is shown on Table I . -14- IIIII -rI -0 o > 3 -I 3 3 3 r = 20 -rl - C m o rn m Rl O - o m -I r)l D -I > > D E O U) < -0 _ 73 Z D Z Z Z MS rri M r D D - m o C) r -I cn -I 3 3 -I (n CD CU < < v r CI • m Z -0 m - D -I N '1 -I D. Z -0 Z Z m v - - -I -I -• IA 0, Iv D O 1 CD - l () m 3 3 3 m rt (D CDD Z D z • r -0 > X X m � U)) rt Cu v o Z -{ • orn r -I c -I --I > z o rt 0 d o 0 o D 70 rn m -I D I CD 1) rt rt CD CI Z 73 D Z _I m v 30 c (D 0 - X -< • o .-. • • m 77 -h 0 0 0zI 0 V) z -71 m O -h -h rn 7D _ -h r e) rn ')I `)'I -n Cu 'r7 r -I - ..� - -rI "rl N -• Cl) - Z -• rt -t U) 0 -t U) rt z v U) 7C rt rt -• 7� .r -• 7c _.-. • • CO -• 7 - • 3 (O n -r'1 CO O O "II -IN Ul • W V O I L , -r7 UI "t 0 m N W • • W V 2. -I rt 0 VI ) V I...0 Ul W ON O Z O U) rt U) -• rt rt 7• -. - N J• N _-- D a cn Z Ul CO w w I -II -t > 1) m • • • w V M D -• V ..r-_ 'I ON V LO V CO C 7 rt -. rt ( 1 O 1 C 3 (O 2 W N.) Ul Z_ V • a' ' I 3 L Ul N.) V N.) ,...MO Ni X7 Z.- W Cr, Z -� • V N N D M ON • Ul I 0O "0 Ul .� Ui vs a' N) a' 7D I U) L. N 3 Ni Ul --- V (D O (D p) • O' N N 3 -0 7 "0 ••< m CO • Vi U1 l0 D rt (D rt UJ 1...0 N ON ON -< Ut (D (D w I 3 w 3 Cr Cr CD (D -s , ON Ul CO _ Cr‘ -I • V 0 W W c_. ......jN m Ul • • • O' C t0 N O VD N Z D co r m V VI l0 _ ON WON L - rn n) O O a V CO Ul V r- V VI CO m rn • V o , o C O CO N W VI CD ON CO (/) • N W O N t0 rn M V W l0 _0 N VI O Co N —I .I` W O% Z LO CO O M W CO CO l0 n .I` W l0 V O O —I W Ul W • Ul CO N I Z Z N • UJ CO O 00 Ul N W CO N C N V —• W 1 0 Z W U.) • W V m rn N W N W a a Ul f') W -� W ON Z U1 Na CO z' 1 Z m v1 • W O C W CO UJ VD V LO V D CO r 1 N N N N N N N N m 73 1 l0 O N N N N N N C7 cn O • a a -r1 N C. PROPOSED MINING OPERATION 1 . General Operating Methods: The operation proposed for the site is an open pit gravel operation utilizing normal construction equipment, including loaders and scrapers. This equipment will operate in a manner normally used in both dry gravel mining methods and construction excavations. No blasting will be required. During the time the actual mining operation occurs, farming will continue on the portions of the site where farming is now conducted and which are not actually disturbed at that time by the mining operation. As will be described below, it is the intention of the mining and reclamation process to return the land to a productive, farmable condition as soon after mining has taken place as possible. As a result, the mining operation has been designed to disturb as little farm land at any given time as possible, and to allow continued irrigation of the land as long as possible. The mining operation described in more detail below has been designed to minimize the area disturbed at any one point in time as well as to minimize double handling of materials , specifically overburden. The block-cut method of mining is proposed for extraction operations at the site. Conceptually, as the overburden is removed from a given area it 1 will be placed directly in the area which has been previously mined. After the overburden is removed from an area, the gravel will be removed from that area until the water table is encountered. At that time, either well points will be installed, or a de-watering trench will be excavated around as much of that area as is required to de-water that particular area. Essentially, the water table will be lowered by pumping only in -16- the area(s) which is being mined and backfilled. A detailed discussion of the methods of disposal of that water are described in a following section. As the water table is lowered in an individual mining area, the gravel which was formerly below the water table will be removed down to bedrock or until the quality of the gravel deteriorates below acceptable standards, whichever event occurs first. While the water table is still artificially lowered in that individual mining area, the overburden from the next mining area will be placed in the de-watered area so that it can be properly compacted and the moisture content controlled during placement. This method is highly preferred to attempting to place the same material in a wet or pond area. De-watering will continue until the overburden has been filled to a grade three feet above the normal water table, including an adequate thickness of top soil . The gravel materials mined at the site are intended for use as base course beneath pavements and as aggregate in asphaltic concrete pavement. At this point there is no intention to use the aggregate from the site as portland cement concrete aggregate. The aggregate mined from the site will be used primarily in BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY's own paving operations, rather than being sold to competitors as raw aggregate. As a result, only enough aggregate must be stockpiled to supply BEST-WAY's own construction projects and smaller stockpiles can be tolerated than if raw aggregate is sold in large volume directly from stockpile. -17- 2. Duration of Operation: The volume of gravel required by a paving company is obviously dependent upon the amount of paving done by that company. This, in turn , is dependent upon the amount of land development in a given I area and upon the amount of re-paving done by counties and municipalities. I Following is a list of assumptions made in order to estimate the duration of the proposed operation : a. Longest Duration (1 . ) No gravel sold as raw aggregate to competitors. (2.) No growth in demand for paving in the area. (3.) Aggregate used for both base course and asphaltic concrete. I (4.) Aggregate not used for portland cement concrete. b. Intermediate Duration (1 .) No gravel sold as raw aggregate to competitors. I (2.) Five percent annual growth in demand for paving in the area. (3.) Aggregate used for both base course and asphaltic concrete. (4.) Aggregate not used for portland cement concrete. c. Shortest Duration (1 .) Gravel sold as raw aggregate in significant quantities (this event is considered improbable) . (2.) Zero to five percent annual growth in demand for paving in the area. (3. ) Aggregate used for both base course and asphaltic concrete. 1 (4.) Aggregate not used for portland cement concrete. Based upon the assumptions stated above, and applying historic pro- duction rates, it appears that the longest duration of the proposed mining operation would be 26 years. The assumption of no growth in demand for paving is considered to have a low probability of occur- rence. It is considered much more highly probable that the assumptions -18- stated in the intermediate case above will apply, resulting in an operation with a duration of approximately 15 to 16 years. The assumptions stated under the third case above (the shortest duration) are also considered improbable. It is BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY's intention to use its aggregate resources which occur In Greeley and Weld County, in that area rather than shipping those materials in bulk by rail to high demand areas such as the Denver Metropolitan Area. As a result, it is not really possible to assign a duration to this third category of assumptions except to state that in this case, the maximum anticipated duration for this operation will be 15 years. In summary, it is most highly probable that the duration of the mining operation at the site will be 15 to 16 years. 3. Equipment and Personnel : At present the equipment in use by BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY includes three loaders, one scraper, seven tandem trucks, and seven tractor trucks which can be used to pull either belly-dump trailers, end-dump trailers, water tankers, or low-boys (equipment- carrying trailers) . It is anticipated that one tandem truck and one tractor unit will be added to the fleet for every five years of continued operation. In addition, it is expected that one additional scraper will be added to the mining operation, resulting in a total of two scrapers, ten tandem and ten tractor rigs working at the site (assuming the intermediate duration case discussed above) . The present mining and paving operation involves a staff of about 55 people working one shift per day, five to six days per week. This figure includes office and maintenance staff as well as the construction personnel . If the assumptions of intermediate duration case stated above are assumed -19- to be correct , and the demand for paving increases annually at the rate of five percent, the staff of BEST-WAY will grow as well , but not at the same rate. Approximately ten staff members are not directly involved in paving operations. The number of these non-construction staff members will show relatively little affect by a moderate increase in production. The remaining 45 staff members involved in the construction aspect of the company's operation will increase in number at a rate of five percent over 16 years. The resulting staff would total approximately 100. It should be noted, however, that the majority of these employees will be working at construction sites rather than at the mining site itself. 4. Operations Phasing and Site Disturbance: The overall mining operation has been divided into 16 phases. The mining plan shown on Drawing 3 shows the site divided into 15 phase areas. Roughly the mining will take place I in the area whose number corresponds to the phase number. As noted above, it appears most highly probable that the duration of the operation will average approximately one year per phase. A detailed description of the mining activities to occur in each phase is as follows: Phase I : At the commencement of overburden stripping, that material will be used to construct a four foot high berm along the west property boundary adjacent to Area 1 to help shield that operation from adjacent residences. In addition, four foot high berms will be built along the south edge of the property along Fourth Street and along the east edge of the property along North 35th Avenue. Additional overburden will be used to build a ten foot high temporary wind block berm across the northwest corner of the site to help maintain the present, near-windless condition of the operations area. Some additional overburden may be i -20- stockpiled within Area I to allow access to the gravel . The gravel in Area 1 will be removed down to the water table, and de-watering operations will begin. The deeper gravel will be mined, the overburden will be replaced and de-watering operations will cease. Area I will be seeded at this point. The stockpile(s) in Area 15 will be reshaped and seeded. Phase II : The overburden will be removed from a portion of Area 2 and will be stockpiled in an adjacent portion of that same area. The gravel will be mined down to bedrock, de-watering that area when required, and the stockpiled overburden will be replaced in that excavation. The remaining portion of Area 2 will be stripped and mined, with the over- burden being placed in the previously mined portion of Area 2. In addition, the existing overburden stockpile from Area 15 will be placed in Area 2. Area 15 will be reseeded. Phase III : As Area 3 is stripped, all of the overburden is placed in Area 2. All of the gravel is mined from Area 3, de-watering that area as required. Phase IV: As the overburden is stripped from Area 4, all of it is placed in Area 2 which should result in the total filling of Area 2. Only the gravel above the normal water table is mined from Area 4 at this point. Phase V: As the overburden is stripped from Area 5, it will all be placed in Area 3. Only the gravel above the water table will be mined from Area 5 at this point. -21- Phase VI : As the overburden is removed from Area 6, it will be placed in Area 3. All of the gravel above the water table is to be mined from Area 6 at this point, leaving the deeper gravel until later. Phase VII : As the overburden is removed from Area 7,' nearly all of it will be placed in Area 3, which then will be filled to final grade. The remainder will be placed in the eastern portion of Area 4 where all the gravel has been removed at approximately the same time that gravel is being removed from Area 7. In Area 7, only the gravel above the normal water table is removed at this point. Area 3 is seeded. Phase VIII : As the overburden is stripped from Area 8, it will be placed in the eastern portion of Area 4, with the remainder being placed in Area 6. Mining will be phased so that the wet gravel in Area 6 is removed (using de-watering techniques), permitting the overburden from Area 8 to be placed directly in Area 6. In Area 8, the gravel below the water table will be left until later. Areas 2, 3 and the eastern portion of Area 4 will be farmed at this point. Phase IX: As the overburden is removed from Area 9, it will be placed in the remainder of Area 6 and will be used to fill the eastern portion of the Area 7. Concurrent with the stripping of overburden from Area 9, the wet gravel in the southeastern one-half of Area 7 will be mined in order to provide a location for placement of the overburden from Area 9. All gravel will be mined from Area 9. Area 6 will be seeded at this point. The combination of Areas 1 and 6 results in a total area of approximately eight acres on which farming would begin. Phase X: As the overburden is removed from Area 10 the remaining portion of Area 7 outside of the pond will be filled completely. Area 9 will be filled completely anda portion of Area 10 will be filled with overburden. All of the gravel is mined from Area 10 at this point. Area 9 can now be farmed. -22- Phase XI : As the overburden is removed from Area 11 , it will all be placed in the northwest portion of Area 10, and the northeast portion of Area 11 , leaving Areas 10 and 11 still short of material . This material must be placed in the locations described in order to form the southern edge of the pond. Phase XII : The gravel in Areas 4, 5, 7, and 8 will be removed completely by de-watering the overall area. When the gravel is removed from those areas and the edges of the cut are properly shaped and graded, the de-watering will cease and as the water rises, the pond will form. Phase XIII : As the overburden is removed from Area 12 , it will be placed in Area 10, filling it completely. The remainder will be placed in Areas 11 and 12. At that point Area 11 will be completely filled, and the remainder will be replaced in the portions of Area 12 that have been mined at that point. All of the gravel is removed from Area 12, de--watering when necessary. Areas 10 and 11 can now be farmed, Phase XIV; As the overburden is removed from Area 13, it will be placed in Area 12 which will be completely filled at the end of this phase. All of the gravel will be mined from Area 13, de-watering when necessary. Area 12 can now be farmed. Phase XV; As the overburden is removed from Area 14, it will be placed in Area 13, completely filling it. The eastern portion of the temporary wind block berm will be removed to allow mining of that -23- area. All of the gravel will be removed from Area 14, de-watering when necessary. Area 13 can now be farmed. Phase XVI : As the overburden is removed from Area 15, enough of it will be placed in Area 14 to completely fill that area, and the remainder will be replaced in Area 15. The remainder of the temporary wind block berm will be removed and used as backfill in Area 15. It will probably not be possible to remove all of the gravel from Area 15 due to a shortage of backfill . Only enough gravel will be removed to allow grading to final contour. At this point the mining operation at the site is completed and all portions of the site will have been I reclaimed to a farmable condition with the exception of the pond remaining in Areas 4, 5, 7, and 8. The Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board has defined different degrees - of disturbance in a mining and reclamation operation. The definition of those three types of disturbance are as follows: Major Disturbance: That area of a mining operation that includes excavations, overburden spoils, and topsoil stockpiles. Moderate Disturbance: That area of a mining operation which is a result of backfilling of an open cut, stabilization of waste dumps, leveling of overburdened soils, the smooth grading and the distribu- tion of topsoil or other suitable approved plant growth median. Also includes within the affected area on-site privateways , roads, railroads, evaporation or settling ponds, leeching dumps, work parking storage or discharge areas and areas in which structures, facilities, equipment, machines, tools, or other materials or properties which result from or are used in the mining operation are situated. -24- Minor Disturbance: That area of a mining operation which is under- going preparation immediately prior to planting or seeding, is being planted or seeded, or has been planted or seeded and has not been released from bond upon full completion of all reclamation require- ments as set forth in the permit. The expected timetable for the mining operation and the amount of land disturbed at any point in the mining operation (using the definitions above) is found in the following table. This table assumes that the mining operation will be of an intermediate duration, that is, 15 to 16 years as discussed in a previous section. The timetable phasing schedule, and degree of disturbance anticipated is as follows: APPROXIMATE DEGREE OF DISTURBANCE (ACRES) PHASE YEAR MINOR MODERATE MAJOR 3,6 16,1 5,3 I (15) (Plant) (1 ) II 2 8.9 16, 1 4.2 " (1&15) (Plant) " (2) III 3 3.6 - - - 16.1 9. 1 (15) (Plant) (2&3) IV 4 a 16. 1 15.0 (Plant) (2, 3, & 4) V 4z 4.2 16. 1 13.8 (2) (Plant) (3, 4, & 5) VI 5 0 16. 1 16.2 (Plant) (3, 4, 5, & 6) VII 6 0 16. 1 25.9 (Plant) (3, 4, 5, 6, 7) VIII 7 4.9 16.1 20.9 (3) (Plant) (4, 5, 6, 7, 8) IX 72 O 16.1 23.9 (Plant) (4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9) X 2.9 16. 1 24.7 (6) (Plant) (4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10) 5. 1 16.1 23.07 XI 10 (9, l of 7) (Plant) (4, 5, Z of 7, 8, 10, 11 ) 16.1 23.07 XII 11 0 (Plant) (4, 5, z of 7, 8, 10, 11 ) XIII 13 0 16.1 10.3 (Plant) (10, 11 , 12) XIV 14 7. 1 16. 1 6.3 (10, 11) (Plant) (12, 13) XV 15 3.2 16.1 6.6 (12) (Plant) (13, 14) 3.1 16. 1 7.3 XVI 16 (13) (Plant) (14, 15) Those numbers enclosed in parenthesis indicate Areas affected. -�5- M 5. Groundwater and Well Protection: The sequential mining of the site requires that de-watering occur in an area for a certain length of time followed by a period of time during which no de-watering will occur. The precise length of the time during which de-watering occurs will be ' dependent upon the exact duration of the extraction operation below the ' normal water table within that small mining area, which in turn, is controlled by the demand for gravel at that point. The exact prediction of the times and lengths of de-watering activities are beyond the scope of this mining plan. In general , however, de-watering will occur when gravel is mined below the normal water table, which will be from 1/3 to 1/2 of the total time required to mine a given phase. The de-watering operation will result in the lowering of the water table in the immediate vicinity of that mining area. There are essentially three options for disposal of the pit water. a. Pumping it into the newly constructed storm sewer along North 35th I I Avenue, causing it to flow directly into the Poudre River b. Pumping it directly into Greeley No. 3 ditch which would return it i • directly to the Poudre River. c. Pumping it back into the ground using an injection well , or a series of such wells, located at sufficient distance from the de-watering area as to avoid recycling of water. These three possibilities are discussed in more detail in the water resource management plan included as Appendix 11 . That water resource -26- management plan has been filed in the district court for Water Division No. One, State of Colorado. The alternative selected will be the result of that court action and cannot be predicted at this point. If either alternative a or b of the above is selected an application will be made for an NPDES Permit from the Colorado Department of Health. If alternative c above is selected, an application will be made for a permit for operation of subsurface of disposal systems from the Colorado Department of Health. Wells have been selected from those shown on Drawing 2 for continued monitoring by the staff of R. V. Lord and Associates, inc. to provide data to allow determination of whether adjacent wells are being adversely affected by the de-watering operation. It is not anticipated that such adverse affect will be noted, but BEST-WAY considers it advisable to collect that type of data in the event I that such claims are made. 6. Environmental Protection and Safety: It was noted in an earlier paragraph I that the natural biomes of the area have been severly disturbed as a result of residential development around the site and farming at the site itself. Therefore, mining operations would have negligible additional environmental impact on the ecosystems at the site. The chemical analyses of water from the site indicate that water pollution should not be expected as an outcome of de-watering operations at the site whereby groundwater is caused to flow directly to the Poudre River or is reinjected into the i alluvial aquifer. Gravel mining and processing and production of asphalt paving at the site also should not result in water pollution. No detailed ; noise studies have been made on or around the site but operations at the -27- site generally produce noise at a low level . Operations at the site are presently limited to daylight hours and this policy will be continued for the life of the proposed operation. The mining plan has been designed to ensure that mining operations at the site always occur such that a cut face occurs between the mining operation and the relatively heavy residential development to the south and west of the site. This will minimize noise produced by mining activities. In addition, the site will be surrounded on the west, south, and east sides by a four foot high berm covered with trees which should help reduce the amount of noise made as well as to greatly enhance the visual effect at the site. The berms at the site perimeter will be built near the begining of the operation to permit a dense growth of trees, bushes and other types of vegetation to shield the site from adjacent streets and residences to the maximum extent possible. it is anticipated that the construction and vegetation of these berms will actually enhance the aesthetic value of the neighborhood over its present level . The type of environmental pollution most commonly associated with operations of the type proposed for the site is the addition of particulate matter (dust) to the air in the area. Fugitive dust has two sources in gravel operations : wind erosion of fine-grained overburden materials, and rock dust generated by the crusher. It is the overburden material at the site I I which is considered the most likely source for fugitive dust. The mining operations at the site have been sequenced to minimize stockpiling of overburden materials. This will , in turn , minimize the amount of material which can be removed by the wind from stockpiles. As the overburden is removed it will generally be placed directly in a previously mined portion of the pit and considerably below original ground surface. This will result in the placement of this material in a highly sheltered condition, -28- thus minimizing the amount of wind erosion. At present, after corn is harvested at the site in the Autumn, the corn stocks are plowed under and the ground surface is allowed to remain unvegetated. This is the same practice as is utilized on most other farms in the area. After a portion of the site has been returned to a farmable condition the ground surface will be at a lower elevation than the original grade. Because of this, it is expected that the amount of material picked up by the wind will be less after crops are harvested than at present where the ground surface is higher and more directly affected by the wind. The four foot high berms to be constructed around the perimeter of the site will be vegetated as will be vegetated as will be discussed below, during the first growing season after construction of those berms to minimize the amount of bare soil subject to wind erosion. The gravel materials which will be processed through the crusher at the site will be in a moist condition. This should result in a much lower production of dust than if the material were dry. The proportion of rock dust generated in the crushing operation is normally insignificant compared to the quantities of overburden handled at the site. Any stockpiles of overburden at the site which must be constructed will be seeded as soon as possible to minimize dust generation. The only real consideration regarding safety which applies to the site is the possibility of persons being injured by falling into the pit itself ' while mining operations are being conducted. The cut slopes in gravel will be maintained so that they are not steeper than 2: 1 (horizontal to vertical ratio) . Places where overburden cuts will not naturally assume a 2:1 slope they will be benched back from the top of the gravel in five -29- foot steps to insure that a person or animal venturing on the site despite the large number of No Trespassing signs at the perimeter, cannot be seriously injured. There will be no ponding of water at the site until Phase XII , by which time the banks of the pond will be cut to form 3:1 (horizontal to vertical ratio) from five feet above to ten feet below the expected water line. The maximum slopes remaining at the perimeter of the site will be 3:1 (horizontal to vertical ratio) . (This will result in a slope similar to the pitch on a normal 4/12 roof.) The equipment used at the site for mining and hauling of gravel has back up signals as required by OSHA. 7. Site Access and Traffic: The present primary access to the site is i from West 35th Avenue at the northeast corner of the site. It is proposed that this continue to be the main access to the site. The Weld County Engineering Department is currently negotiating with BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY to reconstruct the entrance to the site in I order to facilitate the movement of heavy trucks entering or exiting the site, as well as to coordinate the site entrance with the recently redesigned street. Present secondary access to the site is through the homestead at the southeast corner of the site. This is on the property not owned by BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY and has been accomplished through the cooperation of the land owner. Because it is anticipated that it may not always be possible to obtain this sort of cooperation it is proposed that the secondary or emergency access to the site during mining operations be along West Fourth Street at the east end of the south edge of the site. An alternative access to the site could be west through Johnson' s Subdivision by way of existing streets, but -30- because of the existing residential development in that area, this alternative is not considered at all desireable. During the year of 1977 BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY has kept accurate records of trucks hauling asphalt to various paving projects located in the region. The data are summarized in Appendix 4. Destinations within the City of Greeley were not subdivided by BEST-WAY, so it was assumed that approximately one-third of the total Greeley destinations were reached by turning east on Fourth Street while the other two-thirds were reached by going south on West 35th Avenue and turning east on West Tenth Street. Traffic count data supplied by the City of Greeley and Weld County are also included in Appendix 4. Comparison of these three sets of data indicate that the traffic created by BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY's operation is negligable compared to the average daily traffic recorded in the same area. By comparing actual traffic counts it can be observed that BEST-WAY traffic averages less than 4 percent of the established daily traffic. The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) figures shown include two-way traffic on the street and have not been corrected. The BEST-WAY traffic count figures actually vary from 0 to 146 round trips a day with the actual average well under 100. In March 1977, the time period during which the City of Greeley conducted its traffic count on West 35th Avenue, BEST-WAY contributed an average of less than 3 percent of the total traffic measured on that street. In summary, it is not considered that the volume that BEST-WAY contributes to the area is significant. -31- In addition, it should be noted that it is the intention of the City and County to upgrade West 35th Avenue to handle larger volumes of traffic. It is anticipated that the traffic due to BEST-WAY PAVING C0MPANY' s continued operation of the site will grow at a much slower rate than will the overall traffic, and as a result, the effect of continued gravel and asphalt production operations at the site will be relatively insignificant in terms of relative impact. Finally, it has been noted previously that BEST-WAY has, in recent years, obtained the majority of its gravel from pits along the Poudre River, north of the site on West 35th Avenue. This has required that gravel be hauled onto the site as well as away from it, essentially I doubling the volume of traffic at the entrance. Continued production of aggregate from the site would actually reduce traffic at BEST-WAY' s entrance onto West 35th Avenue. -32- D. RECLAMATION PLAN 1 . Goal of Reclamation: The reclamation plan developed for the site is intended to maximize productive use of agricultural land during and after the mining operations are conducted at the site. In conjunction with the mining plan, the reclamation plan has been developed to maintain the majority of the site in a farmable condition as long as possible prior to mining, and to return it to a farmable condition as soon after mining as possible. The reclamation and mining plans have also been designed to maximize the amount of land at the site which can be irrigated before, during, and after the mining operations. In essence, the goal of the reclamation plan is to minimize disturbance at the site. Considering the relatively long time span of the operation (assumed to be 16 years as stated above) it is pointless to speculate about the ultimate land use in the distant future. It should be noted, however, that the final site configuration will lend itself equally to such ultimate uses as park and open space, residential , or light industrial development. BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY intends to maintain the portion of the site shown on Drawing No. 6 as a permanent plant site even after all of the gravel is removed from the site. 2. Land Form: After mining and reclamation operations are completed at the site, the interior of the site will be gently sloping toward the center of the site. A 15 acre pond approximately 15 feet deep will remain at the center of the site, with a 16 acre asphalt and gravel plant site at the north edge where those facilities now exist. The east, west, and south perimeters of the site will consist of 3:1 slopes (horizontal to vertical ratio) . (In layman' s terms, the slope at the perimeter of the site will -33- approximate the pitches of roofs found in the area.) Berms will be constructed around the perimeter of the site along North 35th Avenue at the east edge of the site, along West Fourth Street at the south edge of the site, and along the west boundary of the site from the approximate halfway point to the northern edge of the site. Neighbors adjoining the southern portion of the west side of the site have requested that no berm be constructed along their property to insure that their eastern view is not obstructed. More detailed estimates of land devoted to particular conditions, such as perimeter slopes, are found in Appendix 11 . The final grade proposed for the site was established by determining the present water table levels and insuring that a cover of three feet of materials was provided everywhere, with the exception of the pond in the center of the site. A trade-off had to be established between the quantity of material removed from the site and sold, and the final condition of the site after mining and reclamation operations are completed. By removing gravel from the site, the general surface of the site will be lowered accordingly. By establishing a minimum cover over the water table of three feet a material imbalance is created if excessive materials are removed from the site. It was, therefore, necessary to evaluate the economics of removing additional materials from the site versus the aesthetic and economic values of the site if the site were left in a more usable condition. The proposed configuration is considered to be the optimum condition, maximizing both the quantity of materials removed from the site and the subsequent condition of the site. As indicated above it is BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANYts intention to maintain its asphalt and gravel plant on approximately 16 acres at the north edge -34- of the site after all mining has been completed at the site. The exposed gravel surface presently existing in that area is considered the optimum condition for that land use. Should BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY elect to remove its plants from the site, however, it would be desirable to topsoil and re-vegetate that portion of the site. If that circumstance should occur it would be most practicable to mine additional gravel from the southern portion of the plant site, thereby extending the pond. This would essentially reduce the area requiring topsoil . At the same time, it should be possible to remove some of the topsoil in the surrounding, previously mined areas. It would be necessary to insure that sufficient material was left in those areas, however, to provide adequate cover above the water table, as well as to provide sufficient material for the support of vegetation. At the same time, the berms could be removed and the material in those berms used as topsoil to cover the former plant site. As indicated, this event is considered to have a low probability of occurrence, but it was felt necessary to consider that possibility. This would have the effect of increasing the farmable area at the site. 3. Operating Methods; Ignoring momentarily the concept of reclamation for its own sake, the most economical method of mining at the site is to place overburden removed in a given area in a previously mined area so that it must be handled only once. If that material were to be placed in any location except a previously mined area, it would be necessary to move that material subsequently, approximately doubling the material handling costs. Placing the overburden materials in the previously mined areas is also the first major step in reclamation of the site. Because the same step is actually a necessary part of the mining operation, -35- it is considered that the reclamation efforts at the site are really those efforts directed toward establishing a more useful final grade than other- wise might remain, and efforts directed toward re-vegetating areas which i will not be farmed (such as the 3:1 perimeter slopes) . Because there is I at least some potential for some type of future development at the site, particularly residential , it is considered highly desirable to place the overburden materials in a compacted condition suitable for future development, if indeed that shouls occur. The overburden materials will be compacted to not less than 90% of maximum density as determined by AASHO Method T-99 (standard Proctor density) . The details of where overburden materials will be obtained during mining and where they will be placed during the reclamation operations, as well as the time frame, i are shown in the table in Section C dealing with the mining operations. ! More specifically related to the reclamation aspects of the operation, the following is a time table when each given phase area will be reclamed: PHASE YEAR RECLAMATION AREA ACREAGE IS COMPLETED 1 5.3 2 l 2 4.2 41 ! 3 4.9 7 4 5.9 12 5 4.3 12 6 2.9 12 7 4. 1 12 8 3.8 12 9 3.1 10 10 3.6 14 11 3.6 14 12 3.2 15 13 3. 1 16 14 3.5 16 15 3.6 16 -36- It should be noted that these are estimates of the time required for completion of reclamation based upon the assumption an operation of inter- mediate duration (15 to 16 years) , discussed in a previous Section. 4. Topsoil : It is considered that at a minimum, the upper-most 24 inches of materials at the site are topsoil . The upper-most 24 inches of material stripped from each phase area will be segregated from the remainder of the overburden and considered as topsoil . As the overburden beneath the topsoil is placed in the previously mined areas it will be covered with 18 to 36 inches of this material considered topsoil . This material will be removed from an area of approximately 59 to 60 acres and will be replaced in an area of approximately 44 acres. (No topsoil material will be placed in the pond area.) As a result, it is considered that an adequate depth of topsoil will be provided in the reclamation operation. If localized areas of lower quality aggregate (containing excessive sand or clay) are encountered, this material will be considered overburden and handled as such, being covered with top soil as with the rest of the overburden. 5. Re-vegetation Plan: Recommendations for re-vegetation at the site were solicited from the West Greeley Soil Conservation District. Those recom- mendations are included as Appendix 12. BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY proposes to re-vegetate the site according to those recommendations. In considering both the recommendations of the Soil Conservation Service and the proposed site configurations, it is considered that six types of re-vegetation situations exist. Those types are described below together with a descrip- tion of the proposed methods for treatment of each type. -37- a. North and east facing 3:1 slopes: These slopes will be seeded according to the Soil Conservation Service recommendations for grasses, and in addition, tree seedlings of the varieties recommended by the Soil Conservation Service will be planted on the slopes. b. West and south facing 3: 1 slopes: The above comments apply here. c. Reclamed areas not large enough to farm: These areas will be planted to alfalfa and essentially left to production of this grass until such time as they are large enough to actively farm. d. Reclamed areas large enough to farm: These areas will be farmed as soon as possible after final grade is reached. This category will subsequently incorporate those areas described in c. above as the total area becomes large enough to cultivate. It is anticipated that crops will consist largely of alfalfa and corn. e. Berm areas: A single berm will contain two aspects: eastern and western, or northern and southern. As a result the Soil Conservation Service recommendations discussed in paragraphs a. and b. above regarding both seedling to grasses and planting of trees apply. f. Plant site: As indicated above, it is considered improbable that the plant site will be abandoned. If it were to be abandoned, however, the measures for topsoiling the area described above will apply. In addition, because of the relatively flat nature of this area, it would be brought into cultivation as well . -38- 6. Time Element : The table in Section 3 above gives the best estimate available as the time for completion of reclamation operation. Because the reclamation operation is so intimately combined with the mining operation, and because the duration of the mining in a given phase area is dependent upon demand for paving at that point, it is difficult to assign a high degree of confidence to the time estimates. It can be said, however, that at least as early as the season following completion of reclamation in a given area, whether it be an entire phase area o . a portion of a phase area brought to final grade, that area will be vegetated in one of the six manners described in paragraph 5 above. In no case will more than five years lapse between commencement of reclamation operations and final success of reclamation. I -39- APPENDIX 1 Legal Description-Overall 75.0 Acre Site A 75 acre tract of land located in the Northeast Quarter (NEt) of Section Two (2) , Township Five (5) North, Range Sixty-six (66) West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Weld County, Colorado and being further described as follows: Commencing at the Center Quarter Corner (Cen 1/4 Cor) of said Section 2, and considering the South line of the Northeast Quarter (NE.) of said Section 2 to bear South 89° 55' 53" East, with all bearings herein being relative thereto: Thence South 89° 55' 53" East, along the South Line of the Northeast Quarter (NEt) of said Section 2, a distance of 1242.80 feet to the True Point of Beginning, said Point being the Southeast Corner (SE Cor) of JOHNSON SUBDIVISION as platted and recorded in the records of Weld County, Colorado; thence along the Easterly boundary line of said JOHNSON SUBDIVISION by the following two (2) bearings and distances: North 13° 44' 30" West, 1300. 19 feet; North 09° 12' 16" West, 1040.61 feet to a point on the South bank of Greeley Canal No. 3; Thence along the South bank of said Greeley Canal No. 3 by the following nine (9) bearings and distances: North 84° 39' 18" East, 81 .45 feet; South 89° 00' 30" East, 254.37 feet; South 750 18' 29" East, 125.79 feet; South 66° 09' 38" East, 380.46 feet; South 63° 20' 48" East, 230.77 feet; South 49° 27' 12" East, 458.03 feet; South 69° 28' 12" East, 214.99 feet; South 80° 30' 45" East, 112.96 feet; South 73° 04' 44" East, 266.46 feet; Thence South 06° 10' 17" West, along the East Line of the Northeast Quarter (NE4) of said Section 2, a distance of 886.39 feet; thence North 89° 55' 53" .�s West, along the North Line of an 11 .540 acre tract of land, 766.69 feet; thence South 06° 10' 17" West, along the West Line of said 11 .540 acre tract of land, 659.36 feet to the South Line of the Northeast Quarter (NE4) of said Section 2; thence North 890 55' 53" West, along the South Line of the Northeast Quarter (NEk) of said Section 2, a distance of 851 .81 feet to the True Point of Beginning. APPENDIX 2 cis t/7.5/i1.�4:1 Legal Description - Site For Rezoning and Special Use Review \�b 0 • A /t/ Wf• dec z / 788 55 /7'E: • t •Zds��J/ • ii .- /OS 6✓' ' H . • ..' _ 7--,.- 2�1 - I V N• • : -._ _ . I . . . , _ . . . ... , r . 1 -e... _ 5 9/ ACRES lk)` 0 lb 11 W� li , } 7 , € fi5 ' :/=3GLo ' Ii `V J / \O o 61 • ,69 lc 1 -4..."' l • .., , Jtc)5,:„ .,,,53..,.. 77 8 Aii/7o7',8�9,%7./,:r9 . I L/�?z&rte' _ '`� 8r`� -W.-�4Ih-STREET--- , ';r G.-76/7Ar S'EG� 2 • .SoUf/i�i7� /t/E-/� -1 I- 7.-5y .e:�✓. 2 I I t. LEGAL DESCRJPTION A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1/4) OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 66 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO AND BEING FURTHER DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE CENTER QUARTER CORNER (CEN. 1 /4 COR) OF SAID SECTION 2 AND CONSIDERING THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) OF'SAID SECTION 2 TO BEAR SOUTH 89°55'53" EAST, WITH ALL BEARINGS HERE- IN BEING RELATIVE THERETO: - - 'THENCE SOUTH 89°55'53" EAST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) OF-SAID SECTION 2, 'A DISTANCE OF 1242.80 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER (SECOR) OF JOHNSON SUBDIVISION, AS PLATTED AND RECORDED IN THE RECORDS OF WELD COUNTY, COLORADO; • THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY -BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID JOHNSON SUBDIVISION BY THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) BEARINGS AND DISTANCES: _ ' NORTH 13°44'30" WEST, 1300.19 FEET; NORTH 09°12' I6"-EAST, 105.61 FEET; TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF (S 1/2) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1/4) SECTION 2; i THENCE SOUTH 88°55' 17" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF (S 1/2) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) SECTION 2, A'DISTANCE OF 2054.69 FEET; - THENCE SOUTH 06°10' 17" WEST, ALONG THE EAST .LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1/4) OF SAID SECTIO N 2, A DISTANCE OF 678.88 FEET• - THENCE NORTH 89°55'53" WEST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF AN 11 .540 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, 766.69 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 06°10'17" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID 11 .540 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, 659.36 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1/4) OF SAID SECTION 2; THENCE NORTH 89°55'53" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1 /4) OF SAID SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 851 .81 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID TRACT OF LAND CONTAINS 45.91 ACRES AND IS SUBJECT TO ANY RIGHTS-OF-WAY OR OTHER EASEMENTS AS GRANTED OR RESERVED BY INSTRUMENTS OF RECORD OR AS NOW EXISTING ON SAID TRACT OF LAND - SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE - - I: I DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAT AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION WERE PREPARED UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION . AND ARE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. - -- 14,... .. AiLl./ �':.eeeDR/CU' , - • ARTHUR F. UHRICH REGISTERED .***-`GISrCR4'4)V-)% - REGDSTRATIONRNUMBERADO 7239 .-s- if _ i • • ' DRWN. ' '�ES'o�-- /- DATE �/!/�/ '17 -. ____- 72 3 9 Ell.; -CHECK SCALE '2''y-'/� �_ TEC APPROVED44 - Architects• Engineers• Planners In• (P/4 ......•0�P�-- Nelson, Haley, Patterson & Quirk, Inc. ��`�F Cil� _ REVISIONS Cornbustion Engineering, Inc. "N _ .2021 Clubhouse Drive • 1Greeley, Colorado 80631 R. V. LORD & ASSOCIATES INC. 3250 Walnut St./P.O. Box 335/Boutdor, Colo. 80302 (303) 443-0413 APPENDIX 3 Dear Friend: You are cordially invited to attend an informal public meeting at 7:30 P.M. , Wednesday, November 16th in the cafeteria of Franklin School on 35th Avenue. The purpose of the meeting will be to discuss the plans proposed for the Bestway Paving Company' s operations located near the intersection of 4th Street and 35th Avenue. Our firm has been retained to plan for and design a gravel mining operation for Bestway at their site which surrounds their existing asphalt plants immediately northwest of the City of Greeley. At the meeting we would like to show you what Bestway has in mind for that site, including the gravel pit operation, its appearance and environmental impact, and the proposed reclamation plan. Our plans are not completed yet and we would like to identify your concerns so that they can be addressed in our final proposal and design for continued operations at that site. We are serious about giving you the opportunity to voice your concerns and would appreciate your attendance at the meeting. Our present plans include only one such meeting, but if necessary, we will hold additional public meetings or will meet with smaller groups to discuss the concerns of the neighborhood. Written comments may be directed to Bestway or to me. Very truly yours, R. V. RD AND ASSOCIATES, INC. OU21V4 . Robert F. Matthias Geologist/Project Manager RFM: ss W.O. 2824 ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGNERS • APPENDIX 4 BEST-WAY TRAFFIC COUNTS-1977 Direction of Travel-One Way Trips City of # of Days Month North South East West Greeley Total With Trips Jan. 1 8 24 33 10 Feb. 1 1 1 85 87 7 Mar. 13 1 538 552 15 Apr. 15 117 35 59 438 664 14 May 38 49 7 380 581 1055 20 Jun. 43 520 386 949 22 Jul . 5 17 1 614 482 1119 18 Aug. 51 133 2 176 518 . 880 19 Sep. 1 99 248 493 841 17 Oct. 5 192 135 396 723 19 TOTALS 124 466 237 2141 3941 6903 161 5E5r-L.IAY PAV I kJG CO. TRAFFIC COvtlr ( I-I r THROUGH IO-25-77) h 2824 tJORTH 1 EAST BOU 17 ---- 6 APT C STREET fJ O RTf-1 8CD APT W Alt 1111 > IJOr TO SCALE Q SITE to m GREELEY ( 1/3 OF TOTAL) I Co APT . 4-n-I STREET 5OIJT1-14 KIESTBOJIJP GREELEY (�¢3 PTTOTAL) GFiEELE.Y (2/3 or TOTAL) 32. APT J5 36 (OLD) KIEST BotitJD 26) APT " soJn-looU J �--- • (o API TRAFFIC odkir5 IkI. 4-T*-I STREET 11\J. 35 T hl AVE . . (DATA _JPPLIEP BY CITY OF CREELS PATE : MARC-I ) 1977 SITE -- • 25`95 APT 1 . 26350 ADT 4rr1 5TREEr 2125 ADT W -7 u1 . > Q z F- In NIORTI-I z tJOT TO SCALE 33 f' I v, f t;, z ' o/1 C) I ' 1 • STATE DEPARTMENT OF r-iiGHWAYS JACK KINSTLINGER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS DISTRICT 4 E N. HAASE DWIGHT M BOWER CHIEF ENGINEER (saeN�"a DISTRICT ENGINEER STATE OF COLORADO P O BOX 850-1420 • 2ND ST. • GREELEY. COLORADO 80631 • (303) 353-1232 April 25, 1977 APPENDIX 5 Bestway Paving Co. c% Carl Hill North 35th Ave. Greeley, Colo. 80631 Dear Carl: In response to your request, we sampled aggregate which you indicated was crushed from raw material obtained from the high terrace deposit south of your plant. The samples were taken on March 15, 1977 and sent to our Denver laboratory for analysis and asphalt pavement design. I have attached a copy of DOH Form ) 29 which shows the results of these tests. This sample indicates this material meets all of the Division of Highways criteria for high quality pavement. DWIGHT M. BOWER DISTRICT ENGINEER Leo 01Co District Materials Engineer LO:rd cc: D. M. Bower =_ File - - - de ER DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS Location 1 ) STATE OF COLORADO Slim Car$ar DOH Form No. 429 Field Sample No. C 23774 Revised: August 1973 Lab No. D1ai4 Imo® Date 4-21.-77 BITUMINOUS SURFACING Item 403 Grading or Class EX Preliminary ❑ Construction II TEST RESULTS Pit Name BOOtwn7 Paving Identification Stoctzpile A{.rpg. Aftol Goin3 Thron3h Percent Bitumen 3.3 S.8 6.3 6.8 0 or Max. Sp. Gr. of Mix 2.443 2.426 2.409 2.391 Sp. Gr. of Specimen 2.317 2.344 2.348 2.357 Voids in Specimen 5.16 3.38 2.53 1.42 GRADING ANALYSIS (ACCUMULATIVE %) Stability Value 38 35 32 31 Cohesiometer Value 186 195 222 225 R Value 96 96 95 94 T est Mineral As Job Mix t Nos. Filler Used Formula Strength Coefficient 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.40 As - 375.0 373.0 311.7 257.8 1" Rel.. IMMERSION-COMPRESSION 3/4" 1/2" 100 100 100 3/g.. 82 87 f' #4 75 60 60 Percent Bitumen 6.0 6.0 #8 b1 49 49 Specimen PSI Wet 320 350 ' #50 T- 14 Specimen PSI Dry 357 375 #100 10 % Absorption by Wt. 1.21 1.11 #200 8.1 6.5 6 % Swell by Volume 0.03 0.10 il! Index of Ret. Strength 87 93 Additive Used 0.40 S.A. Sq/Ft Lb Supor Conc. Nootrip Apparent Sp. Gr. of Aggregate Asphalt Additive Type Laboratory Sp. Gr. = 2.34 at 6,0 % AC The recommended asphalt content for the above item is: % acceptable additive, 6.0 % 1C 10 grade, total mix basis, with — p additive, including % added to the stockpile ❑ to the dry aggregate O emulsified asphalt, dry aggregate basis. The recommended % asphalt has been adjusted # % for environmental factors assuming VPD, ft. elev, and construction in REMARKS: *To be Bet fled 8t time ratorta1 is to be uued for Item 403. illi[ . Staff Materials Eng r • APPENDIX 6 mfAvarit ANAP__IfSIIS RESULTS Analyzed by: TRIPLE "S" LAB, INC. Analyzed for: JANUARY 4 , 1914___ .z Name: BESTL^!AY PAVING CO. Phone __________________________ At Johnson's Corner N. 35TH AVENUE, GREELEY, COLORADO 30631 On Interstate 25 Address Loveland, Colorado 80537 Submitted by BESNAY PAVING CO. �- Box 678 Phone 303-667-5671 (FIRM) LAB NO. 31+385.01 SAMPLE NO. • USE: UNIT NO. FIELD OR PEN NO. SOURCE ANALYTICAL RESULTS AS PPM AS MEQ/LITER CLASSIFICATION CATION EQUIVALENTS 10.1 CALCIUM 102 5.1 MAGNESIUM 41 3.4 SODIUM 34 1.5 POTASSIUM 3 0.1 HARDNESS 170 ANION EQUIVALENTS 10.2 CARBONATE ---- ---- BICARBONATE 416 6.8 CHLORIDE 25 0.7 SULFUR. 43 2.7 AS SULFATE 129 --- NITRATE NITROGEN --- --- BORON 0.0 6 NITRATE AS KNO3 --- CONDUCTANCE 1000 PH 8.3 SAR 1 SOLUBLE SODIUM % 15 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS 750 COMMENT'S: W909 40 APPENDIX 7 i v lar,-: 3.—t .: .Iri-i,'-"aa`t '-N :,y...oV*ri_,`1_'r - 'a te" •" fir;;.- -_ . -" "' .r j--..-!''�Y-!:;f`atyNsA., 37cS,, i „n•,,.y'� ^�c� 171-`T3`�"i1^h"'r ►.,-.441,w 1:rp. .R Ass 3,,•' - +'l.w—•-, _ " +';K.- T -i .,s Q,�,�s"T'di. l,p�s,' '. ee" _ ` 3 05 M. C1AR %5 1971 NO Recorded at o'clock, , t r Recorder. Reception No. 11111658 & Y Mw FEUEP TEIN , `.w ' - - - ' N. ORMAN RUYLE, also known as NOBLE ORMAN RUYLE and • _• _o .r D. MARGUERITE RUYLE,. also known as MARGUERITE RUYLE, �bJ ,y - , O` as husband and wife ';s-, ill °D whose address is 1832 36th Avenue, Greeley, County of Weld, .. = °,_f r Y: zr State of Colorado, for the consideration of Other valuable considera— . :p g tion and Ten and no/100 DOERS, _ ,.art"- • in hand paid, hereby sell and convey to ?, •- L -,r , Y BEST-WAY PAVING CO. , a Colorado Corporation `' -�. O whose address is North 35th Avenue, Greeley, County of Weld, 1,-; •"----- .,,-,,,-,t, ,,, a State of Colorado, the following real property in the County of ,,.'-. ' om WELD, and State of Colorado, to-wit: 'M A tract of land located in the Northeast Quarter (NE%) of <i . Section Two (2), Township Five (5) North, Range Sixty-six (66) West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Weld County, ;` y Colorado and being further described as follows: Commencing at the Center Quarter Corner (Cen 1/4 Cor) of 4 said Section 2, and considering the South line of the North- , east Quarter (NEB) of said Section 2 to bear South 89° 55' =; > 53' East, with all bearings herein being relative thereto: Thence South 89° 55' 53" East, along the South Line of the . ...= Northeast Quarter (NEy4) of said Section 2, a distance of '- 1242.80 feet to the True Point of Beginning, said Points,', "" " being the Southeast Corner (SE Cor) of JOHNSON SUBDIVISION, o as platted and recorded in the records of Weld County, Colo- -_- t, rado; thence along the Easterly boundary line of said JOHNSON ¢�` SUBDIVISION by the following two (2) bearings and distances: North 130 44' 30" West, 1300.19 feet; North 09° 12' 16" West, -•, r 1040.61 feet to a point on the 'South bank of Greeley Canal No. 3; Thence along the South bank of said Greeley Canal No. 3 by the following nine (9) bearings and distances: - North 84° 39' 18" East, 81.45 feel; South 89° 00' 30" East 254.37 feet; South 750 18' 29" ast, 125.79 2 79"feet; South 66° ,-+ 09' 38" East, 380.46 feet; South ` feet; South 49° 27' 12" East, 458.03 feet; South 690 28' 12" East, 214.99 feet; South 80° 30' 45" East, 112.96 feet; South 73° 04' 44" East, 266.46 feet; Thence South 06° 10' 17" West, along the East Line of the r z Northeast Quarter (NE%) of said Section 2, a distance of 886.39 feet; thence North 89° 55' 53" West, along the North Line of an 11.540 acre tract of land, 766.69 feet; thence South 060 10' 17" West, along the West Line of said 11.540 acre tract of land, 659.36 feet to the South Line of the North— 'r east Quarter (I ►) of said Section 2; thence North 89° 55' 53• West, along the South Line of the Northeast Quarter (N ) of said Section 2, a distance of 851.81 feet to the True Point of Beginning; together with three shares of the Greeley and Loveland Irrigation Co., one (1) right of Lake Loveland, and three and one-fourth (3 1/4) shares of the capital stock of the Seven Lakes Reservoir and Irrigation Company; EXCEPTING and RESERVING unto the Grantors herein an easement for right-of-way in an existing cement ditch to carry irriga- tion water along the South side of the above described property to an 11-acre parcel situated in the Southeast corner of said _ ir - Page 1 of three pages. "_ `',% r Lr'-j . jri , '.,,t f.---s--.' 4 y • ,I.7:"...:' 'J ,r, MdT' .r i, w -.t r'.Y._ -.cL--:,i •. v - •-, , - t--,•-•_'-••;,11.:� /..-v I'..:.il.�'S�' ...!3,-:i•- JfK�i l+- .ors..- _ - 3.,-- L .e., • . l ' - , li 1 . . 3- 3 r,i'': 2. DWELLING COST, QUALITY AND SIZE: No dwelling shall be :l erected or kept on any part of the within Described real property at • $.° a cost of less than S12,O06.00, based upon the cost levels pertaining -`? 1 "` on the date that' this instrument is recorded. No dwelling shall be �, erected or kept on the within described property unless the ground s I floor area thereof, exclusive of open porches and garages, shall be more than eleven hundred square feet. 3. NUISANCES: No noxious or offensive activity shall be carried on, or permitted, on any part of the within described real property, nor shall anything be done thereon which may, be or become an annoyance or nuisance to the neighborhood. 4. TEMPORARY STRUCTURES: No structure of a temporary character, ,k trailer, basement, tent, shack, garage, barn or other outbuildings shall be used on any part of the above described real property at any ' time as a residence, either temporary or permanent. :v?, J 5. LIVESTOCK AND POULTRY: No poultry, hogs, sheep or livestock of any kind shall be raised, bred or kept on any part of the within , described real property, except dogs, cats, ponies or other household pets may be kept thereon if they are not raised, bred, kept or main- . tained for any commercial purpose. "' Also, subject to inclusion within the Northern Colorado Water Conser- vt, .cy District and the West Greeley Soil Conservation District; to all taxes subsequent to January 1, 1972; and to all existing roads, highways, ditches, utilities, pipelines, power, telephone or water . lines and rights-of-way and easements therefor not of record. Signed this /D _ day of i7� 1977. N. Orman Ruyle, also known as Noble Orman Ruyle rguer uy e, a so :n own as - Marguerite yle, as husband and wife STATE OF COLORADO i ) ss. COUNTY OF WELD ) The forego'ng instrument was acknowledged before me this 6' day of , 1977, by N. ORMAN RUYLE, also known as ORMAN an 1 TE RUYLE, also known as MARGUERITE RUYLE, as husband and wife. WITNESS my Hand and Official seal. • My Commission expires: ��.�PO �• � -- otary Public: — Page 3 of three pages. • 4 .1 --1_ .• •_' i •- f.'.I X _.._ .. -,• I -- - ,-- .- ( .. C STATE OF COLORADO ) ~ +-. 1 -• V _ COUNTY OF WELD ss.- -- I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS INSTRUMENT , WAS FILED FOR RECORD IN MY OFF qT ;_ . y - •• .3 QS _ COCK MA .. _lq - 2✓ _ AND IS DULY RECORDED IN BOOKNO--79 . - a-, _ _ - - _ • ; - _� ..;j PAGE--- -— _ - h"t'Lff 6c):141'•72:671--- . ,', • I -_ RECORDER,: I— f --• • �d � Cc�cl 'r' j7. -- -- BY_�d S = d_ ' 1 v - �� 0-CIA- /ICU - I • _ i i -Ina - , r „, 5. Address of applicant and general office Applicants address: P.O.Box 820, Greeley, Colorado Phone:353-1 General Office address:N. 35th Ave. , Greeley, Coloradphone:35-3-1E 6. Identify any prior permits for open cut mining held by applicant or affiliated person: NONE 7. Description of Operation a. Types and number of operating and processing equipment to be employed: 3 loaders , 2 scrpaers , 10 tandem trucks, 10 tractor trucks , 1 gravel plant with crusher, 1 asphalt plant (these last two are on existing plant site) . b. Maximum number of employees: 55-100 , and number of shifts: 1 c. Number of stages to be worked: 16 , and periods of time each is to be worked: approximately 1 year per stage. d. Thickness of mineral deposit: 30-40 feet, and thickness of the over- burden: 5-15 feet. e. This will be a /dry pit operation f. Site entrance/exit points and county roads and bridges to be utilized between site and delivery point(s) (must be coordinated with County Engineer) : Primary entrance to be existing entrance. Secondary entrance will be onto Fourth Street at SE corner of property. Roads to be used will be primarily Fourth Street and 35th Avenue. 8. Description of Rehabilitation a. Proposed rehabilitation land use(s) : Agriculture-pond-plant site b. Source of technical advice for reclamation: Soil Conservation Service and R. V. Lord and Associates, Inc. c. Explanation of Reclamation Process: This is explained in detail in Section D. Generally, after mining, overburden will be replaced, covered by 18-36 inches of topsoil . Corn or alfalfa will be planted on approximately 25 acres on the flatter portion of the site. Trees, shrubs and erosion-resistant grasses will be planted on the steeper, perimeter slopes. I hereby depose and state under the penalities of perjury that all state- ments, proposals and/or plans submitted with or contained within this applica- tion are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. COUNTY OF WELD R. V. RD AND ASSOCIATES, I C. STATE OF COLORADO 20 Si nature: Owne Authorized Agent Subscribed and sworn to before me this 412 of 19 77 NOTARY PUBLIC ' SEAL My Comriii ssi on expires B1rev ttJ / 7 /1;"/ APPENDIX 9 RE70NING.AI'PL1C.A.TIQN1 Buil_ding„ Greeley, Colo. Weld County Planning Depart:nf•nt FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE ONLY: CASE IIU'%,1 ER: PC HT2\liJNG DATE: SEC: TWP RANGE: CC HEAI-aNG DATE: _ LAND CODE: 1/4: KEY: 7•; 5: SUB/DIV CODE: SUB: BLK: LOT: - KEY: - ' t. 1?E1'ONING Ttt�.7: 1' FR TO: 1) Date: w APP. CHECKED BTi 2) rJ.ite: REC. N0. : G�L77 3) _� Paf,e:___.,_,_ _�_ LEGAL DESC. APPROVAL 4) ____ Date:_ _ . TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT IN ACCORDANCE WITH i ROCEDU1 ALCUTD IL r4i,I!t,.�Mr 'TS: Print or type only, except for neceseRry signatures. I (we), the undersigned, hereby request a h9ening before the Weld County Planning Commission concerning proposed rua oa1_ng of following J rrcr'.bed 'unincorporated area of Weld County: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 45.91 acres located in the NE4 of Section 2, Township 5 North, Range 66 West of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. A detailed legal description is attached. (If additional spe.ce is -( iqui1od, a1',1;,c•tt nn additional sheet of this same size) STREET LOCATION: North 35th Avenue and West Fourth Street, Greeley, Colorado PRESENT ZONE E j'Lf)r1:11-J_ 1; wiA ATPIt;'X ejRUN: 45.91 ac. PL';tPO;r.. To a l l ow open p i t gravel extraction. _T_ _ •- 1S THIS AREA PLATTED: YE>'( "i% (X l� I' ":1:0;;i :7)3 rT r�I74 0'; -- 13 THIS AREA TO BE PLATTE)): 71'5 ( ) NO (X). T^ ""_';,1::: t r; ti."-3, 14?“'.-; I JT MEV SUBMII1 ED: YES ( ) NO ( ). FEE OWNERS OF AREA PROPOSI'D FOR Ei';Z,ON1NTG:_ NAME: BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY A;;' 3 :P.O.Box 820, Greeley, CO TEL:353-1654 NAME: GILSABIND-CONVIDAR LSAB I ND-CONY I DAR ^01,1-]!. :P.0.Box-820 G ree 1 eye COTEL:353-1654 NAME: _______ `IEI.: I hereby depose and state apder of p:ar ii y that all a uoment3, proposals and/or plans submitted with or ec;- '•f,:-:,o l thiE aapli';ation aro true and correct to the best of my knowledge. COULTY OF WELD T_R ) R. V. LORD AND ASSOCIATES, INC. STATE OF COLORADO "r42771- 21:Ad.,-C, :J n.attrc: Owner or Authorized Agent Subscribed and s.,rorn to before pc thiQ � c'- a of _ --�-� 19 . SEAL _ �.r�� 41 • My commission expires: APPENDIX 10 51 - Otero sandy loan, 1 to 3 percent slope (Information supplied by Soil Conservation Service) This is a deep, well drained soil on gentle plains at elevations of 4700 to 5250 feet. It formed in mixed outwash and eolian deposits. Included in this unit are some soils with loam and clay loam underlying material . Typically the surface layer is brown sandy loam about 12 inches thick. The underlying material , to a depth of 60 inches, is a pale brown calcareous • fine sandy loam. Permeability is rapid. Available water capacity is moderate. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Surface runoff is slow and erosion hazard is low. This soil is used almost entirely for irrigation and is suited to all crops adapted to this area. Some conservation practices such as land leveling, ditch lining and pipelines may be needed for proper water application. All methods of irrigation are suitable with furrow irrigation the most common type used. Barnyard manure and commercial fertilizers are needed for top yields along with maintaining good organic matter content. In nonirrigated areas this soil is suited to winter wheat, barley and sorghum. Most of the area is planted to winter wheat which is alternated with summer fallow to allow moisture accumulation. Normally, precipitation is too low to make beneficial use of fertilizer. - Good cultural practices such as stubble mulch farming, strip cropping and minimum tillage are needed to control wind and water erosion. Terracing may also be needed to control water erosion. 51 - Otero sandy loam, 1 to 3 percent slope Page 2 The potential native vegetation on this site is dominated by sand bluestem, sand reedgrass and blue grama. Needle and thread, switchgrass, sideoats grama and western wheatgrass are also prominent. Potential production ranges from 2200 pounds per acre in favorable years to 1800 pounds per acre in unfavorable years. When range condition deteriorates, sand bluestem, sand reedgrass and switchgrass decrease and blue grama, sand dropseed and sand sage increase. Annual weeds and grasses invade the site as range condition becomes poorer. Management of vegetation on this soil should be based on taking half and leaving half of the total annual production. Seeding is advisable if range is in poor condition. Sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, switchgrass, sideoats grama, blue grama, pubescent wheatgrass and crested wheatgrass are suitable for seeding. The grass selected should meet the seasonal require- ments of livestock. For successful seeding, a clean, firm, sorghum stubble- prepared the growing season prior to seeding-or a firm, prepared seedbed and grass drill should be used. Early spring seeding has proven most successful . Windbreaks and environmental plantings are generally suited to this soil . Soil blowing is the principal hazard to establishing trees and shrubs. This hazard can be overcome by cultivating only in the tree row and by leaving a strip of vegetation between the rows. Supplemental irrigation may be necessary at the time of planting and during dry periods. Trees that are best suited and have good survival are Rocky Mt. juniper, eastern redcedar, ponderosa pine, Siberian elm, Russian olive and hackberry. Shrubs best suited are skunkbush sumac, lilac and Siberian peashrub. Wildlife is an important secondary use, with these soils best suited for openland wildlife. Habitat favorable for ring-necked pheasants, mourning 51 - Otero sandy loan, 1 to 3 percent slope Page 3 doves and many non-game species can be developed by establishing wildlife areas for nesting and escape cover. For pheasants, the inclusion of undisturbed nesting cover is vital and should be included in plans for habitat develop- ment. This is especially true in areas of intensive agriculture. Rapid expansion of the Greeley and surrounding area has resulted in urbanization of much of this Otero soil . It has excellent potential for urban and recreational development. Its only limiting feature is the moderately rapid permeability in the substratum and the hazard of contamina- tion of ground water from sewage lagoons. Lawns, shrubs and trees for beautification will do well . Capability subclass Ille irrigated IVe nonirrigated Sandy plains range site 68 - Ustic Torriorthents, moderately steep (Information supplied by Soil Conservation Service) This is a deep, excessively drained soil on terrace breaks and escarp- ments at elevations of 4450 to 5100 feet. It formed in gravelly alluvium on slopes of 9 to 25 percent. Included in this" unit are some soils with pockets of sandy loam and , loam in the underlying material . i Typically the surface layer is pale brown gravelly sand about 10 inches thick. The underlying material , to a depth of 60 inches is pale brown gravelly sand. Permeability is rapid. Available water capacity is low. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Surface runoff is medium and erosion hazard is moderate. The potential native vegetation on this site is dominated by little bluestem, sideoats grama, sand reedgrass, blue grama, hairy grama, switchgrass and needle-and-thread. Potential production ranges from 700 pounds per acre in favorable years to 200 pounds per acre in unfavorable years. When range condition deteriorates, the tall and mid-grasses decrease, blue grama and hairy grama increase and production drops. Management of vegetation should be based on taking half or less of the total annual production. Since this site does not readily lend itself to seeding or any mechanical treatment, deferred grazing is a practical method of improving range condition. Windbreak and environmental plantings are generally not suited to this soil . On-site investigation is needed to determine if plantings are feasible. 68 - Ustic Torriorthents, moderately steep (cont.) Wildlife uses on this soil are very limited due to its lack of potential to produce necessary habitat elements. This soil is typically used as range- land and rangeland wildlife such as scaled quail and antelope are the typical wildlife found. Extreme care is needed to manage livestock grazing if wildlife are to satisfy any of their habitat requirements on this soil . This soil has poor potential for urban and recreational development. The primary limiting soil features are the loose, coarse textured soil , steep slopes and rapid permeability. Capability subclass Vlls irrigated Vlis nonirrigated Gravel breaks range site APPENDIX 11 Water Resource Management Plan BESTWAY PAVING COMPANY ! Greeley, Colorado Prepared for R.V. Lord and Associates, Inc. Boulder, Colorado by William W. Hansen, P.E. Water Resources Engineer Fort Collins , Colorado September 1977 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 HYDROLOGIC AND OPERATIONAL ASPECTS 2 Process Water Supply 2 Pit Dewatering 2 Impact on Neighboring Wells 4 Impact on Cache la Poudre River 4 Impact Mitigation Procedures 7 WATER RIGHTS AND PLANNING ASPECTS 8 Historic and Present Land and Water Use 8 Projected Land and Water Use 14 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 16 Exhibits: 1. Vicinity map 2 . Application for Approval of Plan for Augmentation 3. Letter from City of Greeley dated June 1 , 1977 4. Page 1 of Deed of Trust ' Water Resource Management Plan BESTWAY PAVING COMPANY Greeley, Colorado INTRODUCTION The Bestway Paving Company of Greeley, Colorado proposes to mine the gravel resources underlying a portion of the north- east quarter of Section 2 , Township 5 North, Range 66 West, situated northwest of the City of Greeley, Colorado. A vicinity map attached as Exhibit 1 indicates the location of the pro- posed gravel operation. A detailed description of the proposed mining plan has been developed as a separate set of documents prepared by R.V. Lord and Associates of Boulder, Colorado. The purpose of this report is to supplement the mining plan in such matters as hydrology, water resources and water rights considerations . The proposed gravel mine operation will affect the local and regional hydrology in a variety of ways . Among these are a possible dra' down of the ground water table in the vicinity of adjacent wells , and both a short-term and long-term effect on streamflow of the Cache la Poudre River. The foundation of the water-supply plan for the gravel mine is a Plan for Augmentation filed with the District Court in and for Water Division No. 1 in Greeley, Colorado pursuant to statutory provisions for water right determination and administration. This report will provide supporting hydrologic, engineering and water-use data for the Plan for Augmentation included herein as Exhibit 2 , which has been assigned Case No. W- 8640-77 by the Water Court. The analysis , computations and interpretations provided in this report have been based upon data obtained from a variety of sources . Among these sources are published clithatological data, information on water deliveries available in the office -1- of the Greeley-Loveland Irrigation Company, information provided by Bestway Paving Company and R.V. Lord and Associates , well registrations on file in the State Division of Water Resources , and ditch and delivery data available from the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. HYDROLOGIC AND OPERATIONAL ASPECTS Process Water Supply Bestway Paving Company has for several years operated a gravel mining, crushing and grading operation on a parcel of land along the northern edge of the tract illustrated in Exhibit 1. Operational water requirements have included gravel washing, equipment washing, and dust control. The source of water for these operational requirements has historically been a combination of municipal water ob- tained from the City of Greeley, drainage water seeping into the gravel pit which would otherwise evaporate, and a well on the site with Permit Number 6065-R. The scope of the gravel operation is not expected to be enlarged in the future over what it has historically been. Consequently there is no anticipation that either gross water requirements or depletion of the local water supplies will be increased as a result of the proposed mining plan. Pit Dewatering The mining operation proposed by R.V. Lord and Associates envisions the extraction of gravel from a sequence of pits of several acres in extent. Overburden material would first be removed, and the gravel mined to the ground water level . When the water level is reached an interceptor trench will be constructed around the pit in order to divert the ground water flowing into the pit and lower the ground water level -2- in the pit to the bedrock elevation in order to permit dry- process mining of the remaining material. Arrangements have been made with the City of Greeley to utilize the available storm sewer which is located at the northeast corner of the property, in accordance with the correspondence included as Exhibit 3. The storm sewer goes due north along the existing county road from the property corner, and discharges storm water into the Cache la Poudre River at a point approximately one mile north of the subject property. An alternative procedure for removal of the pit drain- age water from the site would be the installation of a re- charge well or wells along the northern edge of the property. Properly developed and cased, and with adequate pressure head provided by the sump pump in the pits , recharge wells could be expected to provide direct return of the pit drain- age water to the aquifer. Geologic cross sections prepared by Lord and Associates indicate that in the vicinity of the mine area, the aquifer consists of approximately 12 feet of saturated gravel. Assumptions regarding permeability of the formation provide the following range of estimates for the amount of water to be pumped from the pit: Permeability Pit Discharge (gpd/ft2) (gpm) 250 28 2500 283 5000 566 Utilizing standard analytical methods for evaluation of the ground water hydraulics , it may be shown that for any of the three combinations of permeability and discharge rate, the zone of influence of the pit would extend for approximately a mile in all directions . While this result would not normally be expected from a gravel formation, it arises from the fact that the saturated thickness in the vicinity is only 12 feet, -3- and drawdown effects in the pit propagate radially outward to create a "cone of depression" of approximately a-mile radius centered upon the pit. Impact on Neighboring Wells According to records provided by the State Division of Water Resources , there are no active irrigation wells with- in the anticipated cone of depression resulting from dewater- ing of the gravel pits . Well No. 51454, located in the SW1% of the SEa of Section 35-6-66 is adjacent to the Greeley No. 3 Canal and has a registered depth of only 5 feet. It is unlikely that pit operations will affect this well , which apparently receives its supply from leakage from the canal . A list of all of the registered wells in the vicinity has been compiled by Lord and Associates , and a number of represen- tative wells will be identified for purposes of monitoring by personnel from Bestway Paving Company. Ground water levels in the wells will be measured on a periodic basis in order to determine whether the action of dewatering the pit is adversely affecting the yield of existing wells. Prior to the commencement of mining operations , it will be determined to what extent yield has historically fluctuated in response to natural variations in the local static level . Impact on Cache la Poudre River Both topographic and water table gradients in the local area indicate that ground water is moving very slightly east of due north from the site. In the absence of specific geologic data and well logs , it is difficult to estimate the travel time between the site and the river. A travel-time estimate will be prepared at such time as it becomes desire- able for purposes of administration by the State of Colorado. Dewatering of the pit in accordance with the projected mining plan will result in a depression of the ground water -4- body which will move toward the Cache la Poudre River at a speed defined by the slope of the intervening water table and by the permeability of the water-bearing formation. The result of this migration of the ground water depression will be a depletion of the streamflow of the Cache la Poudre River which is exactly equal to the volume of water pumped from the gravel pit. Whereas the actual timing of pumping from the pit may be erratic and subject to both day-to-day and seasonal fluctua- tions , it would be expected that the impact on the river will be approximately uniform throughout the year and equal to the daily average discharge from the pit. Consequently the streamflow depletion may be approximately uniform throughout the year. Compensating for the depletion to the river will be the drainage water which is discharged from the pit. The net impact on streamflow will depend upon which of the two alternative procedures is chosen for disposition of the pit drainage water: 1 . Discharge to storm sewer. While subject to much more erratic fluctuation than the depletion effect on the river, it may be expected that on an annual basis , the positive effect of the drainage water discharged to the river will be approximately equal to the negative effect of the depletion brought about by dewatering of the pit in prior years. The combined effects of both streamflow depletion and streamflow gain are illustrated schematically on Figure 1 where , for convenience, both the natural streamflow of the river and the rate of stream depletion due to dewatering of the pit have been assumed to be constant. It may be observed from Figure 1 that the only time at which a possible adverse impact on the river may be manifested will be during the periods in which dry mining of the surface deposits is taking place, and no pit drainage water is being discharged to the River. The manner in which the negative streamflow impacts -5- N 4) r-1 rd al S-i E 3 O 4) r� a z Sa al U •r1 RS -° -P0 }CU o 4) •ri r-I -r•I •ri N a 4-i -P Sa �. E Sa N AiCU O 4 '0 SA > 44 tr v) w ° - v) 0 - •O O H O •r-1 •1i S: -r-4 54 CI i W w E \\ ' . , CD (71 i CP s~ ITS I CU v -— -- 4—i tr L4 O CU O •r'{ 1 S1 •ri G)O I r0 CD O O 4a 4� / 4i tu Li CU H V) N t:.: y+ +) S4 CU cn Sa (CI TI -Pb 3s~ 'CI 4) O N G O Sa a) CD A n H aq.e.IMOZ3 JaA- -6- may be compensated will be described in a subsequent section of this report. 2 . Discharge to recharge wells . Pit drainage water intro- duced directly into recharge wells on the northern boundary of the site would re-enter the aquifer at a rate exactly equal , and at a location almost equal to that at which it was re- moved. Attenuating effects of groundwater movement and re- distribution would, for practical purposes , cause the recharged water to "fill up the hole" caused by the dewatering of the pit. As a result, it may be expected that the groundwater accretion effect due to recharge will, for practical purposes , balance the groundwater depletion effect due to dewatering of the gravel pit. There should consequently be neither a positive nor negative impact on the flowrate of the Cache la Poudre River as a result of this method of operation. Impact Mitigation Procedures Based upon the simplified hydrologic conditions illustrated in Figure 1 , there are two different combinations of circum- stances which require analysis in order to develop a depletion- replacement program: 1. Pit discharge in excess of depletion. This condition will prevail at any time that the pit is being dewatered, since the stream depletion effect averages out the cycles of pump operation in prior years. The portion of the instan- taneous discharge which exceeds the average annual discharge rate (i.e. , the stream depletion) represents a net gain to the River, and is water which would not otherwise be present in the stream in the absence of the mining operation. The net gain therefore represents a credit to the system which may be utilized by Bestway for exchange. The replacement program developed herein contemplates delivery of the net gain to a downstream water user who would otherwise be using water delivered to him from upstream -7- storage. In this manner, Bestway would obtain an upstream storage credit in an amount equal to the amount of the net gain diverted by the downstream user. The amount of storage credit thus obtained will clearly be dependent upon the streamflow conditions in the Cache la Poudre River and upon the seasonal needs of downstream appropriators . 2 . Dewatering pump not in operation. During these periods there will be no pit drainage water entering the River to compensate for depletions resulting from operations in prior years. At such times as there is a valid downstream call on either the Cache la Poudre River or on the South Platte River below its confluence with the Poudre , water may be released from upstream storage in order to compensate the river system for streamflow depletion. The storage water used for this purpose will be obtained from either of two sources , (a) storage rights owned by Best- way and described elsewhere in this report, and (b) storage credit obtained by exchange for excess pit drainage water. The average rate at which the storage water will be released will be equal to the average rate of streamflow depletion resulting from dewatering the pit in prior years . It should be emphasized that the exchange and replacement procedure outlined above will be utilized only in the event that the pit drainage water is discharged via the storm sewer. If recharge wells are used for this purpose, the exchange procedure will not be required since the drainage water will be returned directly to the aquifer and there will be no de- pletion of the Cache la Poudre River. WATER RIGHTS AND PLANNING ASPECTS The 75-acre parcel owned by Bestway Paving Company is a portion of an 86z-acre parcel of land, 11% acres of which has been retained by the previous owner. Local water rights have historically been utilized for the purposes of irrigating -8- Table 1 Present and Historic Land Uses in the Study Area Dryland Irrigated Developed Total Pasture Corn Land (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) I. Site Area Non-irrigated native grass 9 .0 Cultivated 41.2 Present plant & excavation site 24.8 subtotals 9 .0 41 .2 24.8 75.0 II. Excluded Area 'Cultivated 5.0 Buildings , corrals and residential uses 6 .5 subtotals 0 5.0 6.5 11 .5 Totals 9 .0 46.2 31.3 86 .5 -9- corn which has overlapped the boundary line between the parcels of land which were included in and excluded from the trans- action. The distribution of land uses within the original 86%-acre parcel is shown in Table 1 . The water rights conveyed to Bestway Paving Company are documented in Exhibit 4, which is a portion of the deed of trust. Water rights acquired by Bestway are a portion of the totality of water rights which have historically been utilized for the irrigation of the 46.2 acres within the 86%-acre parcel. A summary of the distribution of the water rights between the two parcels of land is as follows: Conveyed to Retained by Total Histori- Bestway in Seller cally Used on Deed of Trust 861-acre tract Greeley-Loveland Irrigation Co. 3 shares 21 51 shares j Lake Loveland 1 right 0 1 right Seven Lakes Reservoir & Irrigation Co. 314 shares 3/4 4 shares In addition to the water rights owned by the seller and historically used on the entire parcel, supplemental rights have occasionally been transferred on a seasonal basis , either from other parties or from other lands owned by the seller. Examination of delivery records in the office of the Greeley- Loveland Irrigation Company provides the information regarding total water deliveries to the parcel that is summarized in Table 2 . The difference between water ordered out of storage and water delivered to the farm is conveyance loss in the delivery system. This loss is estimated by the Greeley-Loveland Irrigation Company as 22% on a system-wide average for the main canal , but only 20% for customers on the extremities of the main canal as is the case with the subject parcel of land. In addition to delivery losses on the main canal , conveyance losses in the Grapevine Lateral, which delivers the water from the main canal to the actual site, are estimated as 5% of the water delivered. -10- Li 0 • 0 •rl U) U fd Q) •C N co CO co d' H O in 0\ co t1-P U l0 cn H O1 N N N CO N d' ,Q •rl cd • • • • • • • • • • S-1 •rl O' W N U) LO 01 CO 1n l0 N 0 S.4 v H H H H H H H H H H U) H N a) �— tT .-i H N N Lc) u) N Lo COLD d' d' Ln M -P cd ,. Ol co N H O N cn O id, lO -ii U • • • • • • • . • • .,-1 O E 0 N r•) d' cn d' cn d' cn co co Sa •rl [1 -d (\I N N N N N N N N N ,. -P U) -' U) O Z H 0 c ' iZ U >1 ina) S~ N Q cd U i). Sa .0 E 0 U) O 4-1 fd E a) m mco O CO N CO cO CO N U C O No O1 cn cn H or-- H 'CJ >1 rd U • • • • • • • • • • N 1 H rx, 01 O1 N co CO O CO N O N O -P N a •rI N d' 1n 1n cn d' co d' co d' •ri U) U) a, 0 .. a) 4 al n 5.1 rd 5-4 H QJ •r cd cd S4 I H -P a) N H c• cd '? 4) to in u) in i) LI) O O O CO U) L0 I U) � 4-1 N N N N N N 0 O b ,5' L) H + d' I ••••••••• Z rd Sa (1) 4) H 01 Ol N N Ill N N CO N ft 'U SI 0 N (= Li H CO H O d' 1n d' (Jo r•1 Lo H I a) -I -P U H H N N HHHHH H U U)) -P rd ',7 I cd 3 .......• O U 55-1 fd >+ ai X -P H 'C) -P rd H H O A -11 -'\ c+•" -.\ -.\CV -'\ AN . a) CV S4 •rl O La d' LO W OD CO CO CO CO 01 CO Sa -P ,≤ U 4-1 N N d' M 01 O O' O N 0 () II U) I)) U U H H H H H H •d Q Q A l-) U >1 'C7 O H a) 4-1 E rl ai O Sa 4-1 0 U •rl •• a ... Sa CO 01 0 H N co d' U) O fd a) fd CO l0 N N N N N N N - .-. a) a\ 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 • 0 rd A U i }1 HHHHHHHHH S I Z ._. •..• v I i 01 i I —11— The combined shrinkage in the system from the point of storage to the point of delivery is consequently estimated as 25%. The consumptive use of irrigation water by corn,which is the crop that has historically been irrigated on the subject parcel , may be estimated by the modified Blaney and Criddle procedure utilizing the assumption of three—inch average depth of irrigation-water application, and climatological conditions for the Greeley Weather Station as provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The results obtained by this procedure are summarized on Table 2 . Utilizing the same analytical procedure, but incorporating temperature and precipitation data representing the 30-year average for the Greeley Weather Station, the estimated water use for non-irrigated native grasses may be computed as 8.90 inches , Total annual evaporation loss from exposed water surfaces is obtained from Geological Survey Professional Paper 272-D, "Evaporation from the 17 Western States" and for the Greeley vicinity is apparently 41 .66 inches per year. Evaporation loss from miscellaneous surfaces such as roads , buildings , corrals , pit areas , driveways , etc. is estimated as 2 .0 inches per year. Rates of gross depletion from exposed surfaces are summarized in Table 3 , in which table the rate of moisture loss from irrigated land is increased by 5% over the consumptive use of the irrigated crop in order to account for soil-moisture evaporation during the non-irrigation season. Average annual rainfall in the vicinity is 12 .2 inches per year, which when added to the imported irrigation water represents the total annual water supply available for use within the 86%-acre parcel . The water budget for the entire area is summarized on Table 3 , where it may be observed that the average annual depletion of the water supplies available to the 86z-acre parcel is approximately 107.5 acre feet per year. -12- H (d \ Sa N C� l0 O Lf) N 00 CO to d -p w b • • • • • • • • • • O < a) If) t0 If) O N Cr ch O p N E-1 >y O> O N m C O H H p - N c+) O N O in H O1 O •r3 rd a) • • • . • • • • -P W S-i r-( O1 t0 O (f) N Cr d' (1) S1 U CO Cr N cn H H H Q (d ' Q..) A " V) O O m t0 OO cn t0 a) (1) Sa O Ol 00 t0 O O1 c0 t0 -P rd • • • • • • • • -P (d U a) N 00 d' H N CO Cf' H U a >1 N d' N d' rd •rl Sa • • • • • • • • H • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • N • • • • • • • • Sa • • • • • • • • U H Sa CI N r-i • • • • • • • • (d rd \ rd • • • • • • • • • I 4J W (1) r-- N O • • • • • • • • I-X' O Q >i O) tD in • • . • • • • • 1O H ri N • • • • • • • • CO I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • C •, N • O (d C) sfl N • • • • a) Sa • • • • • • • •N Sa UtO t0 • • • • • •A < Id CO d, • • • N • • • • • • • •tT•U \ • • • • • •(Y) • • • • • • • • O a) Sa NO H • • •O -1-) ..C rd • • • • • • • • • H Sa (d U a) N N • • • • . • • A a) Z C >i H Cr • • • • • • • • rd a_) •rl • • • • • • • • El r0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ,d . • 0 • N .:1 a) • .O • A U • C • U • rd • rd — • W TS • rl C • H C •r1 •.▪ • rd ' • C • V) Sa V) V • U) S-1 I!) s4 ' ' a ' (d U U (Cd • rd 00 ai ' •' 1a rd a S-I UI V _ • • •ri (d 'Cl Sa (Ti V S4C Sa a) Ts C C H a) 'Cl C , (Ti O Sa (1) (d V) (Ti Sa a) (d N -IJ (d dP H C at -P ri • -ri rd 14 Li •rl b rs 't7 a) 17-iW 'O 0 V 0)) a) . Q) x Q) •ri Q) 1) v •rl a1 d� U C -P c 5 O SS44 (Ad 3 V O SS4 4-) 3 S4 >i O 3 H •ri al al H •rl tT Ili H •ri A a) I •r) C 4-) a) I •d C C14 -l-) C C > C S-i CU U > C Sa a) a (a 0 C C) (I) O si Cl a) a) O Sa a -SJ •ri 0 N A Z H O •r A Z H O 11) •8-1 -P •ri a) O fat Sa •ri CD a) w a -P 0)) •S4 C. it SA Sa a) • • a H A Q MI H H H —13— Projected Land and Water Use As indicated earlier in this report, the proposed mining plan contemplates a sequence of pits of several acres in extent. The overburden material would be first removed, and the gravel extracted. The next pit in the sequence would be uncovered by placing the overburden material in the bottom of the previous pit. In this way overburden material will need to be handled only once and pit development would proceed in a "leap frog" manner. In the process of extracting the gravel , it is clear that the volume of space available in the pit that will be occupied by the next pit' s overburden is considerably greater than the volume of overburden to be placed therein. Consequently, it is anticipated that a general lowering of the ground surface within the mined area will result. Although it would be advantageous to bring additional fill material to the site in order to compensate for the gravel removed, it cannot be anticipated that such material will always be available when required. Consequently, the mining plan takes into considera- tion only the material present on the site. As a result of the removal of the gravel and its replace- ment with the overburden material, a pond will be created near the center of the site. Based upon engineering computations of the material volumes involved, it is estimated that the surface area of the pond will be approximately 14 acres . Creation of the pond places an additional burden upon the water supplies of the river system inasmuch as the evaporation rate from an exposed water surface is substantially greater than the water loss through soil moisture evaporation and consump- tion by irrigated crops . As a result, future land use within the 75-acre parcel will require a substantially reduced acreage devoted to cultivation of an irrigated crop, such as corn. Commensurate with this reduction will be an increase in the -14- number of acres of non-irrigated native grasses . The lower half of Table 3 illustrates the relative distribution of land use within the parcel which will be required such that the historic depletion of the total water supply not be exceeded under the projected conditions . During the non-irrigating season (November through April) , total evaporation from the surface of the pond will be approxi- mately 5.30 inches . At the same time precipitation incident upon the water surface will normally be 3 .60 inches . The deficit of 1 .70 inches represents a total water loss of approximately 2 .0 acre feet over the 14-acre pond surface, or approximately 21'2 gallons per minute when averaged over the six month period. Consequently, wintertime evaporation losses from the pond surface may be neglected since their impact on the flow regime of the Cache la Poudre River would be immeasurably small. Replacement of summertime depletions will be considerably simpler as a result of the availability of irrigation water which has historically been delivered to the site. Bestway Paving Company has been obligated to retain the water rights described earlier in this report as a result of possible annexation to the City of Greeley for residential development. Although such development is not considered feasible by the Weld County Planning Department at the present time, the water rights will necessarily be retained by the company in order to accomodate this future possibility. In the meantime, the water rights will be particularly valuable for continued irrigation of whatever acreage of corn is practical under given mining configurations , as well as for replacement of evaporation losses from the pond. As a result, it is presently contemplated that at such time as the pond is actually constructed, the irrigation water delivered to the site will be used both for the irrigation of whatever area of corn is allowed, and the remainder introduced directly into the pond in order to compensate for irrigation-season -15- evaporation losses . The water thus allowed to flow into the pond will be considerably in excess of the evaporation losses from the pond, and as a result will recharge the surrounding ground water formation and substantially enhance the subsurface water supply in the vicinity. The amount of such enhancement should be exactly equal to the ground water accretion resulting from historic uses of the water for irrigation purposes , and consequently the base flow regime of the Cache la Poudre River should be maintained in its historic condition. There is a possibility which cannot with current knowledge be anticipated, and that is that the procedure described above may result in waterlogging of the surrounding non-irrigated grassland, rendering it unfit for any future development. If this should prove to be the case, then arrangements can be made with the Greeley-Loveland Irrigation Company to store the subject water rights in the Company' s facilities, whether it be in Lake Loveland, the Seven Lakes Reservoir System, or in Boyd Lake. The water thus stored could then be released directly to the Cache la Poudre River on a predetermined schedule in order to maintain the historic streamflow conditions . Water rights in Lake Loveland are currently used by the Great Western Sugar Company in such a manner. Consequently, there is adequate precedent for this type of operation. Moreover, it would be anticipated that if the land may someday in the future be annexed to the City of Greeley for residential development, the water rights appurtenant thereto will be utilized in precisely this fashion. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The Bestway Paving Company proposes to develop a gravel extraction operation on a 75-acre parcel of land northwest of Greeley, Colorado. The proposed operation will consist of a sequence of pits of several acres in extent, from which the gravel will be extracted and overburden material replaced.with -16- dewatering of each pit required for a portion of its period of use. The impact of pit dewatering on the Cache la Poudre River will be manifested as a uniformly-distributed streamflow depletion effect. Compensating for this depletion will be the introduction to the river system of the pit drainage water, which will be discharged either directly to the river via a storm sewer line belonging to the City of Greeley, or directly to the aquifer by means of recharge wells on the property. Existing wells in the surrounding area will be monitored by Bestway in order to determine if the pit dewatering causes any detectable difference in yield of the wells as compared to natural historic variation. A plan for exchange of water rights , as has been described herein, will protect other water users in the vicinity if the pit drainage water is discharged directly to the Cache la Poudre River. A balance of materials on the site indicates that a pond of some 14 acres in surface area will be a feature of the final land-use configuration. Additional depletion of the water supplies of the South Platte River and its tributaries resulting from creation of the pond will be compensated by the removal from irrigation of approximately 31 acres of land which has historically been utilized for the cultivation of corn on the site. Operational and planning features of the proposed mining plan which affect streamflow and decreed water rights in the vicinity will require approval by the court of appropriate jurisdiction. The matter has been filed with the District Court in and for Water Division No. 1 , as Case No. W-8640-77, in order to assure that vested water rights in the Cache la Poudre River are protected. llllll ▪ ^•r 7,7 ;4- • _ ✓ • -17- EXHIBIT I . .. Ii / �.. .. P. 4690_�,, „18' i' t- \-. s P L° °r E A . .\\ .\\ [{^I -1 i._ ..4,_Tht.),......„_ 4693 •e • Plea. \- \ \�1 �,i�� MOODv 468.. _ ROA�"__•_Sch,$ K' ] 1 - • u• .1 - 466/::. .---..•K'• iiirs. t:L5'70)/ &, u H--------------..----___. 3 ° "77 M 3 5 h '-, • N. 4677 " M, /o co �l 1 - -f6pR4O0, J✓ I. 34 ,_ _ -S p .73 4660 A L LItl 3' Spr;nl� In Cr \ ., :v:':._ --- • L ' _ — •• -• BLISS 4666 . ° • ' ::::... •; 4669 .N 4662 t. \ i,_-,...„•••N•::•;:•:•:::-::•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•::::••:{ :: -So n —466 Pt 22 IF'- + 4133 ..."---------....„.....„ _.----.9..: \ I s 9 0 . ;`-� "ls — •C if I �`a� 1 _ /��/ 0 4j5 I i) ii\ -46.30 ., 1 i `O / ? V i r j / / : ' *. '4628 \( ,z, ''' 11 r.• • t----L---"Z--. C -\:\"\-: .Nt'Scii\ .6 / \ `z-_• L 0UDRte='jf 4'14 ti✓ �'• / +oel-...,7.�' TT` �� 25 484o • \� 5 f' i ii ,4643 \:r..,...,; a� r. 11 ( 47se 9 k- --\ �. ~ — /.S3 ' — 464.30 ., .'ly • — : °1. ' .i. • 14645._—,��J ' '� �i ' •2 • p. .... . ,. _ % 11.. - 46-1. s.-. • •"73"ice ' ` I _ _/- \'`• li.' � ' ` ° . �� _ L :IL I; I ':n !t! v/ %T_ :,our; or 'U [P 15 M B : 3Z IN THE DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR MAC v. DAN i o;W CLERK WATER DIVISION NO. 1 STATE OF COLORADO Case No. ((1- -`?("-/O-77 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION ) FOR WATER RIGHTS OF BESTWAY ) APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL PAVING COMPANY, IN THE SOUTH ) OF PLAN FOR AUGMENTATION PLATTE RIVER AND ITS TRIBUTARY, ) THE CACHE LA POUDRE RIVER 1. NAME AND ADDRESS OF APPLICANT: Bestway Paving Company c/o Mr. Carl T. Hill 131 North 35th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 • Telephone: 353-1654 2. WATER RIGHTS OWNED BY APPLICANT: a. Three (3.0) shares of the outstanding capital stock of the Greeley-Loveland Irrigation Company, consisting of the fol- lowing water rights in Water District No. 4 : (1) Greeley-Loveland Ditch, point of diversion on the south bank of the Big Thompson River in the SW 1/4 of Section 15, T 5 N, R 69 W of the 6th PM. (2) Barnes Ditch, point of diversion on the north bank of the Big Thompson River in the NE 1/4 of Section 17, T 5 N, R 69 W of the 6th PM. The two ditches include the following direct-flow decrees: Priority No. Amount, cfs Appropriation Date Decreed 6 18.08 10-20-65 5-28-83 7 8. 36 11-1-65 5-28-83 13 1/2 12.06 6-1-67 5-28-83 17 39.04 10-20-70 5-28-83 21 1/2 19. 42 6-23-73 5-28-83 23 35. 50 ]0-25-73 5-28-83 42 15.20 11-1-78 5-28-83 48 297.44 4-1-81 5-28-83 (Boulder County Total 445. 10 District Court) (3) Boyd Lake, dam axis located in the SW 1/4 of Section 8, T 5 N, R 69 W, Priority No. 13 for 44,031 acre-feet by appropriation of 4/28/02, decreed 6-29-16, Boulder County District Court. b. One (1.0) right of Lake Loveland, dam axis located in the NW 1/4 of Section 14, T 5 N, R 69 W, Priority No. 9 for 14,239 acre-feet by appropriation of 1/14/93, decreed 6-29-16, Boulder County District Court. c. Three and one-quarter (3 1/4) shares of the capital stock of the Seven Lakes Reservoir and Irrigation Company. Reser- voirs in the system are located northeast of Loveland and together comprise Priority No. 12 for 8432 acre-feet by appro- priation of 4/28/02, decreed 6-29-16, Boulder County District Court. 1 3. PLAN FOR AUGMENTATION AND PLAN FOR OPERATION: a. Applicant owns a 75-acre parcel of land located in the NE 1/4 of Section 2, T 5 N, R 66 W, located northwest of Greeley, Colorado (presently the site of an asphalt plant, an open pit gravel extraction process and irrigated croplands) . Applicant intends to utilize the parcel for a gravel mining operation and to extract remaining gravel from the land by a dry- process, open-pit procedure extending over approximately 20 to 25 years. b. The process will consist of two steps for each individual pit site within the 75-acre parcel. The first step for each pit will be extraction of the portion of the gravel above the water table during which time de-watering will not be required. The second phase will consist of de-watering the pit by means of a cutoff trench around the pit with the drainage water being diverted from the site in either of two ways: (i) Pumping into the storm sewer of the City of Greeley - 2 - located on the northeast corner of the property. Pit drainage water will then be conducted via the storm sewer to the Cache La Poudre River at a point one mile north of the subject tract of land. (ii) Returning the water immediately to the aquifer by means of recharge wells along the north side of the site. With either procedure, the de-watering operation will lower the water table in the pit-to the bedrock elevation and will permit dry-process extraction of the remaining portion of the gravel down to the bedrock elevation. c. The extraction of gravel from the site will result in a - substantial lowering of the ground level in the mine area as overburden material is replaced in the pits after extrac- tion is completed. After the removal of the gravel, the parcel will of necessity include a lake which is projected to have a water surface area of approximately 14 acres. • • d. De-watering the pit will create a ground water depression which will migrate in a northeasterly direction to the Cache La Poudre River. The gain to the Cache La Poudre River which results from return of the water drained from the pit will exactly equal any depletion to the stream, and the precise impact on streamflow will depend upon which technique has been utilized to return the drainage water to the stream: (i) Recharge wells would return the pit water immediately to the ground water formation at a rate exactly equal and opposite to the depletion caused by pumping. There would be no net impact, either positive or negative, on the rate of flow in the Cache La Poudre River. (ii) Pit drainage water introduced directly to the river via the storm sewer will cause a net streamflow effect that will be either positive during periods in which the pit is being de-watered, or negative while no pit water is - 3 - being discharged. The negative streamflow impacts will be compensated in a manner described in Paragraph k of this plan if the storm sewer discharge is used. e. Water rights owned by the applicant have been used in con- junction with certain other water rights retained by the previous owner of the property for the irrigation of approximately 46.2 acres of corn on the subject parcel of land and certain adjoining property. Water rights have been delivered to the farm via the Greeley -Loveland Ditch and the Grapevine Lateral, with conveyance losses of approximately 20% in the main ditch and 5% in the lateral. Examination of historic climatological data and of the existing records in the offices of the Greeley-Loveland Irrigation Company provide the following information on water supply and depletion for the period for which the ditch records are available. Water Delivered to Farm Consumption of Water by Corn Total Irrigation Water Year (acre-feet) (inches) (inches) (inches) 1968 111.75 29.03 22.97 19.67 1969 189. 75 49. 29 23.85 16.33 1970 219.75 57.08 24. 25 17.16 • 1971 207.75 53.96 23.17 15.93 1972 147.75 38.38 24.06 16.74 1973 155. 25 40. 32 23.73 19.71 1974 147.00 38.18 24. 36 18.70 1975 162.00 42.08 23.04 15.85 1976 118.50 30.78 23.44 16.79 9-yr. avg. 162.16 42.12 23. 65 17.43 The water delivered to the farm includes a total in most years of 5 1/2 shares of stock in the Greeley-Loveland Irrigation Company and 4 shares of stock in the Seven Lakes - 4 - Reservoir and Irrigation Company as well as the one share of Lake Loveland representing the total water supply used on a parcel of land of 86 1/2 acres prior to the sale of 75 acres to the applicant. In addition, other shares have been utilized from time to time on a seasonal basis by trans- fer from other land owned by the applicant's predecessor or by rental on a seasonal basis from other owners. The land requires a larger than normal duty of water due to the unusually coarse texture of the soil. f. The total water supply to the 86 1/2-acre parcel consists of both precipitation and irrigation water delivered to the southwest corner of the tract. The gross rates of depletion of the total water supply used in this Plan are as follows: Open water surfaces 41.66 inches Irrigated land (corn) 24.83 Non-irrigated native grass 8.90 • Buildings, residences, gravel pits, corrals, & other developed areas 2.00 The gross depletion on the irrigated land has been increased by five (5.0) percent over the water requirements of corn in order to account for soil-moisture losses during the non- irrigating season. g. The distribution of land uses within the 86 1/2-acre tract is described as follows: Historic & Present Projected (acres) (acres) Open water surfaces 0 14 Irrigated land (corn) 46.2 14.9 Non-irrigated native grass 9.0 32.1 Buildings, residences, gravel pits, corrals, & other developed areas 31. 3 25.5 Application of the gross depletion rates defined in paragraph f to the subject areas defined in this paragraph indicate - 5 - that for both land use patterns the gross depletion of the total water supply incident upon the parcel is approximately 107.5 acre feet per year. i. The final pattern of land use, which will not exist until approximately 20 to 25 years from the present, is projected on the basis of existing zoning and current land-use recommendations provided by the Weld County Planning Depart- ment. It is contemplated that under these criteria the agricultural character of the area will be preserved. Under these conditions the historic depletion of the waters of the South Platte River system will be maintained by the removal from irrigation of approximately 31 acres of corn, and the 31 acres will be changed to 14 acres of water surface area in the pond and an additional 17 acres of non-irrigated native grass. j. This plan of augmentation specifically contemplates the continued delivery to the parcel of the irrigation water supplies available by virtue of the ownership by the applicant of the water rights defined in Paragraph 2 of this application. Water in excess of the irrigation needs of the cultivated crop would be introduced directly into the pond for the purposes of compensating for surface evaporation loss there- from and for maintaining the historic pattern of subsurface return flow from the subject parcel. k. If pit drainage water is discharged directly to the Cache La Poudre River via the storm sewer, a plan for water rights exchanges has been developed to ensure that there will be no adverse streamflow impacts as a result of stream depletion caused by de-watering of the pit. In summary, the plan will operate as follows: (i) During periods when the rate of discharge from the pit exceeds the rate of stream depletion, the excess will - 6 - be diverted by a downstream water user who would other- wise be using water from upstream storage at that time. The Applicant will thus gain a credit in upstream storage in an amount equal to the downstream diversion, adjusted for transit losses. (ii) During periods of dry surface mining (when no pit drainage water is delivered to the river) , the stream depletion resulting from prior de-watering operations will be replaced from upstream storage. The storage rights utilized for this purpose will be comprised of both (a) those acquired pursuant to the plan of exchange • • in (i) above, and (b) those owned by the Applicant and defined in Paragraph 2 of this plan. WHEREFORE, the applicant requests this Court to enter findings of fact, conclusions of law and a decree approving the plan for augmentation. Respectfully submitted, VRANESH AND MUSICK By 42:/' lay B.B." Schroeder (2447) P. O. Box 871 Boulder, Colorado 80306 (303) 443-6151 1-800-332-2701 ATTORNEYS FOR APPLICANT - 7 - STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF BOULDER ) Wayne B. Schroeder, being first duly sworn, deposes and states that he has read the foregoing application and that the facts contained therein are true to the best of his knowledge. / Ze-44-11 Way e B:- Schroeder , SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this . 't�ii day of di,I--2- -,-,6:I., , 1977. ./ - WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL.aec'' ::/b'tary Public My commission expires: - 8 - Al lot 'x_-41 t-7:1-‘-,., `; ' LEI 1 a ��4--t . _ _ „..,-;,---..-.4.:-.--z.::-..77- _ .ti.rp�s w ~� — • --, --?'------- -- .r1,1‘ --7--- .11: oi _,__t ..1.,______ At,..�f..i t i./ " .�I mod- L �? ` �_` _'_�--��1 �' [--T�_--=-----,,...z. .AZ / -t --,--___.,-- — ._...„,..-_<:::',.. .),-.5.-5,A.,--: - - t,a.: —.., Y w `1` t _.rr _,4, 'mil_ ,_��..-..---:4F--1,3,-,_ - ♦ • - '1 •"".� 7 L' 4 ._. i�'� + �c ,1*N- p, �1 ''''441-'----4/ . i 1 /�O .v --.71-- ' t . 4 -`(�}'.�¢` � �L Ai —= �-' -.-411 :- ..-,f-i_..19.. Y� _ .r �.`..-%_ "'` ,. . .L '. .-C L'�.i -\--4. --__ .__, "sit'17 l ^1 I GREELEY CIVIC CENTER - W . Q .)-O�� GREELEY COLORADO (O 60631 June 1, 1977 — 7 ' . 1 R v Lop, 6 iSSCc / \ - R.V. Lord and Associates, Inc. • P.O. Box 335 T s` Boulder, Colorado 80302 III-10 ')/ Attention: Robert F. Matthias Dear Mr. Matthias: With regard to your letter dated May 26, 1977, I have discussed your request with the City Engineer, Max Karner and as a result approval of the subject storm sewer tap will be granted. The following requirements, however, will have to be met before construction can begin. 1. Sewer tap fee of $50. 00 will have to be paid. - 2. A plan indicating location, materials and type of connection will have to be submitted. The construction of the tap will also be subject to inspection by a member of our staff. If I can be of any further assistance please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, J Dan Bunting ' Engineering Aide DB/ms "A COMMUNITY OF PROGRESS" U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 10-75 NS-5 APPENDIX 12 SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE 10-75 FILE CODE CONS-14-5 ( INVENTORY & EVALUATION OF LAND, WATER, AND RELATED RESOURCES REQUESTED BY Bestway Paving Company LOCATION 75 Ac. in SE4j NE4 Sec. 2, T5N, R66W ASSISTED BY Ronald D. Miller DATE May 16, 1977 * ® INDIVIDUAL ❑ GROUP ❑ UNIT OF GOVERNMENT SITUATION: See attached letter of request. iI SUGGESTED SOLUTION(S) Soils and recommended procedures: As you will note from attached soils map and soil descriptions the predominate soil type is Otero sandy loam, 1 to 3 percent slope. At least twelve (12) inches of the topsoil should be stock piled and replaced after mining operations to provide an adequate topsoil for farming or for development purposes. At least six (6) feet of soil material should be placed over the area to provide adequate depth between the surface and any water table that should be created during mining operations. This will provide adequate depth for crops as well as depth for building purposes. VEGETATIVE COVER: For a vegetative ground cover on slopes of 3:1 or flatter, and exposure to the north and east a mixture of the following grasses could be seeded: Western wheatgrass (Agropyron smithii) 30%, variety Barton; Side oats grama (Bouteloua curtipendula) 40%, variety vaughn; Blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis) 30%, variety lovington. *Check appropriate category (2) To do best they should be drilled into the seedbed where possible. If not possible then broadcast at a rate of double recommended seeding rate. Recommended Seeding Rate: 40 pure live seed (PLS)/Sq. Ft. Western wheatgrass 30 = 4.8 lbs PLS/Ac. Blue grama 30% = 0.6 lbs PLS/Ac. Side oats grama 40% = 3.5 lbs PLS/Ac. DRILLED TOTAL = 8.9 lbs PLS/Ac. BROADCAST TOTAL = 17.8 lbs PLS/Ac. Mature height of these grasses once established will be in range of 12 to 15 inches which should preclude the necessity to mow or clip. For 3:1 slopes or flatter with south and west exposure the following mixture would be acceptable. Blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis) 30%, and Side oats grama (Bouteloua curtipendula) 70%. Recommended Seeding Rate: 40 pure live seed (PLS)/Sq. Ft. Blue grama 30% = 0.6 lbs PLS/Ac. Side oats grama 70% = 6.2 lbs PLS/Ac. DRILLED TOTAL = 6.8 lbs PLS/Ac. BROADCAST TOTAL = 13.6 lbs PLS/Ac. Slopes at 3:1 should be mulched after seeding to reduce water and wind erosion before the area is protected by the seeded vegetative cover. An effective mulch of clean straw (grass, hay, or cereal grain) applied at a rate of 4,000 pounds per acre will provide 92 percent of coverage for soil surface. This will increase soil moisture and lessen the surface temperature to protect germinating seeds and seedlings. The straw should be crimped into the soil to prevent it from blowing and washing away. Other acceptable mulch materials are excelsior matting, jute netting, or erosion control fabric. (3) The flat bottom area can be seeded with hay crop grasses and legumes. These will provide excellent ground cover as well as an economic return of sellable hay. A typical mixture reconuuendation seeded at 40 PLS/Sq. Ft. would be: Alfalfa (Medicago sativa) 75% = 6.0 lbs PLS/Ac. Smooth Brome (Bromus inermis) 25% = 3.3 lbs PLS/Ac. DRILLED TOTAL = 9.3 lbs PLS/Ac. OR Orchard grass (Dactylis glomerate) 600 = 1.6 lbs PLS/Ac. Smooth Brome (Bromus inermis) 4070 = 4.6 lbs PLS/Ac. DRILLED TOTAL = 6.2 lbs PLS/Ac. Amount of production per acre would definitly be higher from the alfalfa grass mixture. If the area were not to be irrigated then the recommended rates should be cut in half. (( SEEDING DATES: All seedings should be made in the spring if possible to take advantage of the best moisture period. Best dates are between March 15th and May 15th. Later seeding could be done up to June 1st if supple- mental water is to be applied to site or if precipitation is forecast. Late fall seeding of slopes can be made after October 15th. Germination will not.take place until following spring. SEED EQUIPMENT: An effort should be made to insure all seedings are drilled with a good grass drill. This will insure a better seed germination and survival rate. Broadcast seeding is acceptable but not recommended. (4) WOODY PLANTS: The following is a list of woody plant species that are suited to this site. • Caragana (Caragana aborescens) Hackberry (Celtis occidentalis) Cotoneaster (Cotoneaster acqutifolia) Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia) Honey locust (Gleditsia tricanthos) Rocky mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum) Eastern redcedar (Juniperus virginiana) Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) American plum (Prunus americana) Russian apricot (Prunus siberica) J Skunkbush sumac (Rhus trilobata) Siberian elm (Ulmus pumila) BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY GILSABIND CONVIDAR OPERATIONS STANDARDS 1. No excavation or processing of sand and gravel shall be permitted nearer than 10 feet to the boundary of adjacent property, easement or irrigation ditch or right-of-way, nor nearer than 125 feet to any existing residence. A four-foot high, ten-foot wide or wider perimeter berm shall be constructed of overburden and topsoil materials immediately adjacent to property lines or easement lines located along the entire length of the east edge of the site, with the exception of one entrance location onto 35th Avenue, and the entire length of the south edge of the site, and 10 feet from and parallel with abutting property lines on the entire length of the west edge of the site which bears N9°12' 16"E for a distance of 1040.61 feet. No berm shall be constructed along the west edge of the site which bears N13°44' 30"W for a distance of 1300. 19 feet until the beginning of Phase l0 of the mining operations as shown on the Mining Plan Map. Prior to beginning Phase of the Mining Operations, a four-foot high, ten-foot wide or wider perimeter berm shall be constructed no less than 10 feet from and parallel with abutting property lines along the west edge of the site which bears N13°44' 30"W for a distance of 1300. 19 feet . No berm shall be constructed along the Greeley No. 3 Ditch. The height of the berm on the east edge of the site shall be four feet above the existing centerline elevation of 35th Avenue. The height of the berm on the west edge of the site shall be four feet above the existing elevation of abutting property lines. The height of the berm on the south edge of the site shall be four feet above the existing centerline elevation of 4th Street . Vegetation of the berms shall be in accordance with the recommendations of the West Greeley Soil Conservation District as outlined in the supplemental materials dated January 31 , 1978, on Pages 4 through 7 prepared by R. V. Lord and Associates, Inc. Seedling trees shall be planted at intervals not to exceed 30 feet between trees. In addition, ponderosa pines 5 to 6 feet in height shall be planted at intervals not to exceed 210 feet . All tree species planted at the site shall include those recom- mended by the West Greeley Soil Conservation District . BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY and GILSABIND CONVIDAR shall maintain and care for the vegetation of the berms and all trees. Watering of the vegetation and trees shall be by tank or water truck. All dead trees shall be replaced by a similar species of equal size and/or height . BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY GILSABIND CONVIDAR OPERATIONS STANDARDS Page 2 Vegetation and tree landscaping of the berm constructed along the west edge of the site which bears N13°44' 30"W for a distance of 1300. 19 feet shall be completed within six months after beginning Phase____of of the mining opera- tions. All other berms shall be constructed with vege- tation and tree landscaping within six months of approval by the State Mined Land Reclamation Board. 2. All sand and gravel operations shall be conducted during the hours of daylight except in the case of public or private emergency, or to make necessary repairs to equipment . This restriction shall not apply to operation of administrative and executive offices or repair facilities located on the property. 3. Weeds and any other unsightly or noxious vegetation shall be cut or trimmed as may be necessary to preserve a reasonably neat appearance and to prevent seeding on adjoining property. 4. Existing trees and ground cover along public road frontage and drainageways shall be preserved, maintained and supple- mented if necessary, for the depth of the setback in order to protect against and/or reduce noise, dust and erosion. 5. Access to the site will be limited to one entrance on 35th Avenue, south of the Greeley No. 3 Ditch. 6. All access roads from sand and gravel operations to public highways, roads, or streets, or to adjoining residential structures, shall be paved or otherwise treated to mini- mize dust conditions on all parts of such access roads which are located withon one-fourth mile of the public highway, road, street , or adjoining residential structure. 7. BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY and GILSABIND-CONVIDAR shall con- struct a six-foot high, solid wooden privacy fence along the entire length of the west edge of the site, the entire length of the east edge of the site and the entire length of the south edge of the site. No fence will be built along the Greeley No. 3 Ditch. A six-foot high chain link fence may be substituted on the east edge of the site for a distance not to exceed 200 feet south of the entrance onto 35th Avenue. All fencing shall be constructed on the centerline of the four-foot high, ten-foot wide or wider berm, except along the west edge of the site which bears N13°44' 30"W a distance of 1300. 19 feet which shall be constructed no less than 10 feet from abutting property lines and no less than one foot from and parallel with the west edge of the existing BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY GILSABIND CONVIDAR OPERATIONS STANDARDS Page 3 concrete irrigation ditch. Upon construction of the four- foot high, ten-foot wide or wider berm which bears N13°44 ' 30"W a distance of 1300. 19 feet , the fence shall be relocated on the centerline of the berm. All other fences shall be constructed within six months of approval by the State Mined Reclamation Board. BEST-WAY PAVING and GILSABIND CONVIDAR shall have the responsibility for maintaining the fences in good repair and free from debris. 8. Where topsoil is removed, sufficient arable soil shall be set aside, for respreading over the excavated area. 9. The gravel plant , asphalt plant and scale shall remain in their present location. The rock crusher shall remain within the approximate limit of the existing pit as shown on the mining plan map. 10. BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY and GILSABIND-CONVIDAR shall fur- nish evidence it is insured to the extent of not less than $100, 000. 00 against liability for any negligent act or omission by the operator from the operation or mainten- ance of the sand and gravel pit and the extraction and production of sand and gravel and all activities connected with or incidental thereto. 11. A fugitive dust emission permit shall be applied for and obtained through the Weld County Health Department . 12. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System waste discharge permit shall be applied for through the Colorado Department of Health for any discharge of groundwater. 13. Garbage and refuse on the property shall be disposed of in a sanitary manner. 14. All phases of the operation must conform to maximum per- missible noise levels as stated in 25-12-103, CRS, 1973 . All loaders and scrapers shall be muffled when areas / , , and through / are mined. Noise levels shall not exceed 55 db(A) between the hours of 7: 00 a.m. to 7: 00 p.m. and 50 db(A) between the hours of 7: 00 p.m. and 7: 00 a.m. at the property lines. 15. A water spray bar shall be installed on the existing rock crusher for dust control. 16. The stockpiles shall be located within the approximate limit of the existing pit as shown on the mining plan map. BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY GILSABIND CONVIDAR OPERATIONS STANDARDS Page 4 17. A 10 foot wide maintenance road shall be constructed and maintained immediately adjacent to the property line along the entire length of the west edge of the site. 18. All references to BEST-WAY PAVING COMPANY and GILSABIND CONVIDAR shall include its heirs, successors, and assigns. 19. The Special Use Permit shall be limited to the plans shown hereon and governed by the Operations Standards stated above and all applicable Weld County Regulations. Any material deviations from the plans and/or Operations Stan- dards 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 Operations Standards shall be permitted. Any other changes from the plans and/or Operations Standards shall be filed in the Office of the Department of Planning Services. BESTWAY PAVING COMPANY Proposed Operations Standards The following paragraph numbers refer to Operations Standards contained in Section 6. 1 (3)E of the Weld County Mineral Resource Extraction Plan, Volume II , July, 1975. 1 . The operation will adhere to the setback requirements as designated. A berm will be constructed immediately adjacent to property lines or easement lines. 2. The operation will adhere to this restriction. 3. The operation will adhere to this restriction. Also, BESTWAY PAVING COMPANY agrees to revegetate all disturbed areas as soon as possible according to the Soil Conservation Service recommendations contained in the development report. 4. The operation will adhere to this restriction. 5. Access to the site will be limited to the present entrance on 35th Avenue, South of the Greeley No. 3 Ditch. 6. The operation will adhere to this restriction. 7. The site will be bounded on the south by a 6-foot wooden privacy fence, on the east by a 6-foot chain link fence, on the southwest by a 6-foot chain link fence, and on the northwest by a 6-foot wooden privacy fence. No fence will be built along the Greeley No. 3 Ditch. 8. The operation will adhere to this restriction. 9. The crusher, gravel plant and asphalt plant will remain in their present location. 10. This requirement has been fulfilled. 11 . Applicable State and Federal Laws and local County and City regulations governing the operation shall be obeyed. J ,i BESTWAY PAVING COMPANY Reclamation Standards The following paragraph numbers refer to Reclamation Standards contained in Section 6. 1 (3)F of the Weld County Mineral Resource Extraction Plan, Volume II , July, 1975. 1 . The operation will adhere to this restriction. The site will be reclaimed to an interior-drainage configuration. Revegeta- tion will be as proposed in the development report. 2. The operation will adhere to this restriction. No slope greater than 3: 1 will remain. 3. Not applicable 4. Not applicable. 5. The operation will adhere to this restriction. Berms will be vegetated to minimize erosion exterior to the site. 6. The operation will adhere to this restriction. The pond will be approximately 15 feet deep. 7. The operation will adhere to this restriction. This is discussed in detail in the development report. /�_ Tr, RECE RJ 3 r i , , ''In ,i,'i, I,'i$jfll ,E Representatives of stway Paving Company and Gilsabind Convidar have statt l consistently throughout the various public hearings regarding the rezoning that they are concerned about the neighboring residents . Further, they have announced that with proper bufferings and restric- tions the area residents would not feel the impact of a gravel pit. The following requests are in direct response to the applicants ' statements . The requests are divided into five categories: I. Buffering and Area Protection A. In accordance with the recommendation of the City of ' Greeley Planning Commission, Bestway Paving Company and Gilsabind Convidar shall adhere to a 100 feet set-back for their mining operations . This set-back shall extend along all peripheries of the approximate 45 acres in question abutting properties not owned by Bestway Paving Company or Gilsabind Convidar. B. Prior to any mining activities commencing, a berm which shall extend 4 feet above the level of 4th Street and/or 35th Avenue shall be constructed along the entire 100 ft. set-back line. C. A 6 foot privacy fence shall be built on top of the entire length of the berm. The entire fence shall be constructed before any mining activities shall com- mence . The fence shall be constructed of unpainted rough cedar. D. Along the entire length of the privacy fence on the side facing the properties adjacent to the approximate 45 acres and on the berm, 5 ft. to 6 ft. tall Austrian pine trees shall be planted . These trees shall be spaced at intervals as minimal as possible. These minimal spacing distances shall be determined in consultation with two independent nurseries. Two representatives of H.O.P.E. shall attend each of the consultations to verify the re- commended spacing distances . All trees shall be planted prior to any mining activities commencing. In addition to the Austrian Pines, 5 ft. to 6 ft. tall cottonless cottonwood trees shall be planted in the areas between the berms and adjacent properly boundaries . The distances between the cottonless cottonwoods shall be those distances recommended by two independent nur- series . The cottonless cottonwoods will be planted before any mining activities commence. E. All areas between the fencing and adjacent property boundaries shall be r . Ided or seeded in a manner consistent with lawn of residents in the area south of 4th Street. These area plantings shall be done prior to the commencement of any mining activities. F. All mining and related activities in and on the approximate 45 acres in question shall take place only between 8 : 00 a .m. and 5 : 00 p.m. and only on the days Monday through Friday. No mining or related activities shall take place before 8 : 00 a .m. and after 5 : 00 p.m. , and no mining or related activities shall take place on Saturdays , Sundays, and national holidays . G. No mining or related activities shall take place when the wind velocity exceeds 30 miles per hour . H. No noise emitting from the approximate 45 acres in question shall exceed state and/or county limits. I. Should any drainage problems along 4th Street occur as a result of Bestway Paving Company ' s and/or Gilsabind Convidar ' s mining and related activities or their development of bufferings, Bestway Paving and/or Gilsa- bind Convidar shall be liable and responsible for any damage occurring to area homeowner ' s properties because of the drainage problem. (See 12-3-77 memorandum from West Greeley Soil Conservation District and 1-12-78 memorandum from County Engineer. ) J. Stockpiles of any and all materials on or in the approxi- mate 45 acres in question shall not be created high enough to be visible from area homeowners ' properties . K. Bestway Paving and/or Gilsabind Convidar shall adhere to the descriptions of planting the unmined and/or reclaimed areas of that portion of the approximate 45 acres which shall be used for mining which have been delineated in the original and/or supplemental plans developed by Lord and Associates for Bestway Paving and/ or Gilsabind Convidar and previously submitted to the Weld County Department of Planning. L. There shall be only one entrance/exit onto the approxi- mate 45 acres in question and that access shall be through the northern portion of the approximate 45 acres to question. M. As per the Weld County Health Department' s statement, Bestway Paving and/or Gilsabind Convidar shall apply for a fugitive dust emission permit. N. As per the Weld County Health Department, Bestway Paving Company, et a1 . shall apply for a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit. II. Maintenance of the Buffers A. The 6 ' high, rough cedar privacy fence shall be kept free of all paint at all times . Further , the fence shall be kept free of all graffiti at all times . No fencing or portions thereof shall be in disrepair or missing for more than a 24-hour period at any given time. B. All plantings in the area exterior to the privacy fence shall be cared for and maintained in a manner consistent with the plantings of property owners in the area south of 4th Street. III. The Existing Plant Site A. In accordance with the recommendations of the Weld County Health Department, all trash and/or garbage on the present Bestway Paving and/or Gilsabind Convidar plant site shall be removed weekly. B. In an action consistent with that of Weld County, a scrubber shall be installed and maintained on the present asphalt plant. C. In accordance with the Weld County Health Department, Bestway Paving Company, et al . shall obtain a permit to operate the crusher at the present plant site. D. No equipment or buildings on the present plant site shall be moved onto any portion of the approximate 45 acres in question except for front-end loaders , trucks, and similar equipment. No newly acquired equipment or buildings shall be placed on the approximate 45 acres in question except for front-end loaders , trucks, and similar equipment. IV. Reclamation A. All reclamation plans shall be done and done in a manner consistent with the plans presented at public hearings and discussed in the original and supplemental plans developed by Lord and Associates for Bestway Paving Company, et al . B. The lake/pond created as part of the reclamation plan shall be developed and built in such a way as to prevent mosquitos breeding in or near the lake/pond. A V. Monitoring and Enforcement ' A. A board of area replfcntatives shall be created to monitor all above identified restrictions. This board shall consist of persons elected by H.0.P .E. The number of persons on the board and the manner in which board members are elected and replaced shall be determined by II .0.P .E. The board is to monitor Bestway Paving ' s et al . adherence to the above identi- fied restrictions, to report any suspected violations or deviations to the appropriate local and/or state agencies, and to monitor the action (s) taken by the appropriate local and/or state agencies once they have been contacted about suspected deviations or violations . Weld County officials shall recognize this board as the official group representing the area property owners and residents and shall respond appropriately to their contacts. These requests are made in order to protect the area residents. ' They were developed to reduce the negative impacts of the mining operation on visual asthetics, dust pollution, noise pollution, property values , safety, health, and general quality of life. We do not feel, given the possible extent of negative effects related to having a gravel pit in the area, that these requests are unreasonable . V Best-Way Paving Company Z-294 : 77:12 SUP-347: 77:21 REFERRALS December 13, 1977 County Attorney County Engineer - CIN.,.. 11.A.) ,Jzar, County Health Greeley Planning Commission 919 7th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Jerry Kiefer 2929 17th Street Road Greeley, Colorado 80631 Colorado Geological Survey Dave Shelton 1313 Sherman Street Room 703 Denver, Colorado 80203 Soil Conservation Service _ ;, \:,., ,, ,s.vz 2017 9th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 DL . RTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES r‘c t*�<' WELD COUNTY CENTENNIAL CENTER "_'" ' - ° yi 915 10th STREET I• , GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 ° ri GARY Z. F0RTNER k it {'f n DIRECTOR OF PLANNING PHONE (303) 356-4000, EXT 400 COLOR'A 1 February 1, 1978 TO 6JHOM IT MAY CONCERN: • Enclosed is an application from Best—Way Paving Company Change of Zone from "E" Estate to "A" Agricultural District for a and Special Use Permit for a Gravel Pit This item will be heard before the Weld County Planning Commission on February 7, 1978 . If you have any comments or suggestions, may we please hear from you before February 3, 1978 . The loca- tion of the parcel of land for which this application has been submit- ted is Pt . of the NEI of Section 2, T5N, R66W Thank you. • Enclosures a d 11'L LE) C:O11N1 Y COMMI`;SIONFI S GI INN K IIII LINGS VII.!()It JAC((IIULCI I{OY MOST II ( NORMAN CARLSON • till-INMAI(I' mcmoRnnDun'. To Chuck Cunliffe February 16 , 1978 Date COLORADO From Best-Way Change of Zone Subject: , 0516771818 This memo is in response to your request for further \"3 4 c,G►� clarification of questions raised by this department NS' `�..� in a memo dated January 12, 1978 . Each item is ad- FEB 1978 dressed as numbered in the original memo. f RECEIVED0O Ethilk 1 . Additional right of way along 35th Avenue will -, gaga{a1;Commcm be dedicated. However, an additional 20' along 4th Street would fall within the utility easement 1Se for the existing electrical transmission line. It c - I foresee no future construction that would necessitate relocation of the lines, therefore, more right of way is not being requested along 4th Street . 2. Drainage between the proposed berm and 35th Avenue has been clarified by a cross section signed by Carl Hill dated February 1 , 1978. A similar situation along 4th Street was considered along with the possibility of eliminating the existing concrete irrigation ditch. In the deed between the Ruyle ' s and Best-Way there is an easement for right of way along the existing cement ditch to carry irrigation water. Since the ditch cannot be removed the idea of swailing between the berm and road is voided. There have been questions raised concerning the existing drainage conditions . The City of Greeley is presently improving storm drainage along 4th Street in coordination with the newly installed 35th Avenue systems. Questions as to the extent of improvements can only be answered by the City. 3 . See item 2 above 4 . See item 1 above 5. The 4th Street access proposal has been dropped by Best-Way. 6. Approval of the existing access on 35th Avenue remaining in place has been given. The County does intend to improve the existing entrance along with the paving of 35th Avenue this Spring. If you have any further questions or require further clari- ationsnonC these matters please contact me. Drew Scheltinga ; mmoRnnDuff.YI'M ' To Chuck Cunliffe February 8, 1978 C. Date COLORADO From Best-Way Change of Zone Subject: Attached is a cross section of 35th Avenue signed by Carl Hill. This shows the berm outside of the proposed 20' dedication and a swale between the curb and berm. Drainage along 4th Street is clarified in the supplemental report by Lord and Associates dated 1/31/78. Questions by this department in a memo dated 1/12/78 have been clarified. '1c ‘ck,_,:.:\ .--4.0__\:',c hi ' Drew Scheltinga CC mm ��g 10111� - 5P co � 0 .�,r �� LPL 'L mmonnum Planning Commission January 12, 1978 0 . To Date COLORADO From Best Way Paving- C.O. Z. and S . U. P. for Gravel Pit subject: The following are reccommendations of this office. 1. An additional 20' R. 0. W. dedication should be made along 35th Avenue and 4th Street . 2. Drainage between the 4' Berm and 35th Avenue, and 4 ' Berm and 4th Street should be controlled. 3 . Possibility of eliminating concrete irrigation ditch along 4th Street . 4. R. 0. W. on 4th Street questionable because of Utility easement . 5. All access from 4th Street denied unless City of Greeley approves . 6 . Approval of existing access on 35th Avenue only. y . 1 G. Frank Smith, Jr. County Engineer mfm W��'/ BOARD OF HEALTH eld el/_/ County Health Department DAVID WERKING DDS Greeley FRANKLIN D YODER, MD, MPH WILLIAM BLICK, Roggen Director 1516 HOSPITAL ROAD DORIS DEFFKE Greeley GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 A M DOMINGUEZ, JR , J D Greeley (303)353-0540 ANNETTE M LOPEZ, Greeley FRANK MYERS, M P H, Windsor HERSCHEL PHELPS, JR, M D, Greeley O KATHLEEN SHAUGHNESSY, PHN, Ault October 23, 1 978 ARTHUR G WATSON Platteville Gary Fortner, Director Planning & Zoning 915-10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Mr. Fortner: On Friday afternoon, October 20, 1978, I made an inspection of the Bestway Paving Company site to determine ambient noise concentrations at property lines to determine compliance with the Colorado Noise Statute 25-12-101 , C.R.S. 1973. Accompanying me on this inspection were Tom Hohn and Cathy Carter of your staff. Noise concentrations at the western boundary did not exceed 55 db(A). Working on this boundary was a scraper and a water truck. The scraper, compared to the water truck, was a quieter machine. Vehicle speeds observed did not exceed 10 m.p.h. Noise concentrations at the northern boundary, the irrigation ditch, did not exceed 50 db(A). However, the asphalt batch plant was not operating when we got to this location on the survey. Noise concen- trations along this boundary are reduced by dirt and gravel mounds of approximately 30 feet in height along part of this boundary. Noise levels at points south of the rock crusher along the existing pit/proposed pit expansion line were at 72-73 db(A). Noise generated by the rock crusher, loader, and the asphalt plant (operating at this time) seemed to be responsible for most of the recorded noise levels. Our division intends to perform other noise testing at the proposed pit expansion boundary lines within the next two weeks. However, at this time our division feels that there is no problem with noise levels emanating from the present Bestway site and that noise levels are in compliance with Colorado Noise Statute 25-12-101 , C.R.S. 1973. If we can be of further service, please feel free to contact this office. Sincerely, �-�g25262428 Ronald K. w, Supervisor rg Environmental Health Services O RKS:dr :d r �' tcc1 °P° ��' ow. citt „neaitt*w Cr) A. lei L6 0 9) WeldBOARD OF HEALTH e County Health Department DAVID WERKING, DOS,Greeley FRANKLIN D YODER, MD, MPH RALPH MB,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 March 2, 1978 JOE STOCKiON,Gilcrest Mr. Gary Fortner, Director Planning Commission 915-10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: As a result of unanswered questions about asbestos levels and hydrocarbons associated with the proposed expansion of the Best-Way Company, this department in unable to approve or disapprove this expansion. Future data obtained by this department should place us in a position to render a decision. This letter supercedes our letter dated December 28, 1977, in that a qualified approval was given for this expansion. Sincerely, hn G. Hall, . .H. Director Environmental Health Services JGH:dr CP o MAR 1978 CV RECEIVED `N + �tetiA 'ec) c'leOZ 60,‘;'y�y J 7; cliave C6l/!y z-F-FC 8t7 Vv4y 0rc.c /J BOARD OF HEALTH e ounty Health Department DAVID WERKING, DDS Greeley FRANKLIN D YODER, MD, MPH RALPH MB Greeley Director 1516 HOSPITAL ROAD WILLIAM BUCK 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 February 23, 1978 JOE STOCKTON Gilcrest Anthony Robbins, M.D. , M.P.A. Executive Director Colorado Department of Health 4210 E. 11th Avenue Denver, CO 80220 Dear Dr. Robbins: The proposed expansion of a gravel pit and asphalt plant in the Greeley area has given rise to several health related questions concerning residents of this area. One question involves the possible adverse health affect of asbestos containing rock when it is mined or crushed. The November 10, 1977 issue of the Federal Register addressed this problem and cited a - problem in Rockville, Maryland, in which significant quantities of asbestos were found in the air near crushing operations. - A second question involves the release of oxides of sulfur in the production and manufacture of asphalt. Specifically, how much of this pollutant would a typical asphalt plant release to the atmosphere, and what are the expected health hazards related to such an operation? We request, as soon as possible, assistance in assessing the possible hazards from your staff, the state geologist, the Environmental Protection _ Agency, and any other appropriate agency. We look forward to hearing from you or a member of your staff concerning this matter. Thank you. Yours sincerely, - Franklin D. Yoder, M.D. :Y:::mmissioner x` 23?_4?5?6�,_ Ed Dunbar, Chr. `1\ " �E �\ Commissioner Norman Carlson }1 1978 'J\ Commissioner Victor Jacobucci FEB Commissioner Leonard Roe RECEIVED = Commissioner June Steinmark �cs '1 CC "' Dr. David Werking F;ari og Co ° '�°�� John Hall, Director of Environmental Health Services Gy FOrtger Director of Planning-Weld County ��` Ot 6 U� �ar WeldBOARD OF HEALTH e County Health Department P DAVID WERKING, DDS,Greeley FRANKLIN D YODER, MD, MPH RALPH AAB,Greeley Director 1516 HOSPITAL ROAD WILLIAM BUCK, Roggen GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 DORIS DEFFKE, Greeley DONALD HERGERT. Windsor (303)3530540 ANNETTE M LOPEZ, Greeley HERSCHEL PHELPS, JR, M D, Greeley KATHLEEN SHAUGHNESSY,Ault JOE STOCKTON, Gilcrest February 16, 1978 Mr. Gary Fortner, Director Planning Commission 915-10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The following additional remarks are submitted as pertaining to the Change of Zone from "E" to "A" as requested by Best-Way Paving: (This information supplements previous correspondence from this office dated December 28, 1977 and February 6, 1978) . 1. Dust control on rock crusher shall be accomplished in a manner acceptable to this department, i.e. water spray bar. 2. Garbage and refuse on property (south side of office) shall be disposed of in a sanitary manner. (Covered daily or taken to an appropriate landfill). 3. A pit or soil analysis shall be performed to acertain presence or absence of asbestos. 4. All phases of the operation must conform to maximum permissable noise levels as stated in 25-12-103, C.R.S. , 1973. Sincerely, *sod. N....4jetle n G. Hall, M.P.H. , Director Environmental Health Services JGH:dr (tr,13105477r0\� FEB 1978 a: RECEIVED 0O r— Weld Cou®ty to Planning Comissiao.51 ��52�L�ti t �� I BOARD OF HEALTH Weld County Health .department DAVID WERKING, DDS, Greeley FRANKLIN D YODER, MD, MPH RALPH MB, Greeley Director 1516 HOSPITAL ROAD WILLIAM BLICK, 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 February 6, 1978 Gary Fortner, Director Planning Commission 915-10th St. Greeley, CO 80631 BEST WAY PAVING CO. RE: Change of Zone E to A & SUP-Gravel Pit TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Additional remarks requested by your department: 1. We cannot make a determination of noise levels because we were not funded by the County Commissioners for our request for sound detection equipment. However, it does appear that muffling of both loaders and scrapers will be necessary when areas 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 10 through 14 are mined. (Mining Plan - Lord & Associates for Best-Way) . However, sound levels will be attenuated as the working face is lowered. State Health personnel indicate that two sources of sound at the same intensity generate only an increase of 3 dB to the sound generated by one. Sincerely, o � is�Gca.� ,, � , i) John G. Hall, M.P.H. , Director Environmental Health Services JGH:dr c FEB 1978 IRECEiVE!D gcLing r-c3 Panting Comex22 Z31, �CCkGu Weld OF HEALTH WV el/_/ 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 JOE STOCKTON, Glicrest December 28, 1977 Mr. Gary Fortner, Director Planning Commission 915-10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: This department approves the request by Best-Way Paving for Change of Zone from "E" Estate to "A" Agricultural and a Special Use Permit for a Gravel pit with the following provisions: 1. A fugitive dust emission permit must be applied for through the Weld County Health Department. The application for this permit must be accompanied by a pit analysis. 2. A separate emission permit application must be made before a rack crusher is added to the site. 3. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) waste discharge permit shall be applied for through the Colorado Department of Health for any discharge of groundwater. Sincerely, Jam,_ _ Jo G. Hall, M.P.H. , ire tor Environmental Health Services JGH:dr • 1Y 179/7 r t%' 'c. a J .0:'' °< est Greeley Soil Conservation District ♦ SOIL • M CONSERVATION 7 ICI DISTRICTS �, �MOf P. 0. Box 86 • Greeley, Colorado 80631 '�� December 30, 1977 CID Gary Z. Fortner Director of Planning Weld County Centennial Center 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 The following comments are in response to the request for review of the Mining Reclamation Plan for Bestway Paving Company, application for Special Use Permit for a gravel pit to be located in the NE4 of Section 2, Twp. 5N, Range 66W. Our office provided recommendations to the consulting firm in preparation of their plan. Our review indicates that those recommendations have been incor- porated into the plan. The information was a basis for their replacement of topsoil for revegetation purposes and cropping systems. The revegetation plan includes our recommendations for species of grasses, trees and shrubs to be used. The reclamation plan does include proper sloping and necessary mulching to insure vegetation establishment and erosion protection. The amount of surface drainage discussed in the plan was to be handled by re- construction of adequate curb and gutter along 4th Street. If temporary re- direction of the surface water is done prior to reconstruction, then care must be excercised to insure that the diverted water will not inundate adjacent pro- perties. Sincerely, Milton Baumgartner, Presia'ent West Greeley Soil Conservation District MB/jb 1 I AMMO n 3 14 s '.1,:i 1 jr---l'1 a.1.1iiiioli.j.ii 13 _..------4- ',.',;,4,,--,:- .4r "---. }1 s i I :1 GREELEY CIVIC CENTER GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 PHONE (303) 353-6123 February 17, 1978 Weld County Planning Dept. Centennial Center 916 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Attention: Mr. Cunliffe Dear Sir: In response to your question, the recently installed storm sewer in West 4th Street between 35th Avenue and 40th Avenue was designed for a 50-year storm. The intent is to receive storm water south of 4th Street. Inlets were placed along the south side of 4th Street at the locations shown on the attached plan. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, ax yy A. Karn Acting City Engineer MAK:ms FEB 1978 L-- RECEIVED „- 0) Weld County °° Planning Commission ' H 1 "A COMMUNITY OF PROGRESS" / i; _ 1 .. .. - — -� 4111111 frte.0 t ...". — V - el 10.0 Iti.1. 644 . 41 I Valli ..... -.;.% O. 0 ' ' -' ' '''-- ' -...$, -eePootrf " , y - t 9 %J. ' ra . sue' Mg.'- '. It ar_1� i 1_ - "1r ` . ` L- GREELEY CIVIC CENTER GREELEY COLORADO 80631 PHONE (303) 353-6123 January 18, 1978 Weld County Planning Department Centennial Complex Greeley, Colorado 80631 Attention: Chuck Cunliffe Dear Sir: In response to your question regarding Bestway excavation permit, I offer two comments; One, an entrance from 4th Street is acceptable, and two, an additional dedication of 10' for street right-of-way will be neces- sary. The entrance should be opposite one of the existing Avenues. If you have any further questions please advise. Very truly yours, 2 Max A. Karner Acting City Engineer RE MAK:ms C R'ED ',:, Ci;, ,/ ,s G_ , ;l--,1 Y " ./: "A COMMUNITY OF PROGRESS" 11 ..1.----. . ,...- v.. . _ ,, j..., . • _ • _ _TIM LL _ t �x - -77.i 4,00.4 �. III litoligir" IN .N�' lligir- IN :rte"' . , - it 0 VP, ,. ...--lir . -S.„ ,,:- .°: _ ,,,,'.,,,:t_ '''.`kvist'. - - - j ; AIS:::: s'.,.: -..::•_:.,. ..1 -1„.. ...zr‘or t t,,,, - ..vi*,:.,,,:::*..r..2 . .....;44.41_,:_z,44.„ _ . ,,,,ive \-.;i4.;...- -_, GREELEY CIVIC CENTER GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 PHONE (303) 353.6123 January 12 , 1978 Tom Honn Director of Planning Services Weld Centennial Center Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Tom: Re: Zone Change and Mining Permit: Best-Way Paving Company The Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed zone change from "E" to "A" that would permit mining of gravel at the 45 acre site at 35th Avenue and 4th Street. The Commission expressed concerns for impacts on the neighborhood located south of 4th Street. The recommendation from the Commission is one of no objection, provided that a buffer of approximately 100 feet be maintained north of the 4th Street right-of-way. This buffer would be left in its natural state and excavation could begin beyond the buffer. Enclosed is a copy of the minutes from the Administrative Review Team. Planning Commission minutes have not yet been typed. Please contact me if I could be of further assistance . Sincerely, hn Given , , rrent Planner JG:ka J (1 " Enclosure "A COMMUNITY OF PROGRESS" / 1 11 iJ IOAUIORD PUBLIMNO CO,GRAVER RECORD O F PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission Page 3 January 10, 1978 He made a motion for acceptance of staff's recommendation for mixed C-1, C-3, and PUD. Commissioner Dietz seconded the motion. Commissioner Modlin asked if they had the authority to change the zoning request. Ron Lamden replied that zoning can he initiated by the Commission. Chairman Cummins noted that Mr. Todd should receive answers to his questions before going to City Council. A vote was taken and the motion carried unanimously. limmimmume IV. REFERRAL FROM COUNTY: REZONING ESTATE TO AGRICULTURAL AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT LOCATION: 4th Street and3 FOR 5thAv GRAVELEXCAVATION Avenue . Corner) 'I k Mr. Sasaki explained that the site is outside of the City limits and the request is to rezone from estate to agricultural with a Special Use Permit for gravel mining. Staff's recommendation is that the gravel excavation be Z-294 allowed, with a 200 foot setback from 4th Street. They recommend no SUP-34'; objections to the zone change or the Special Use Permit, with this restric- tion. • Mr. Methias of Lord F, Associates presented the plans, explaining that the operation has been in existence for 15 years as a non-conforming in the County. They propose to leave a 14 acre pond where the hold is formed. i The plant site would be kept for future use while the remainder of the land will be reclaimed for agricultural uses. Property owners have requested the `' F • deletion of part of the berm because a ditch forms a type of natural berm in the same place. The operation should take 16-25 years, depending on demand. Commissioner Keirnes asked if the cores had been drilled. Mr. Methias I 'replied that they have. Commissioner Ewald questioned the request of the County for rezoning "E" to "A". Mr. Sasaki explained that "A" is the only zoning which allows mining. He also noted that a letter was received " objecting to the zone change and Special Use Permit. The person had concerns with the length of time the mining would take and has read the report. She would like to see the property develop residentially, as it is already zoned for this. Chairman Cummins noted that the state requires extraction, even under other zoning. Commissioner Ewald asked what the maintenance would be for the setback. Mr. Sasaki noted that staff's 200 foot suggestion was an arbitrary figure set because of their concern with the open pit. Mr. Methias commented that there would be a problem with what to do with the property for the setback. Commissioner Ewald moved to have no objections to the rezoning or the Special Use Permit, with the recommendation that a minimum setback of 100 feet he provided. Commissioner Modlin seconded the motion. Chairman Cummins noted that a 5 year review period is required here. Mr. Sasaki commented that if the plan is followed, there should he no problems. A vote was taken and the motion carried unanimously. ` V. RIiFERRAI. FROM COUNTY: RECORDED EXEMPTION LOCATION: 3225 23rd Avenue Mr. Sasaki pointed out the location of the property and explained that the petitioner wishes to split the lot through the recorded exemption process . Commissioner Ewald asked what the zoning is. John Given replied that it is estate. Commissioner Ewald moved for no objections. Commissioner Keirnes seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried unanimously. VI. REFERRAL FROM COUNTY: RECORDED EXEMPTION LOCATION: 1032 North 11th Avenue Mr. Sasaki pointed out the location of the property on 11th Avenue, noting +� that it is out of the flood plain area. It would be used for produce so a raised dock would prevent problems with this also. The area is projected as industrial so this use would fit. Staff had no objections to the lot split. Commissioner Ewald questioned the sizes of lots "A" and "B". Mr. 1 Sasaki replied that Lot A is 6. 1 acres and Lot B is 2.19 acres. Commissioner Keirnes made a motion for no objections. Commissioner Dietz seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried unanimously. I� a 9\O'*'"''''; Cg7Y6rIvA"- Y1 119 STAVII 4)1471'3:"IllillitAt)() I). RICHARD D LAMM I‘ GOVERNOR JOHN W. BOLD �Nc Director 'NE-ro. COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 345 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (0'2. 6, dP 715 STATE CENTENNIAL BUILDING - 1313 SHLRMAN STREET '� 4� DENVER COLORADO 80203 PHONE (303) 892-2611 APR 1978 0 RECEIVED March 30, 1978 Weld Canty Planning Commission Mr. John Hall . Weld County Dept. of Health 1516 Hospital Road Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Mr. Hall : Thank you for delivering the gravel samples to our office. Before I discuss the composition of these gravels, I would like to provide some background information on asbestos and occurrences in the Cache la Poudre River basin. "Asbestos" is not a mineral . Rather it is a term applied to certain minerals when those minerals crystallize as asbestiform varieties. The term also refers to industrial products obtained by mining and processing primarily asbestiform minerals. "Asbestiform" is a specific type of mineral fibrosity in which the fibers exhibit high tensile strength and flexibility. Crystal cleavage and acicular (needlelike) and prismatic crystal habits are often mistaken for fibrosity in megascopic examination of mineral specimens. Serpentine and several amphibole-group minerals (anthophyllite, cummingtonite- grunerite, actinolite-tremolite, and riebeckite) are the most common minerals that occur in this fibrous form, usually in veins or small veinlets of metamorphic rock containing or composed of the nonasbestiform variety. Only a very small percentage of these minerals occur as asbestiform varieties and under particular geologic conditions , In a few rare cases, these occurrences are large enough to be economically recovered, as in Arizona, California, North Carolina, Georgia, and Vermont, the major U. S. sources. Fewer than a dozen occurrences of serpentine and asbestos minerals are reported in Colorado. The two reported occurrences in the Cache la Poudre River basin are from the Greeley-Poudre tunnel (massive nonfibrous serpentine) and from the Copper King Mine in the Prairie Divide district. In the latter, antho- phyllite, cummingtonite, and actinolite are present in an amphibole skarn, a tabular, complexly folded body less than 6 ft thick and contained within a biotite granite mass. The actinolite and cummingtonite occur as short bladed crystals. The anthophyllite reportedly occurs as "sheaves of curved fibers" averaging 0.5 inch in length. Whether or not this is a genuine fibrous occurrence and whether or not the fibrous occurrence is asbestiform, the chances of this material from such an extremely small area withstanding a 24- mile transport to the Poudre River is negligible. Even more remote are the GEOLOGY STORY OF THE PAST . . . KEY TO THE FUTURE �(® $ r Mr. John Hall March 30, 1978 Page 2 chances of finding any of these minerals in random sampling at Greeley, an additional 40 miles downstream. Furthermore the skarn at the mine is exposed only at depth, not at the surface. Al Hornbaker and I examined the pit-run and crushed samples and found the following lithologies (descending order of abundance) : Medium- and coarse-grained biotite granite pegmatitic or vein quartz and feldspar fragments hornblende-biotite gneiss biotite schist In addition, two fragments of volcanic rock and several small granules of argillite(?) were seen. The sand fractions of all the samples showed a predominance of individual quartz and feldspar grains with a few mica flakes. Several samples of the gneiss and schist showed chloritic and epidote alteration. Hornblende was the only amphibole observed in any of the spec- imens. An examination of the geologic map shows that the mountainous part of the river basin is dominated by Sherman Granite and felsic and hornblendic gneisses, which are the principal lithologies seen in the samples. The source area simply does not contain the rock types typical of asbestos occurrences. I am certain that a petrographic examination of particulates from crushed fractions of the gravel will confirm this. Therefore, I can state rather conclusively that asbestiform-mineral content is not an item requiring consideration in the operation of gravel pits in the Cache la Poudre River Valley. Sincerely, f/ Stephen Schwochow Mineral Resources Geologist SS/dks I �( e OF'CO0 414 RICHARD D. LAMM * '))`�� * JOHN W. ROLD GOVERNOR * , * Director 18 76 COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 715 STATE CENTENNIAL BUILDING-1313 SHERMAN STREET DENVER,COLORADO 80203 PHONE (303)839-2611 February 15, 1978 Mr. Thomas Hann Weld Co. Dept. of Planning Services Weld Co. Centennial Center 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Tom: RE: BEST-WAY PAVING SPECIAL USE PERMIT After talking with you on Wednesday, I checked the Weld County Mineral Resource Extraction Plan and could find no operations or reclamation standard that would prohi- bit the extraction of gravel down to the bedrock contact. Therefore, the Best-Way Paving Co. would not be in viola- tion of county mining regulations by mining the gravel to bedrock at their pit west of Greeley. Consequently, I see no serious geologic problems involved with the operation as described in the report by Lord and Associates. Sincerely, ‘,44;1, Stephen D. Schwochow Engineering Geologist SDS/vt cc: Robert Matthias Neb 44/ o FEB X978 � 0) RECEIVE® ' r— N/bld C9CLnj, ti Planning Com�issfo® GEOLOGY STORY OF THE PAST . . . KEY TO THE FUTURE S 1,411 of co o RICHARD D. LAMM * * JOHN W. ROLD 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 _1 ! RECEIVED -" December 19, 1977 . Mr. Ken McWilliams Weld Co. Dept. of Planning Services Weld Co. Centennial Center 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Ken: RE: BEST-WAY PAVING SPECIAL USE PERMIT The Best-Way Paving Co. currently operates at gravel pit in the NE% Sec. 2, T5N, R66W, an area shown as "Ti" on the CGS gravel resources map of the Greeley quadrangle. Terrace deposits south of the river in this area are not only of exceptional quality but also are quite thick. Test holes from the Lord and Associates' report show about 50 ft of gravel overlying the shale bedrock. The present operation and the intent to mine farther southward obviously indicate that the site contains a commercial mineral deposit. The description of the mining, reclamation, and afteruse represents a fine example of multiple-sequential land-use. The public response to this proposal, as outlined in the Lord report, further shows that such an operation can successfully be carried on in residential and agricultural zones, given the proper incentives. I would like to mention 2 minor concerns not addressed in the Lord report. Regarding safety, page 29-30, I am sure that the State will require the perimeter of the site to be fenced for protection. Graded slopes and signs will not be enough. The second item concerns the depth of the proposed excavation. The report states that gravel will be removed down to the contact with the claystone bedrock. Although this method is designed for the maximum recovery of the resource, it may not conform to the county's mining regulations. I believe that a 1- or 2-ft-thick gravel layer should be left at the bottom of the pit so as to permit the flow of groundwater across the site after recla- mation. This procedure should not interfere with dewatering during the actual operation. I see no other serious geologic problems in- volved with the operation. Sincerely, Stephen D. Schwochow SDS/vt GEOLOGY Engineering Geologist STORY OF THE PAST . . . KEY TO THE FUTURE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE 4302 W. 9th St. Road, Greeley, Co. 80631 February 16, 1978 Gary Z. Fortner Director of Planning Department of Planning Services Weld County Centennial Center 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 The following comments are in answer to subsequent request to review additional material submitted for Best Way Paving Company Special Use Permit for a Gravel Pit located in the NE4 of Sec. 2, Twp. 5N, Range 66W. The additional materials submitted covered the stripping, mining, gravel plant etc. All sloping, seeding, mulching and selection of tree species for plant- ing as stated are in accordance with Soil Conservation Service recommen- dations and should be adequate to treat the site. I can offer no comments on noise levels or air pollution as covered in the additional material. That category is out of my field of expertise. ncerel , • ,,,,.-/Ma.- nald D. Miller District Conservationist cc: Milton Baumgartner, Pres., W.G.S.C.D. West Greeley Soil Conservation District RDM/jb FEB "-SCEi19 8 co r— vpip Auras- IE 0E 6ZV- ot co - !eb T. • 1678 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 4210 EAST 11TH AVENUE • DENVER, COLORADO 80220 • PHONE 388-6111 Anthony Robbins, M.D., M.P.A. Executive Director March 13, 1978 Franklin D. Yoder, M.D. Director, Weld County Health Department 1516 Hospital Road Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Dr. Yoder, This letter is in reply to your February 23, 1978 letter raising questions regarding possible health effects from expansion of a Greeley area gravel pit and asphalt plant. Regarding asbestos exposure like that in the Rockville, Maryland area, no similar problem is anticipated from the Greeley gravel opera- tion. Contact with the State Geologist discloses little likelihood of asbestos bearing mineral deposits . The quarry in Montgomery County Maryland is part of a belt of serpentine rock which contains the long fiberous chrysotile asbestos. We understand consulting engineers will testify at hearings on the Greeley expansion as to the local mineral deposits and any possible asbestos generation. The second question on sulfur oxides from an asphalt batch plant was answered by the Air Pollution Division staff, who can be available for the local hearings. There is little expectation of air concentrations at other than low levels, unless very high sulfur containing oil is used. - The staff will review the air pollution permit request resulting from the plant expansion prior to operations. Dust is the usual problem, not oxides of sulfur. Please alert my staff or the State Geologist if attendance at local hearings is desired. Sincerely, Anthony fobbins , M.D. , M.P.A. Execut i vc„ Director �� RECEIVED =; ' Neff Couotr �, 4 FiarninC Com�1;r oT Co ay• • ILO, • • 1878 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 4210 EAST 11TH AVENUE • DENVER, COLORADO 80220 • PHONE 388-6111 Anthony Robbins, M.D., M.P.A. Executive Director February 21 , 1978 Mr. Robert F. Mathias R.V. Lord & Associates 3250 Walnut Boulder, Colorado 80306 Dear Sir: The Engineering Unit of the Air Pollution Control Division never has had any experience, nor has the question ever arisen, on the subject of asbestos in rocks in this area. Sincerely, W.P. eef Air Pollu ion Control Engineer Air Pollution Control Division WPR:plc ASPHALT HOT - M I X EMISSION STUDY 2.OsEARry F a I.W 0 �yF4,..... IIIS�``J`: A� Asphalt Institute Research Report 75-1 (RR-75-1) March 1975 J ASPHALT 1-10T-MIX MISSION STUDY ABSTRACT The findings of this study may be summarized by the statement that THERE IS NO SERIOUS AIR POLLUTION OR EMPLOYEE HEALTH PROBLEM RESULTING FROM THE USE OF PETROLEUM-DERIVED ASPHALT IN HOT-MIXES. The findings are based on eight complete sets of emission samples taken at two hot-mix plants involving four asphalts from three refineries. The emission samples were taken following the discharge of the mix from the mixing chamber. In most of the samplings the immediate area was shrouded to concentrate the emissions, to exclude extraneous matter and to provide more uniform sampling conditions. Most of the air contaminants found in the emissions were at extremely low concentrations and all fell well within currently applicable limits established by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) . Analysis of gaseous substances included carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, carbonyl sulfide, mercaptans, ozone, aldehydes, phenols and C2 to C14 hydrocarbons. Solid particulates were also collected and found to contain only trace amounts of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons and metal compounds, much lower than are typically found in emissions from other industrial and commercial sources. The Threshold Limit Value (TLV) for asphalt (petroleum) fumes of 5.0 mg/m3, recommended by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) was also considered and found to be slightly exceeded in one sampling. However, each sampling was found to be well within this limit on a time weighted basis (and sampling was made under exaggerated conditions not typical of a workman's exposure) . Furthermore, this TLV limit is intended primarily to apply to substances high in polynuclear aromatics, whereas it has been shown that asphalt fumes contain extremely low concen- trations of these compounds and are largely made up of innocuous saturated type hydrocarbons. Under the shrouded, concentrated sampling conditions, the amount of volatile organic hydrocarbons occasionally exceeded the 0.24 ppm limit set forth in the Ambient Air Quality Standards promulgated by the Environ- mental Protection Agency (EPA) . However, it is inconceivable that this limit would ever be reached at the "fence line" of a hot-mix asphalt plant. The same applies to other compounds considered to be air contaminants. vii Hello