The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About5.0 Resolution 2013-70Reception 4; 841780 10/09/2013 10-26.53 AM Jan Olberico 1 of 6 Rec Fee-$0 00 CPC Fee 0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss County of Garfield ) At a regular meeting of the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Colorado, held in the Commissioners Meeting Room, Garfield County Plaza Building, in Glenwood Springs, on Monday, the l3`h day of April 2009, there were present: John Martin , Commissioner Chairman Tresi Houpt , Commissioner Mike Samson , Commissioner Ed Green , (absent) County Manager Jean Alberico , Clerk of the Board when the following proceedings, among others were had and done, to -wit: RESOLUTION NO. 2D/3— 70 A RESOLUTION CONCERNED WITH THE DENIAL OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A WATER TREATMENT PLANT LOCATED AT 2101 -321 COUNTY ROAD 321, ON A 41.96 ACRE PARCEL OWNED BY ALTELA, INC, IN THE NW' , SW % OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 93 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., GARFIELD COUNTY. COLORADO PARCEL NO. 2177- 203 -01 -001 Recitals A. The Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, received an application from Altela, Inc for Laramie Energy [I, LLC, (the "Applicant'), for a Special Use Permit for a Water Treatment Plant, on property owned by Altela, Inc. B. The Water Treatment Plant (the "Property ") is approximately 1 acres in size and part of an overall 4L926 acre tract of land, located at 2102 -321 County Road 321. C. The Property is located within the Northwest 1/4, Southwest `/4 of Section 20, Township 6 South. Range 93 West of the 6'h P.M. D. The Property is located within the Agricultural /Residential /Rural Density zone district (AARD) in which a Special Use Permit for a Water Treatment Plant requires approval through a Special Use Permit process pursuant to Section 5,03 of the Zoning Resolution of 1978. 1 ■Ill Prolnri ililliVACNiuliali NrVIIWi liiiiiN� I 1 lir Reception#: 841780 10/09/2013 10:26 -53 R17 Jean Alberico 2 of 6 Rec Fee.$0 D0 bac FeO 00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO F. The Board of County Commissioners is authorized to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Special Use Permit pursuant to Section 5.03 of the Zoning Resolution of 1978. F. The Board of County Commissioners opened a public hearing on April 13, 2009. upon the question of whether the Special Use Permit application should be approved, approved with conditions, or denied, during which hearing the public and interested persons were given the opportunity to express their opinions regarding the application. The Board of County Commissioners closed the public hearing and the record on April 13, 2009, to make a final decision. G. The Board of County Commissioners on the basis of substantial competent evidence produced at the aforementioned hearing has made the following determinations of fact: 1. That proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners. 2. That the public hearing before Board of County Commissioners was extensive and complete; all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted; and that all interested parties were heard at those hearings. 3. That the proposed Special Use Permit for a Water Treatment Plant is not in the best interest of the health, safety, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County in that; a. The Application does not comply with all required standards set forth in the Zoning Resolution of 1978, including the requirement for the design to minimize impact on and from adjacent land uses per Section 5.03.03 and therefore does not adequately demonstrate compatibility with the surrounding area. RESOLUTION NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, that based on the determination of facts set forth above, the Special Use Permit to allow a Water Treatment Plant as proposed by Altela, Inc, is hereby denied. Dated this 7h day of October, 2013. 2 11111 /12111/111Pridt Iwi11 ! ul ,#111 11111 ReceptionHt: 841780 10)0912013 10:26 53 Aft Jean Alberico 3 of 6 Rec Fee,$0 00 Doc Fee-0 00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO ATTEST: GARFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, GARFIEL r► CO TY, COLORADO C) k of the Board of County Commissioners Upon motion duly made and seconded the forgoing Resol 'ion was a� opted by the following vote: COMMISSIONER CHAIR JOHN F. MARTIN , nay COMMISSIONER MIKE SAMSON , aye COMMISSIONER TRESI HOUPT , aye STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss County of Garfield ) I, , County Clerk and ex- officio Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners, in and for the County and State aforesaid, do hereby certify that the annexed and foregoing Resolution is truly copied from the Records of the Proceeding of the Board of County Commissioners for said Garfield County, now in my office. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said County, at Glenwood Springs, this day of , A.D. 20 . County Clerk and ex- officio Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners 3 LARAMIE ENERGY 11, LLC AftetiRain System VICINITY MAP N W GARFIELD CDUNTy. coLooAno . e.' .1.; - - ;- - • ..1 - s 11. ,• °. . .• - -_ s ., . - � F � - - • • " • ,' •':- 9D W1/4 SEC 20 ALUM. 125 PLS 30125 MARGARET // + JONSSON / } __�._- _.._..__ SW1/4 NW1 /14 GRAVEL ACCESS NW1 /4 SW1/4 m r ° ¢ iABi MARGAR N JONSSON SHIRLEY DONACNUE I FUTURE LARAMIE 20-72 GRILL PAD `�' m dt o l TANK 51 FOR 1 20 -12 L PAO y Mete in UNITS l 1 Altaic 1n UNITS 11,1% .510791 GRAVEL ACCESS L 1 LON - 107.806961 VILLAGE OR. - - _ . .. .. ACCESS RD - • • : -'. 'NOGG~ -.: :.,1000 P • 1 a27sI NO North A x PTT .,, -058 �,2D -000 •- 5!20 -12B ��'i20 -11b 1 j!, i[� DUSTING TOPSOIL FUTURE AltelaRa it tJN11S '� I U f 0 710 ` }} Graphic tote 1in Nor4h 1 4IN10N SW 401.2 DIM GA NUnr1+.RmfMO LARAMIEso-y2wrrTl rertAIMIg LeEre1 0 DATtt 6p00.70W6 amyn 7766: WOE* 214141.P0 3041434.PROILS2 RIIINJPG ■III kAWAY4004014,10110iy,l4 Ir4II 1111 Recaption#: 841780 10109/2013 10 :26:63 P11 Jean Albarico 4 of 6 Rec Fee•$0.00 Doc Fee :0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO i 4'i 1/ 711171I1/:∎i54LIPAI M00111 00,110i1 #11 /1111 Recept i ontt : 841780 10/09/2013 10.26.53 AM Jean Aleerjeo 5 of 6 Rec Fee $0 00 Doc Fee0.00 OPRFIELD COUNTY CO APRIL 13, 2009 PROCEEDINGS OF THE GARFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR AN ALTERNATIVE WATER TREATMENT PLANT IN THE ARRD ZONE DISTRICT, SOUTHWEST OF RIFLE ON COUNTY ROAD 321. APPLICANT IS ALTELA, INC. ON BEHALF OF LARAMIE ENERGY II, LLC. — DUSTY DUNBAR The applicant proposes an installation of a small demonstration water treatment plant that utilizes patented AltelaRain system to treat/purify produced water. It is on less than one acres of a parcel consisting of 41.926 acres with access from County Road 321. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Due to the following conditions: • the limited nature of potential impacts to surrounding properties, • the proposed is required to operated within compliance levels for noise and to mitigate glare and other emanations, Staff recommends the Board approve the request for a Special Use Permit for the Altela, Inc. alternative water treatment plant with the following conditions: 1. That all representations of the Applicant, either within the application or stated at the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners, shall be considered conditions of approval unless explicitly altered by the Board. 2. That the operation of the facility be done in accordance with all applicable Federal, State, and local regulations governing the operation of this type of facility. 3. That the Applicant shall comply with the fire protection provisions included in the rules and regulations of the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) and the International Fire Code as the Code pertains to the operation of this facility. 4. Vibration generated - the alternative water treatment facility shall be so operated that the ground vibration inherently and recurrently generated is not perceptible, without instruments, at any point of any boundary line of the property on which the use is located. 5. Emissions of smoke and particulate matter: the alternative water treatment facility shall be so operated so as to comply with all Federal, State and County air quality laws, regulations and standards. 6. Emission of heat, glare, radiation and fumes: the alternative water treatment facility shall be operated so that it does not emit heat, glare, radiation or fumes which substantially interfere with the existing use of adjoining property or which constitutes a public nuisance or hazard. 7. Volume of sound generated shall comply with the standards set forth in the Colorado Revised Statutes and COGCC Series 800. 8. No storage on the site is proposed or permitted, nor is human occupation of this site. 9. Any lighting shall be pointed downward and inward to the property center and shaded to prevent direct reflection on adjacent property. 10. Prior to the issuance of the Special Use Permit, the Applicant will append the general Storm Water Management Plan and Spill Containment & Counter Measure Plans for this site with site - specific plans. This plan shall include adequate design for the spill containment basin for the tanks that serve both Laramie Energy II and Altela, Inc. 11. Those recommendations by the Rifle Fire Protection District for labeling tanks, operating the facility within industry standards and limiting the operation on this site to its present level and connections shall be a condition of approval. 12. Prior to the issuance of the Special Use Permit, the Applicant shall provide written confirmation to the Garfield County Environmental Health Manager from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) APCD that this system does not exceed air quality emission levels subject to reporting and/or permitting. 13. Prior to issuance of the Special Use Permit, a reclamation security of $2500 per acre shall be submitted for the under 1 -acre site disturbance, as per the Garfield County Vegetation Manager. If the use as a alternative water treatment facility is ended, reclamation shall be initiated within 60 days and meet the requirements set forth in the reclamation plan in place on the date the Special Use Permit issued, or the site reclamation standards in place at the time of use cessation, whichever is more stringent. The reclamation 1111 1111,1i 1 ',111,1 , 11111i411'I0.:Nlii. 1411, Hi 11 111 Reception#; 841780 lOr0912C13 10 26,53 PM Jean A16erieo 6 of 6 Reo Fay -$0 00 Dae Fee0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO standards at the date of permit issuance are cited in Section 4.06, 4.07 and 4.08 of the Garfield County Weed Management Plan (Resolution #2002 -94). 14. All securities for revegetation as per the Garfield County Vegetation Management Director shall be required to be in place prior to the issuance of this permit. 15. Dust mitigation on the sites and access roads shall be performed to prevent fugitive dust and a shake screen or cattle guard shall be placed on the access road to reduce mud being dragged onto Garfield County roads. 16. All equipment and structures associated with this permit shall be painted with non- reflective paint in neutral colors (desert tan or beetle green) to reduce glare and make the facility less conspicuous. 17. A safety plan to protect the wellbeing of children, wildlife and errant livestock shall be developed by the Applicant and submitted to the Garfield County Planning Department prior to the issuance of the Special Use Permit. 18. The Special Use Permit shall be limited to the specifics presented in the application, including location and processing volume. Amendment to this permit may be considered under a Limited Impact Review Amendment. A power point presentation was given by the applicant and available in the Clerk's office by request. Commissioner Haupt commented, not to discourage this technology and applaud you for bringing this in however, the concern regards the disruption of the character of the neighborhood. We deal daily with rural residential areas and we do not often make decisions to protect the character of these rural areas. She said she likes the technology. Conamtsssoner Houpt made a motion to deny this request as it is not compatible with character of the neighborhood. COMinissioner Samson - Second. 'Then he would echo everything that Commissioner Houpt said. Sometimes there are good points on both sides. He would like the applicant to go away knowing there is not a permanent `no' for this technology within our County. The sore spot was that you want to locate this within a rural residential area and it is in the wrong spot and at the wrong time. In running for County Commissioners many people voiced their concern that they were not happy with Laramie and had a lot of drilling in south Rifle and you have backed off on most of that drilling. To both of you of all the companies presenting here, this has been the most professional presentation. The discussion has been pleasant and you have tried to do the best you can in a tough situation. Do not give up come back with a better location. Chairman Martin —Did not agree saying the location is more impactive if you have trucks haul out the water for some 20 years. They are not going to go away and you are making more of a problem for the neighbors that this would ever be. Commissioner Samson — They have the technology, it is working, and we have asked the industry, use the frac water, and use if for the benefit of Colorado. Congressman Salazar has moved it forward this morning to do the same exact thing. We were all smiles about the technology; it is in the wrong location. Chairman Martin - Why should we have to relocate it; it is going to be there and the trucks are not going away and this thing with benzene is not going away. The neighbors are definitely going to see a negative impact. Commissioner Houpt — This one is when a special use permit comes in and is not already in place. Commissioner Houpt - Remove the question from this discussion. We need to make a decision of it is already there and it is a well site that may never be drilled. All trucks gravitate to the location. Chairman Martin — Reiterated that you are going to see greater impact of truck traffic than you have now. The answer you are seeking is acceptance for this process. If we vote it down, -the impacts will be greater and in the short and long run, it is a disservice to the residential area. In favor: Houpt -- aye Samson aye Opposed: Martin - aye Adjournment Attest: Chairman of the Board