Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.0 Staff Report BOCC 10.05.15Board of County Commissioners, October 5, 2015 Exhibits -Ken Sack Animal Processing Exhibit Exhibit Letter (A to Z) A · Public Hearing Notice Affidavit, with attachments B Garfield County 2013 Land Use and Development Code, as amended c Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030, as amended D Application E Staff Report F Staff Presentation G Email dated May 4, 2015 from Bob Peterson, CDPHE H Email dated May 14, 2015 from Dr. Melvin Gore, USDA, with attachment I Letter dated May 18, 2015 from Orrin Moon, Fire Marshall Colorado River Fire Rescue J Letter dated May 15, 2015 from Chris Hale, Mountain Cross Engineering K Email dated May 21, 2015 from Orrin Moon, Fire Marshall Colorado River Fire Rescue L Email dated May 26, 2015 from Dan Goin, Road & Bridge M Letter dated May 26, 2015 from Steve Anthony, Vegetation Management N Email dated May 29, 2015 from Nathan Lindquist, Planning Director City of Rifle 0 Email and attachment dated June 1, 2015 from Orrin Moon, Fire Marshall Colorado River Fire Rescue p US Environmental Protection Agency Water Trivia Facts (number 44.) Q Letter dated May 21, 2015 from Morgan Hill, Garfield County Public Health R Conditions of pending Building Permit s Information dropped off in Community Development-Eagle Spring Organic T Not Used u Not Used v Submittal documentation dated June 22, 2015 (includes plans, traffic study, and utilities w Email dated June 22, 2015 from Dwight Whitehead, Division of Water Resources x Well Permit 125042 v Email dated June 23, 2015 from Dr. Melvin Gore , USDA z Email dated June 23, 2015 .from Matt Langhorst, HCE re: kill room floor drains AA Email dated June 26, 2015 from Dale Dexter, Homestead Meats BB Email dated June 26, 2015 from Orrin Moon, Colorado River Fire Rescue cc Letter dated June 26, 2015 from Morgan Hill, Environmental Health DD Email dated June 29, 2015 from Chris Hale, Mountain Cross Engineering EE Community D evelopment Road Policy 01-14 FF Supplemental Information dated June 30, 2015 provided by the Applicant GG Applicant proposed conditions and findings received July 8, 2015 HH Staff list of potential conditions for PC/BOCC consideration II Applicant's Presentation dated September 5, 2015 JJ A vigation and Hazard Easements EXHIBIT I A Garfield County PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE INFORMATION Please check the appropriate boxes below based upon the notice that was conducted for your public hearing. In addition, please initial on the blank line next to the statements if they accurately reflect the described action. l:8:J My application required written/mailed notice to adjacent property owners and mineral owners. KJH Mailed notice was completed on the 28th day of August, 2015 . KJH All owners of record within a 200 foot radius of the subject parcel were identified as shown in the Clerk and Recorder's office at least 15 calendar days prior to sending notice. KJH All owners of mineral interest in the subject property were identified through records in the Clerk and Recorder or Assessor, or through other means [list] -------- • Please attach proof of certified, return receipt requested mailed notice. l:8:J My application required Published notice. KJH Notice was published on the 3'd day of September, 2015. • Please attach proof of publication in the Rifle Citizen Telegram . [Kl My application required Posting of Notice. KJH Notice was posted on the 28th day of August, 2015 . KJH Notice was posted so that at least one sign faced each adjacent road right of way generally used by the public. I testify that the above information is true and accurate. Name: Karl Hanlo n, Karp Neu Ha nlon Signature : //s Karl J. Hanlon Date: September 28, 2015 Ad Name: 11496556A Customer: Karp Neu Hanlon, PC-(legals & Classified Your account number is: 1026008 PROOF OF PUBLICATION T E RIFL£ CMTIZ£N T £L£6RAM STATE OF COLORADO, COUNTY OF GARFIELD I, Michael Bennett, do solemnly s wear that I am Publisher of The Rifle Citizen Telegram, that the same weekly newspaper printed, in whole or in part and published in the County of Garfield , State of Colorado , and has a general circulation therein ; that said newspaper has been published continuously and uninterruptedly in said County of Garfield for a period of more than fifty-two consecutive weeks next prio r to the first publication of the annexed legal notice or advertisement; that said new spaper has been admitted to the United States mails as a periodical under the provisions of the Act of March 3, 1879, or any amendments thereof, and that said newspaper is a weekly newspaper dul y qualified for publishing legal notices and advertisements within the meaning of the laws of the State of Colorado. That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was published in the regular and entire issue ofevery number of said weekly newspaper for the period of ! consecutive insertions; and that the first publication of said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated 9/3/2015 and that the last publication of said notice was date d 9/3/2015 the issue of sa id news pap er. fn w itn ess whereof, I have I I// J);:my hand th is 09/25/2015 . ~: M ichael Ben nett, P ub li s her Publisher Subscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public in and for the County of Garfield, State of Colorado this 09/25/2015. ~JL9~ Pamela J. Schultz, Notary Public My Commission expires : November 1, 2015 My Commission Expires 11101/2015 PUBLIC NOTICE TAKE NOTICE that Kenneth J , Sack has applied to lhe Board or County Commissi oners, Garfield County, Stnto ol Colorado, tQ request a Land Use Change Permit lor Animal Processing as dellned by tha G_arlreld Couniy 2013 Land Use and Devel - opment Code. as nmended, In connection with the ~~~~'1'3.~g/~~1 gcl~~lo~~~d In the County Legal Description THE SURFACE ESTATE ONLY OF THE FOL- LOWING DESCRIBED PARCELS: A tract ol land siluated in Section 18, Township 6 Soulh , Range 92 West of the 6th P.M. being more panicularty described as follows: Beginnl"ll at a point whence the Southeast Comer ol said Section t8 bears.South 18' 48' 43" East 273ll-17 leet; thence North 73' 57' 56' West 84-78 feet; thence South 82' 36' 32" West 46. 72 feet; thence South 58' 04' 05" West 135 .69 feet; thence South 74 ' 39' 03 ' West 73 .66 feet; thence North 80' 55' 21• West 78.00 feet; thence North 68' 38' 29' West 108.08 leet; thence North 68' 53' 03" Wost 7~ .02 feet: thence South 89' 30' 19• West 79. 16 l eet; thence South 72° 51' 07" West 70-62 fest : thence South 58" 03'. 49• West 148. 75 feel; thence South 46' 15' oo• West 56.32 feet ; thence South 41 ' 58' 31" West 98.48 feet; thence Soulh 54" 4.2' so· West 125 . 13 leet; thence South 75' 59' s8· West 43.66 feet: thence South 81 ' 24 ' 12' West 39.30 feetto lhe Nor:Ul rfglll of way or County Road 315; theha! along sard right of wey and along a non-tangent curve to Iha right with an arc length of 307 .60 feel, a rad ius ol 783.33 leer. a central angle of 22' 29' 57". a chord bearing of North 52" is· 12• West , a chord length of 305.63 lest; the nce North 41 ' 01' 13" West 536.04 leet; thence along a curve to the lelt with an aro length or 127.44 feel, a radius ol 1789.03 leet, a central an~te of 04 ' 04' 53", a chord bearing of North 43" 03 40' West. a chord length o'f t 27A1 leet to a point on the North-South centerllne of said Secuon 18 ; 1herce North 00 ' 21 ' 29' Wosl 902 .06 leet to the North- west Comer of 1he SW II NE % of sald Seation 18; thence North 89' 20' 17" East 447.79 leet along the Nonh Ure of said SW II NE ~; thence South 46' 24' 49" East 1877.41 leet to the POINT OF BE- GINNING. County of Garfield. Stale ol Colorado, TOGETHER WITH WELL PARCEL A tract of land situated in Section 18, Township 6 South, Range 92 West of lhe 6th P.M . be ing more particularly descnbed as follows: Beginning at a point whence the Southeast Comer of said Section 18 bears South 22' 24' 40' East 3116.54 feet said POINT OF BEGINNING ; thence afon& said boundary line North 46' 24' 49• West ~~ ~~!'is!h1~~~a:teg;tPe:i~:~bn~~"~c!.7h 1~i~ 24' 49" East 30,00 feet; thence South 43' 35' 11" West 87.60 feet lo the POINT OF BEGINNING, County of Garfield, Slate of Colorado . Practical Description: 482 County Road 315, Silt, co 81652 Request Descnptfon:Applicant requesls that a 35.2-acie property be permil!!!d es an animal pro- cessing faci lily in the Rural Zone District. All persons affected by the Proposed Land Use Chonge Permit are In vi ted to 8Pfl'E"-' end state their views, endorsements or objeGt1oru;, tf you cannot appear personally at such meeting, then you ore urged lo state your views by lefter, as the Planning Commission will give consideration to the com- ments of surrounding property owners and others affected In deci ding whether to grant or deny the request lor the land use request. This application may be reviewed at lhe office ol the Planning De- par1ment localed at 108 8th Street, Suite 401, Ger- lleld Countr. Administration Building, Glenwood Springs, Co orado. between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m .. Monday lhlo1.!9h Friday. A public hear i ng on the appl!cati on hall b oon schodulod for Monday, Octob er 51 2015-al1:00 p .m. in the County Commlssloriers Hearing Room, Garfield County Administration Building , Suite 100. 108 &h Street, Glenwood Springs. Colorado. Planning Depanm!!nt Garfield Coi.rnty Published in the Rifle Citizen Telegram on Sep- tember 3, 2015. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STA TE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) I, Angelique P. Petterson, being first duly sworn, state and allege as follows: On August 28, 2015, I mailed a Public Notice; a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, via cerlified mail, return receipt requested, to all landowners and all mineral owners within 200 feet of 482 County Road 315, Silt, Colorado, 81652, also known as Garfield County Assessors Parcel No . 2179-181-00-681. A list of the landowners and mineral right owners is attached hereto as Exhibit B. Copies of all Return Receipts received as of September 28 , 2015, are attached as Exhibit C. AND FURTHER AFFIANT SA YETH NOT. STA TE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) Acknowledged, subscribed, and sworn to before me this 28 1h day of September, 2015 by Angelique P. Petterson. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My Commission expires: rn ) "63 \ ZDI 'O ERIKA WATKINS NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID 20064043473 M'feof.MSSION EXPIRES OCTOBER 23. 2018 ~1&.~ Notary Publi'i PUBLIC NOTICE TAKE NOTICE that Kenneth J. Sack has applied to the Board of County Commissioners, Garfield County, State of Colorado, to request a Land Use Change Permit for Animal Processing as defined by the Garfield County 2013 Land Use and Development Code, as amended, in connection with the following described property situated in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado; to-wit: Legal Description Practical Description Request Description Please see Exhibit A attached (also known as Garfield County Assessor's Parcel No. 2179-181-00-681) 482 County Road 315, Silt, CO 81652 Applicant requests that a 35.207-acre property be permitted as a USDA-certified animal processing facility in the Rural Zone District. All persons affected by the proposed Land Use Change Permit are invited to appear and state their views, endorsements or objections. If you cannot appear personally at such meeting, then you are urged to state your views by letter, as the Planning Commission will give consideration to the comments of surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for the land use request. This application may be reviewed at the office of the Planning Department located at 108 8th Street, Suite 401, Garfield County Administration Building, Glenwood Springs, Colorado, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. A public hearing on the application has been scheduled for Monday, October 5, 2015 at 1:00 p.m. in the County Commissioners Hearing Room, Garfield County Administration Building, Suite 100, 108 8th Street, Glenwood Springs, Colorado. Planning Department Garfield County EXHIBIT A THE SURFACE ESTATE ONLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCELS: A tract of land situated in Section 18, Township 6 South, Range 92 West of the 6th P .M. being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point whence the Southeast Comer of said Section 18 bears South 18° 48' 43" East 2736.17 feet; thence North 73° 57' 56" West 84.78 feet; thence South 82° 36' 32" West 46.72 feet; thence South 58° 04' 05" West 135.69 feet; thence South 74° 39' 03" West 73.66 feet; thence North 80° 55' 21" West 78.00 feet; thence North 68° 38' 29" West 108.08 feet; thence North 68° 53' 03" West 71.82 feet; thence South 89° 30' 19" West 79.15 feet; thence South 72° 51' 07" West 70.62 feet; thence South 58° 03' 49" West 148.75 feet; thence South 46° 15' 00" West 56.32 feet; thence South 41° 58' 31" West 98.48 feet; thence South 54° 42' 50" West 125.13 feet; thence South 75° 59' 58" West 43.68 feet; thence South 81° 24' 12" West 39.30 feet to the North right of way of County Road 315; thence along said right of way and along a non- tangent curve to the right with an arc length of 307.60 feet, a radius of 783.33 feet, a central angle of22° 29' 57", a chord bearing of North 52° 16' 12" West, a chord length of 305.63 feet; thence North 41° 01' 13" West 536.04 feet; thence along a curve to the left with an arc length of 127.44 feet, a radius of 1789.03 feet, a central angle of 04° 04' 53", a chord bearing of North 43° 03' 40" West, a chord length of 127.41 feet to a point on the North-South centerline of said Section 18; thence North 00° 21' 29" West 902.06 feet to the Northwest Corner of the SW 114 NE 114 of said Section 18; thence North 89° 20' 17'' East 447.79 feet along the North line of said SW 114 NE 114; thence South 46° 24' 49" East 1877.41 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, County of Garfield, State of Colorado, TOGETHER WITH WELL PARCEL A tract of land situated in Section 18, Township 6 South, Range 92 West of the 6th P .M. being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point whence the Southeast Comer of said Section 18 bears South 22° 24' 40" East 3116.54 feet said POINT OF BEGINNING; thence along said boundary line North 46° 24' 49" West 30.00 feet; thence departing said boundary line North 43° 35' 11" East 87.60 feet; thence South 46° 24' 49" East 30.00 feet; thence South 43° 35' 11" West 87.60 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, County of Garfield, State of Colorado. Land/Mineral Owners within 2 00 feet of Parcel No. 2179-181-00-681 2177-131-00-303 AIRPORT LAND PARTNERS LIMITED 312 AABC, SUITE A ASPEN, CO 81611-2568 2177-134-00-205 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY 108 8TH STREET SUITE 213 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601-3363 2179-181-00-691 EAGLE SPRINGS ORGANIC LLC PO BOX 351 RIFLE, CO 81650 2179-181-00-124 THE DISCOVERY FOUNDATION c/o THE DIXON WATER FOUNDATION 4528 COUNTY ROAD 398 DECATUR, TX 76234 2179-184-00-720 BEDROCK RESOURCES LLC PO BOX 1167 SILT, CO 81652-1167 2179-181-00-123 PORT EVERGLADES RESTAURANT CORP 8191 E KAISER BLVD ANAHEIM, CA 92808 RICHARD THOMSPON DEVER & DOROTHY DEVER FULLER 13518 RARITAN WAY DENVER, CO 80234 URSA OPERATING COMPANY, LLC 1050 17TH STREET, SUITE 2400 DENVER, CO 80265 Exhibit B U.S. Postal ServicerM CERTIFIED MAIL" RECEIPT (Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) Som To ni r=t "$iliitii."/iPl:'Jil. 3 12 AABC Cl or PO 8011 No r-·.:.r --·-··---· SUITE A '-".~ Slnlo, Z/1 ASPEN, CO 81611-2568 SENDER COMPLETE rHJS SECTION • Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete Item 4 If Restricted Delivery Is desired . · • Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. • Attach this card to the back of the mallplece, or on the front If space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: AIRPORT LAND PARTNERS, LTD '312 AABC SUITE A 'ASPEN, CO 81611-2568 ~ Slgriatli ."(,?--~·c_ ~ent CJ Addressee D. le delivery address different from Item 1? 0 es If YES. enter delivery address below: CJ No 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 3. Service 'fype 0 Certified Mall9 CJ Registered Cl Insured Mall Cl Priority Mall Express'" Cl Return Receipt for Merchandise Cl Collect on Delivery 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) CJ Yes 2. Arllcle 'Number (Transfer from service labeO 7D13 2630 DODD 6945 0107 i PS Form 3811, July 2013 Domestic Return Receipt U.S . Postal Servicem CERTIFIED MAILM RECEIPT ::T r-'I r-'I Cl (Domestic Mail Onfy; No Insurance Coverage Provided) lJ'J '-~____;;;;_....::...__;;,_.;;;,t<O::..:....-=.....::...--=-.;.:.:;;;:..s:..~s;.--=--==--~.....1 ::T IT" J1 Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl rn ....[] ru r=c-=-- l'Tl ..-'I CJ ~ :t r SENDER. COMPLETE fH/S SECTION • Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery Is desired. • Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can re turn the card to you. • Attach this card to the baok of the mallpiece, or on the front If space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY 108 8TH STREET SUITE 213 GLENWOOD SPRINGS , CO 81601 COMPLETF THIS SECTION ON DLI /VERY 0 Agent OAddmsee B. Received by (Printed Name) IC. Date of Delivery D. Is dellvery add res s dlffel'en t from Item 1? D Yes If YES, enter delivery address below: D No II\ UI 11111QIm1111111111\1111111 \l\lll Ill 3. Service Type 0 Certified Mall" D Priority Mall Express™ 0 Registered D Return Receipt for Merchandise CJ Insured Mail 0 Collect on SeUvery 4. Restricted Delivery? {Elltra Fae)· CJ Yes 2. Article Number (71'snsfer from service labe~ 7013 2630 DODD 6945 0114 1 PS Form 3811. July 2013 I Domestic Return Receipt f U.S. Postal ServicerM CERTIFIED MAIL .. , RECEIPT .-=! ru .-=! CJ (Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) • .~~~~~~::!__!!~;iW~~~;___J ;1- • IT' ...a CJ CJ CJ CJ Re strtcted Denvery Fee 0 (Endol'Gemen! Required) m -$0. 1nr----1,....--T--i ...a Tola! Postage & Faas ., 0Sl2S/20 .. , ~ om To ~.trltE SPR'MO$ OR~N e1.LC 8 ~trciii,lliit:NO:; PO BOX 351 r-?!..':.~.?.~X....f'!~~--RIFLE, CO 81650 Cily, Slnto, ZIP+ PS Form 3800. August 2006 See Reverse tor lnsh uct1ons SENDER COMPLETF THIS S F:C TION • Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete Item 4 If Restricted Delivery Is desired. A. Slgna!ure 0 Agent • Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. 0 Addressee • Attach this card to the back of the mallplece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to : EAGLE SPRINGS ORGANJC LLC PO BOX 351 RIFLE, CO 81650 2. Article Number = 3. Service 'JYpe 0 Certified Ma119 0 Priority Mall Express"' 0 Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise 0 Insured Mall 0 Collect on Delivery 4. Restricted Oellvery? (Extra Fee) O Yes (Transfer from service label) 7013 2630 0000 6945 0121 l PS Form 3811, July 2013 Domestic Return Receipt U.S. Postal Service"' CERTIFIED MAIL., RECEIPT (Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) Cer11f1911Fee CJ CJ Return Rocelpl Fee CJ (Endorsement Required) CJ Restric ted Delivery Fee 1---;,.r:.;n,___,l Cl (Endo rsomont Required) i------------1 ,.,, $0. q ..n Total Postaae & Fons !i: ru ~~-T ~WfCON WATER.F m ant To C/0 THE DISCOVERY ,...::i ~iiiiof.7tiiD FOUNDATION ~ orPOBox N , , oiiY.siii io.".Z 4528 COUN I y ROAD 398 mmm" DECATUR, TX 76234 SENDER. COMPLE IF Tf-llS SECTION • Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete Item 4 If Restricted Delivery Is desired. J c • Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. B. Received by (P1nJed Namo) {;RJ'tl .SJi . C. Date of Delivery "9 . • Attach this card to the back of the mailplece, or on the front If space permits. 1. Art!cle Addressed to: D. Is delivery address different from Item 1? ~ ~ THE DIXON WATER FOUNDATION C/O THE DISCOVERY FOUNDATION 4528 COUNTY ROAD 398 · D~CA TUR, TX 76234 If YES, enter delivery address below: li:t.No 11111111111111111111 l lllllll Ill Ill Ill I II Ill Ill 3. Sep.("ce l)'pe l2f Certified Mall" C Priority Mall Express"' C Registered C Return Receipt for Merchandise C Insured Mall C Collect on De li very 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) C Yes 2. Article Number 1 (Transfer from service labeQ 7013 2630 ODDO 6945 0138 I PS Form 381 1, July 2013 Domestic Retum Receipt U.S. Postal Service'"' CERTIFIED MAIL"' RECEIPT (Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) U1 ~ •. ij.ij, i' -~~~mg~~~~!"~ 0 UlL-~~_!____.!...,-!!......::~~..!!..7;2f---;;;::---:;;;;:~~---J .::r • i::r ...II Certine dFae Soni 0 BEDROCK RESOURCES LLC rn .-=! -sriaof.7.iit : PO BOX 1167 0 0~!:!.._eo:_ SILT, CO 81652-1167 I'-Qly. Slalo, PS For m 3800, Augus t 200& See Reverse tor 1ristruc\1ons SENDER. COMF'LETE THIS S ECTION • Complete Items 1, 2. and 3. Also complete Item 4 If Rest ricted Delivery Is desired. • Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front If space permits . 1. le Addressed to: B~ROCK RESOURCES LLC PO 'BOX 1 f67 SILT, CO 81652-1167 If ""'"' ~~•a• ncllvArv address below: Ill If 1111111111111 1111111111111 111111111111111 3. Seivlce rype D Certlfled .MalP D Priority Mall Express'" D Registered D Return Receipt for Merchandise D Insured Mell D Colfect on OetlverY .. 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) [J Yes 2. Article Number (Tl'ansfer from service labeQ 7013 2630 ODDO 6945 0145 l. PS Form 3811, July 2013 Domestic Return Receipt I I CJ Rel\Jm Receipt l'ee g IEndorseme nl Required) 1---'~-i*~~I c Raslrlclod OollVGIY Fee lcndo l8lllllOnl Aoq~lred) 1--+-~:--I CJ $0. 'l ~ Tolal Postage & Fees L.::l)!C----"-.:--- ru -......-,...---=::~ rn .-'I CJ ........ l II SENDER: COMPLE rt: THIS SECTION ... • Comp\ete ltems.1, 2, al')d 3. Also complete Item 4 If Restricted Delivery Is desired. • Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you . • Attach this card to th.e back of the mallplece, or on the frQnt If space pennlts. 1. Ar:tlcle Ada'ressed. to: )'ORT EVi.fR©LAD ES RESTAU RANT cdlt'P· 8191 E KA-ISER BLV D ANAHEIM CA 92808 CIJMPl I' IE ff//S SfC rtON ON UEL/VE/11' D. Is delivery address different from Item 1? If YES, enter delivery address below: Ill lllll l\111111111111111111111111111111111111 3. Service iype CJ Certlffed Mall• CJ Priority Mall Express'" . CJ Registered CJ Return Receipt for Merchandise Cl Insured Mall CJ Collect on DeRvery 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) CJ Yes 2. Article Number (Transfer from service labeQ 7013 2630 DODD 6945 0152 : PS Form 38 11, July 2013 Domestic Return Receipt U.S. Postal Servicem CERTIFIED MAILM RECEIPT Ir ..a .-=t Cl (Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) • U'J L-~--==--....::...._.::-.--.:::.--=:,,c:.....::....-=-,;_:;:.~-=~;;R..,_:::::....~--' • :::r . er ...a Cl Cert~led Fee Cl Return Re ceipt Fee CJ (Endorsement Rsqu lred) Cl t---+-~tit-:-ftf =t-~ Roalrlctod Delivery Fee Cl (Eodorsemont Required) l'TI $0.l-O---''t---'~~-rn ...a ru nr o l'TI .-=t ... ., .... ~:: .. 1 DOROTHY DEVER FULLER Cl Strool, r ij1I. r-orPO~"' 13518 RARITAN WAY Ci,Y,SiiiiO;~ DENVER, CO 80234 PS Form 3800 . A11ous1 20US Sac Rovcrso for lristrucllo na SENDER: C OMPLETE THIS SECTION • Complete items 1, 2, arid 3. Also complete item 4 If Restricted Delivery Is desired. A. Signature X~~I~ D Agent D Addressee • Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. • Attach this card to the back oft a~~!!~~ or on the front If space permi "'~i ·.. 2 B. Received by (Pdnled Name) O. Date of Del.Ivery .Rtct/.AQ D D ~c;./'--. 1. Article Addressed to: 2. Article Number (Tl'Bnsfer from service labeO .~PS Form 3811, July 2013 D. Is delivery address different from Item 1? D Yes If YES, enter delivery address below: D No 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 II 3. Service Type D Certified Mall8 D Priority Mall Express"' D Registered D Return Receipt for Merchandise D Insured Mall D Collect on Delivery .-.. 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) o ·ves 7013 2630 0000 6945 01b9 Domestic Return Receipt U.S. Postal Servicern CERTIFIED MAIL,. RECEIPT (Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Pl'ovlded) PS Form 3800. August 2006 -See Reverse-for Instruction's SENDER COMPLETE THIS SECTION • Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. • Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. • Attach this card to the back of the mallplece, or on the front if.spa e permits. 1. Article Addressed to: URSA OPERATING COMPANY, LLC 1050 l 7TH STREET, SUITE2400 DENVER, CO 80265 Ill II HUH HI/I ll/l//l//ll lllll/l/l/ll/I 3. Service Type Cl Certified Mall" Cl Priority Mall Express"' Cl Registered Cl Return Receipt for Merchandise Cl Insured Mall 0 Collect on Dellveiy 2. Article Number ~':""~p.t~-, -.----···-···· .---..-- 7013 2630 ODDO 6945 0091 (fransfer from service labeQ : PS ,Fomi.381;f ,-July 2013 Domestic Return Receipt ' AFFIDAVIT OF SIGN POSTING STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) I, Matthew R. Langhorst, being first duly sworn, state and allege as follows: On Aw.} ) ]; +-~ , 2015, at approxjmately ·s,oo f.m., I posted a notice poster at the property 1 ated at 482 Col1nty Road 315, Silt, CO 8165 . Notice was posted so that at least one sign faced each adjacent road right of way. A picture of the notice poster(s) at the posting site is attached as Exhibit A. AND FURTHER AFFIANT SA YETH NOT. ~~~· STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) Acknowledged, subscribed, and sworn to before me this 28th day of September, 2015, by Matthew R. Langhorst. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My Commission expires: ~/3 0 /d. 0 11 r I REBECCA J. HALE NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID 19974011109 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 30, 2017 ,." .addllloMI ltifomutlon, cont.6ct lhf ~~b:er 111 '111°16°82' 'Z. or 1081111111. lulle 4ol GlenwoodSprlnp,COllM,,I TYPE OF REVIEW APPLICANT (OWNER) REPRESENTATIVES LOCATION ACCESS SITE ZONING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EXHIBIT I Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 ANIMAL PROCESSING FACILITY PROJECT INFORMATION Major Impact -Animal Processing Kenneth J . Sack Karl Hanlon -Karp Neu Hanlon, PC; Matt Langhorst- High County Engineering East of the Garfield County Airport -Section 18, Township 6 South, Range 92 West of 61h P.M. CR 315 (Mamm Creek Road) through Eagle Springs Organic property 35.207-acres -Parcel Number 2179-181-00-681 Rural Residential Medium-High (2 to <6 acres per dwelling) I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL The Applicant seeks a Land Use Change Permit for an "Animal Processing" facility. The facility will be operated by Eagle Springs Organics as 'Outwest Meat and Seafood at Eagle Springs' where animals will be slaughtered and processed . The application states that cutting and packaging ofthe meat is proposed to occur onsite at the facility or at the butcher shop in the City of Rifle where the product will be sold. The application proposes to slaughter and process cows, pigs, goats, and sheep. The site also contains a poultry processing facility, however that use is not proposed as part of this request as it is currently operated as a custom-exempt facility which is a use-by-right in the Rural zone district. The resulting meat product is proposed to be available for public sale and consumption; therefore the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) will regulate and inspect the facility and related activities to protect the public safety. An Animal Processing Facility is defined in the 2013 Land Use and Development Code, as amended (LUDC) as "A USDA-inspected facility primarily engaged in slaughtering animals, preparing processed meats and meat byproducts, and/or rendering or refining animal fat, bones, and meat scraps. Excluded from this definition are custom meat processing and wild game processing facilities, as defined and permitted by the USDA and CDPHE." ll P ag e Figure 1-Anima l Processing Area Figure 2 -Site and Actess -Eagle Spring Ranch Road Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 2JPage --u--•ut-- Figure 4 -Closeup of Processing Facility Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 Figure 5 -Closeup of Water Storage and Chicke n Processing Facility 3I P a g e Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 The facility currently exists and operates as a 'custom exempt' slaughterhouse . The diagrams above include the layout of the facility, showing the building in which the slaughter and processing is proposed to occur as well as the supporting infrastructure, including potable water storage tanks. A single family home and the chicken processing structure are adjacent to the facility. In order to determine if the minimum standards are met, and to determine potential impacts, it is necessary to understand the slaughterhouse process. The sequence of events commences with delivery of animals to the facility, either via truck from local ranchers or from the adjacent Eagle Springs Organic operations. The diagram below illustrates the processing ofthe animals. ~ 'fl- Fiom feedlot - Figure 6 Slaughter Process Slaughter Cow Opening of carcass by cutting Suspension om overhead rad by hind legs - Sticking anC:I bleeding over a collectlng trough Evlsceradon Chllllng or freezing • Splitting and cutting of carcass From the description provided in the application materials Staff has determined that the facility is categorized as a 'simple slaughterhouse' meaning that the facility slaughters animals and does a very limited amount of by-product processing. The main products consist of fresh meat in the form of half or quarter carcasses or in smaller cuts of meat. The slaughtering process results in by-products, both liquid and solid, which may be processed for consumption or which may be disposed of as solid or liquid waste. No edible by-products are proposed to be processed in this facility and the application states that the solid waste will be refrigerated then 41Page landfill. The photo above indicates the truck bay and drain outlet. USDA INSPECTION Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 hauled daily by Waste Management to the landfill. The application discusses how the liquid waste will be disposed - specifically the blood and other fluids that will collect in floor drains located in the kill room and in the processing room. The OWTS design does not include kill room fluids as information in the application states that "Any floor drains or plumbing from the "kill room" must be collected in a vault and hauled, as needed. No OWTS has been designed for this portion of the slaughterhouse ." The master butcher explained at the site visit that the floor drains are connected to an exterior tank located on the back of a flat-bed truck. The tank will be filled and then property disposed of daily at the A USDA-inspected facility requires an inspector to be on-site to ensure proper safety measures and processes have been complied with based upon USDA minimum standards. The USDA inspector examines the animals prior to slaughter to determine that the animal is healthy and the inspector remains onsite to ensure a humane slaughter of the animal. Once slaughtered, the skinning, evisceration and halving of the animal occurs under examination of the inspector. The meat is then accepted, graded and stamped as certified by the inspector. USDA regulatory compliance requires humane handling methods of livestock slaughter to a 1978 Act of the same name which requires activities be carried out only by humane methods. USDA Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS) also regulates the labeling process to protect consumers from misbranded and economically adulterated meat, poultry and egg products which ensure that all labels are truthful and not misleading. Sf Page II. ADJACENT USES AND ZONING Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 The site is located east of the City of Rifle, the Garfield County Airport and the Airport Industrial Park . Access is south of exit 94of1-70, from CR 315 (Mamm Creek Road). Adjacent uses include agriculture, residential and oil & gas activities to the south and east. A variety of institutional, commercial and industrial uses occur to the west. Zoning, as indicated in Figure 2, right, shows Rural in the pale green, Public Airport Overlay in the bright green, City of Rifle in the bright yellow, PUD in the pale yellow and Industrial in the red. Ill. REFFERAL AGENCY COMMENTS Figure 8 -Zoning Map Submittal documentation was forwarded to numerous federal, state and local agencies for review and response. Road & Bridge, Exhibit L-Comments from Dan Goin, District 3 Foreman, responded that a concrete apron exists at the driveway so it appears to meet the Road & Bridge standards. Vegetation Management, Exhibit M -Steve Anthony requests that the applicant provide a noxious weed map and inventory of the 35-acre parcel and the adjacent easement and water tank site. Russian Knapweed is a concern for this site. A weed management plan will then be necessary to address treatment of any noxious weeds found on the site. Calculation of surface area of disturbance is also required to determine revegetation of the site. Environmental Health, Exhibit Q, CC-Morgan Hill attended the May zgth site visit and identified concerns including the possibility of fugitive dust, water supply system including the hauling water scenario, wastewater management and current use of the facility. Ms. Hill recommends that an alternate water supply be provided to serve the site. Upon review of additional submitted information, Ms. Hill reiterated her original concerns related to water and additional comments related to the piping from the kill room and wastewater treatment. Mountain Cross Engineering, Exhibit J, DD -Chris Hale provided the following comments: 6IPage Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 Water-The proposed water hauling scenario is not typical and may not be a reliable source under drought conditions. The applicant should discuss what means and methods will be used to test, treat and maintain the water system to mitigate any contamination. The applicant should discuss how water for fire suppression is separate and preserved from the potable water. OWTS -The applicant should discuss how the animals will be kept off of the OWTS as pasture areas are shown where the OWTS is located. The existing house does not show connection to the water system or an exist i ng OWTS therefore, the applicant should identify how the home is served with water and sanitation and verify the location and status of those improvements. Traffic -The traffic study assumes that the peak hour traffic will not be increased however, because there is traffic generated the applicant should explain this in greater detail or revise the provided calculations. Misc. -The application does not mention what existing equipment is on -site versus what is necessary for USDA operation. The applicant should discuss the necessity of building permits for any improvements. Sup pl emental Rev iew, Exhibit DD -The Fire Protection District should review the proposal for fire suppression, the well permit does not appear to permit filling of the proposed pond, consider a condition related to fencing of the OWTS. CDPHE -Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), Exhibit H, Y -Dr. Melvin Gore has been involved in the review of the building and OWTS permits and he responded to Staff questions regarding the USDA process. FSIS General Rules state that "Each official establishment must be operated and maintained in a manner sufficient to prevent the creation of insanitary conditions and to ensure that product is not adulterated." The USDA determines this by having an inspector on-site to determine that the animal is disease-free and to assure a safe and humane slaughter. Other comments include: Water -Only potable water may be used during the slaughter process and when producing food for human consumption. The process requires continual washing of hands, aprons, tools and equipment that may come in contact with edible product. Hauling of water to the site will require testing of the water in areas such as at faucets, hoses, etc. a minimum of twice per year. 71Page Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 Sterilization is required for some equipment and tools, especially during the slaughter process. This can be done with water that is at 180 degrees Fahrenheit at the nozzle, or a chemical sanitizing agent such as bleach. Dr. Gore emphasizes that USDA-FSIS would only use potable water to formulate an acceptable sanitizing agent. Refrigeration -The carcasses after slaughter must be held at S45 degrees Fahrenheit to prevent any outgrowth of pathogens. Disposal-The USDA regulates by-product storage to the extent that the waste material products do not contaminate or adulterate the inspected and passed product. Any product intended for human consumption, including edible by-products is regulated by the USDA. The proposed method of disposal in this case is by a waste management company. The concern is in the holding or storage of the by-products which could result in flies or pests. CDPHE -Hazardous Materials/Waste, Exhibit G -Bob Peterson, Solid Waste and Materials Management Program, responded that the solid waste disposal is proposed to occur off-site. Colorado River Fire Rescue, Exhibits I, Kand 0, BB -Orrin Moon provided initial comments regarding the project that no information was provided regarding fire protection and stated that additional information was necessary to determine that the proposed access road is adequate for fire truck access. An electric gate at the bottom of the driveway prevents fire district access therefore the District will require a Knox Box or Knox padlock for the gate. Addressing issues need to 'be resolved. Supplemental comments provided in Exhibit 0 state that the access road, from the solar array to the proposed facility, is not adequate for fire trucks. The road needs to be designed to carry 54,000 pounds (the weight of a fire truck) as well as be 20' in width with 50' outside turning radius and a~ adequate turnaround at the proposed facility. Mr. Moon also states that 18,000 gallons of water storage is required for fire protection as well as a fire hydrant attached pursuant to district requirements. Supplemental comments provided in Exhibit BB indicate that the District is satisfied with additional information provided related to the access road and fire protection pond. Mr. Moon would like assurances that the road will be built as designed. City of Rifle, Exhibit N -Nathan Lindquist responded that they have no specific comments on the project . Community Development -Building Division, Exhibit R -Discussion with the Building Division regarding pending building and OWTS permits for this site has determined that there appear to be similarities, but inconsistencies, in the information contained in the Land Use Permit application. It would be appropriate to have a condition of approval regarding issuance of the building and OWTS permits consistent with the SIP age Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 information provided in the Land Use application. Exhibit R contains conditions related to the building permit. Division of Water Resources, Exhibit W -Dwight Whitehead responded to Staff's request regarding well permit 125042, Exhibit X, which is proposed to be used to fill the pond that will hold water for firefighting purposes . The response included a statement that this well permit " ... would not be allowed to fill the proposed fire protection pond .... " And states that a plan of augmentation or replacement water and a new well permit would be needed. No comments have been rec ei ved from: Colorado Parks and Wildlife County Sheriff County Airport IV. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS ,SECTION 4-105. MAJOR IMPACT REVIEW. C. Review Criteria. An application shall comply with the applicable standards of this Code. SECFION 4-203 G. IMPACT ~NALYSIS Where t he prop o sed Deve lopment will im pact speci fic features of the site, the Applicant shall describe b oth the existing con d itions and the po te ntial cha nges created by the project. The Impact Analysis shall i nclu d e a complete descriptio n of how the Applicant will ensure that impacts will be mitigated and standards will be sa t isfied. The fo ll owing i nform ation shall be included in the Impact Analysis : 1. Adjacent Land Use. Existing use of adjacent property and neighboring properties within 1,500-foot radius . Sta f f Co mme nt: Eagle Springs Organ ic pr ope rty t o t he sou t h contai ns agricult ural us es su ch as gree nhouses and grazing, oil & gas p ro d uct ion pad s, and a so lar array . Other uses to the south and east are primarily agricu ltu ral and residential in nature . Uses t o t he west include public airport as well as other i nstitutio nal uses, Ind ustrial and oil & gas rel ated uses. 2. Site Features. A description of site features such as streams, areas subject to flooding, lakes, high ground water areas, topography, vegetative cover, climatology, and other features that may aid in the evaluation of the proposed Development. 9IP age Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 Staff Comment: The application states to "Please see Site Plan for site features and vegetation on the existing site." The overall site plan does not indicate the site features including streams or ditches, however it does include topography. The plan appears to indicate some vegetation on the site however there is no labeling to make a determination of the vegetation type. 3. Soil Characteristics . A description of soil characteristics of the site that have a significant influence on the proposed use of the land. Staff Comment: HP Geotech appears to have performed gradation and hydrometer analyses and determined the soils classification as Sandy Clay Loam. No analysis was provided regarding any influence of the soils on the proposed land use. 4. Geology and Hazard. A description of the geologic characteristics of the area including any potential natural or manmade hazards, and a determination of what effect such factors would have on the proposed use of the land. Staff Comment: The application states that the site is relatively flat, however the County Hazard maps, left, indicate that moderate slope hazard exists on the site. The on-site driveway access must traverse through this hazard area. 5. Groundwater and Aquifer Recharge Areas. Evaluation of the relationship of the subject parcel to Floodplains, the nature of soils and subsoils and their ability to adequately support waste disposal, the Slope of the land, the effect of sewage effluents, and the pollution of surface runoff, stream flow, and groundwater. Staff Comment: The application states that the site is not located within a floodplain, however there is no evaluation of the nature of the soils, pollution of surface runoff, groundwater or the effect of sewage effluents. 6. Environmental Impacts. Determination of the existing environmental conditions on the parcel to be developed and the effects of development on those conditions . lOIPage Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 Staff Comment: The application states that th e o peratio ns will occur within a closed faci l ity and therefore there will be no en vironm en tal impa ct and that the operations are consistent with general agriculture use in Garfie ld Co unty. 7. Nuisance . Impacts on adjacent land from generation of vapor, dust, smoke, noise, glare or vibration, or other emanations. Staff Comment: The application states that there are no anticipated nuisance impacts from the operation. 8 . Hours of operation. The Applicant shall submit information on the hours of operation of the proposed use . Staff Comment : The application states that hours of operation are anticipated to be "daylight hours" Monday through Friday, but that it was difficult to determine how many days per week operations would occur. ARTICLE 7: STANDARDS DIVISION 1. GENERAL APPROVAL STANDARDS. The following standards are approval standards that shall apply to all proposed Land Use Changes, including Divisions of Land , not otherwise exempt from the standards set forth in this Code. STAFF COMMENT: The Applicant has stated that the other information in the application collectively addresses the Animal Processing standards. Applicant response to Article 7, Divisions 1, 2, and 3 refer only to the site plan and other engineering documents provided and do not sufficiently elaborate or detail a full response. Staff has attempted to distill the submittal information in order to provide a response to each standard. Supplemental submittal information in Exhibits V and Z, and as included in Sections 15 -20 of the updated application, has been incorporated into the staff responses. SECTION 7-101. ZONE DISTRICT USE; REGULATIQNS. Staff Com ment: The site appears to comply with the Rural Zone District requirements regarding land use restrictions and dimensional requirements. 'SECTION 7-102. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN & INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS. Staff Comment: The application does not discuss the Comprehensive Plan in the application. In Staff's eva l uation t here are components of the Comprehensive that are consistent with the project, particularly Section 6, Agriculture. However the project is not generally consistent with Water and Sewer Services . SECTION 7-103. COMPATIBILITY. . . Staff Comment: The nature, scale and intensity of the proposed use is compatible w ith adjacent land uses. ll J P oge SECTION! 7.~104. . .•• sou~~'J .OF WATER: Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 Staff Comment: This standard requires that " ... an adequate, reliable, physical, long-term, and legal water Water Tank Structure supply to serve the use ... " be provided. The submittal indicates that water will be obtained from municipal sources, hauled to the site and stored in 3-2,000 gallon tanks. However, supplemental information was provided that the Applicant may consider extending the City of Rifle water from the Airport area . No additional information has been provided regarding this proposal therefore the review of this application considers water provision via the water hauling scenario. The hauled and stored water scenario proposes to serve the animal processing facility as well as adjacent single family home, the chicken processing facility, and provide irrigation for the site (page 4 of the Site Utility Report). The application had originally stated that the 6,000 gallon capacity of the system would require water delivery every 64 days, however supplemental information states that water usage will require delivery every 5.3 days. The site of the water tanks is located on a parcel adjacent to the subject site and an easement exists for the water tanks. The concern~ related to the amount of water necessary to serve the proposed use would not be an issue if an adequate, dependable water supply were proposed to serve the facility. Numerous referral responses cite concerns regarding the amount of water stated as necessary to operate this facility. The USDA has stated that potable water is critical to these operations to maintain health and safety standards related to cleanlienss and sterilization of the facility. The photo below, Figure 12, shows the water tank access. A warning system is in place that will indicate when the tanks are at half capacity. 12 I P a g e Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 Morgan Hill responded, Exhibits Q and CC that the current proposal to haul water is not a good long-term solution and that the proposed amount of water to be used for the site appears variable and seems too low. !SECTION 7~105. CENT',rtAI,. WATER [)ISTRIE:tUTION AN;[) VV,«\STEWATER SYSTEMS. Staff Comment: An existing water distribution system will deliver water from the storage tanks to the facility as well as to the other uses that it serves, such as the single family home and the chicken processing facility. There are concerns related to liquid waste management, particularly the kill room floor drains that contain no interior or exterior shut-off valves which could lead to health and safety concerns related to spills and pest infestation. ;SECTION 7-106. PUBLIC UTILITIES. Staff Comment: The application states that all utilities are currently onsite with no modifications and refers to the Site Utility Report . The Site Utility Report lists electric service as being provided by Holy Cross Electric through overhead lines throughout the site and natural gas is provided by Xcel Energy. 13IP age SECTION 7-107 . ACCESS AND ROADWAYS. Staff Comment: Access is proposed to be from two locations off of CR 315 (Mamm Creek Road). Figures 13 and 14 show the northernmost access to the site which exists on the subject property. The second proposed access is off of Eagle Springs Ranch Road, Figures 15 and 16, located approximately 1 mile south of the on-site driveway and traverses through the adjacent property to access the subject site. Information has been provided that the on-site driveway does not meet county standards and is therefore proposed to be used for employee access during the summer months Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 only. All other vehicles will enter the facility from Eagle Springs Ranch Rd via CR 315. 14 I P a g e Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 lSIPage Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 It appears that there are difficulties with access from either of the proposed routes . Eagle Springs Ranch Road appears to be sufficient for a certain distance but once on the Eagle Spring Organic property the access roads do not appear to meet county standards as is evidenced by ponding of water, potholes, and lack of grading and drainage. Submittal of supplemental information contained in section 15 of the application includes existing road plans and profiles that indicate that the access does not meet the minimum County road standards and there is evidence from the Fire District (Exhibits I, K and O) that the existing access is neither safe nor adequate to serve the proposed use. Orrin Moon, Colorado River Fire Rescue, Exhibit 0, states that a section of the access road (from the solar arrays north) is not adequate for fire trucks . Supplemental information provided has satisfied the District regarding the ability to create adequate access, however the District seeks some guarantee that the road improvements constructed would occur as they are currently designed. SECTION 7-108. USE OF LAND SUBJECT TO NATURAL f'IAZARDS. .. . Staff Comment: County hazard maps indicate that the western and northern portions of the site are located in a moderate slope hazard area. It appears that some of the access roads are located in the slope hazard area and the main reason why the existing site driveway does not meet county standards is due to steepness of the grade. Once on top of the site the land becomes generally level. 1SECTION 7-109. FIRE PROTECTION. Staff Comment: Orrin Moon, Colorado River Fire Rescue provided four sets of comments on the application, Exhibits I, K, 0 and BB. As indicated by the number of comments (exhibits) received from the District, the review process resulted in a requirement to review numerous supplemental materials submitted as they related to the operations of the proposed facility. While the District originally stated that the application did not contain information regarding fire protection and stated a requirement of 18,000 gallons of stored and accessible water for fire fighting, the Applicant did respond with information related to the provision of a pond to store water dedicated for fire -fighting purposes . Access was also an issue identified in the comments commencing with the fact that the original submittal did not include information related to Eagle Springs Ranch Road, the main access road to serve the facility . Access to the site via the on-site driveway was determined as infeasible due to grade and w i dth as well as an electric gate at the bottom. The district also identified that the existing site addressing is from CR 315 -if Eagle Springs Ranch Road were to exist as the access to the site then addressing should be from this road so that emergency responders can accurately locate the site. After attending the May 29 1h site visit the District provided additional comments, Exhibit 0, related to inadequate access and a lack of water supply for firefighting. Issues were identified with the processing facility structure in that the Kill Room ceiling is exposed wood covered in plastic which needs to be designed to meet the IBC code. 16 I P a g e Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 Exhib it BB indicates that the ongoing review of supplemental information has mitigated the concerns however the district seeks assurances that the proposed road design and pond would be constructed per engineered design. DIVISION 2. GENERAL RESOURCE PROTECTION STANDARDS. The following resource protection standards shall apply to all proposed Land Use Changes , including Divisions of Land and exempt Subdivisions, not otherwise exempt from the standards set forth in this Code . SECTION 7-201. AGRICULTURAL LANDS. Staff Comment: This code section includes several standards including impact to agricultural operations, do mestic anima l control, fencing, roads and irrigation ditches. The applicant responded to the first component that this operation is to support agricultural operations. No demonstration of compliance with domestic animal controls was provided nor was discussion of irrigation ditches or fences included in the submittal documents . SECTION 7-202. WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS. Staff Comment: No information was provided regarding applicant consultation with CPW or a wildl ife biologist. The application states that the site will comply with referral comments from CPW. CPW however has not provided comments on the application. SECTION 7-203. PROTECTION OF WATr ERBODIES. Staff Comment : There do not appear to be any Waterbodies proximate to the facility or impacted by the proposed operations . SECTION 7-204. DRAINAGE AND EROSION . Staff Comment : The LUDC requires that site design facilitates positive drainage. No information has been provided for the existing structure and the application states that there is "No change in the site to trigger additional concerns ." The site plan does include arrows that may designate flow on the site . Acquisition of a Land Use Change Permit requires demonstration of adequate site drainage regardless of whether structures on the site or existing or proposed . SECTION 7-205. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. Staff Comme nt : Air and water quality are reviewed to determine that the proposed use will not be adversely i mpacted . Morgan Hill with Environmental Health, Exhibit Q, recommends that fugitive dust mitigation occur due to penning of livestock. The interior roads should also have dust mitigation. It does not appear that water quality would be impacted as no hazardous materials will be used or stored at the site . 17 I P i1 g e [SECTION 7-206. WILDFIRE HAZARDS. Staff Comment: The applicant provided no response to wildfire hazard for the site. Wildfire Hazard Mapping is shown in Figure 17 which indicates a low hazard for the subject site. iSECTION 7-207. NATURAL AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDS. Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 Staff Comment: The site is located within moderate slope hazard areas on the Garfield County GIS mapping as shown in Figure 18. Figure 18 -Site Topography indicating slope hazard :SECTION 7-208. RECLAMATION. Staff Comment: Soils will be disturbed during construction of the OWTS systems and the application states that the site will be reclaimed with onsite soil and reseeded with native non-irrigation seed mix. This section of the code discusses the requirement for a weed inventory and management plan, which has not been provided. Steve Anthony, Vegetation Management, responded to the request for comments, Exhibit M, that the site is a concern due to the presence of Russian knapweed . Mr. Anthony requires that an inventory and map of noxious weeds be provided as well as a plan to address treatment. DIVISION 3. SITE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS . 7-301. COMPATIBLE DESIGN. Staff Comment: Compatible design is a concept that site organization and operational characteristics should avoid nuisances and be generally compatible with adjacent properties . The application response to demonstrating compliance with this standard is "Please see attached Site Plan prepared by HCE". Thought the site plan reflects few details in regard to compatible design, Staff believes that the proposed use is agricultural in nature and therefore is consistent with adjacent agricultural uses. The processing facility is located such that there would be little impact to adjacent property. lBIPag e 7-302. OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING STANr>ARDS. Staff Comment: The application response to compliance with this standard is to "Please see attached Site Plan prepared by HCE''. The provision of necessary parking is related to the use. In this instance the calculation of number of spaces is based upon the square footage of the facility itself. The site plan indicates that five employee parking spaces (10' x 20') will be provided as well as one handicapped parking space. Staff was unable to locate the numbers to demonstrate the square footage of the facility and there unable to determine that this number of spaces meets the LUDC requirements. 7-303. LANDSCAPING STANDARDS. K N Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 Staff Comment: No response was provided to this standard. There are exemptions provided from this standard however this facility does not meet those exemptions . 7-304. LIGHTING STANDARDS. Staff Comment: No information was provided regarding lighting other than "no new lighting will be installed with this application ." The site is subject to the county lighting standards regarding downcast and shielded lighting. 7-305. SNOW STORAGE STANDARDS. Staff Comment: Staff was unable to locate dedicated snow storage areas on the plans however we would not anticipate an issue with this since it is a 35-acre parcel. 1-306. TRAIL AND WALKWAY STANDARDS. Staff Comment : Not applicable. DIVISION 6. ADDITIONAL ST AND ARDS FOR AG RIC UL TURAL AND ANIMAL RELATED USES. 7-602. ANIMAL PROCESSING. All facilities shall be in compliance with USDA, CDPHE , and any other Federal, State, and local regulations. Staff Comment : The submittal contains an updated application to the USDA for permitting of the proposed facility . 19 I P o e e V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. VIOLATIONS AND TIMING Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 This application resulted from a Notice of Violation (NOV) issued on February 20, 2014. The County Staff and referral agencies have all worked since that time to assist the Applicant in obtaining permits related to zoning and land use as well as building and OWTS permits necessary to bring the site into compliance. The Planning Division has held at least two Pre-Application Conferences with the Applicant's representatives, the first of which occurred on March 14, 2014 and resulted in submittal of an application on October 21, 2014. The application did not meet the submittal requirements and was subsequently withdrawn on January 8, 2015. The application was resubmitted on March 6, 2015. Staff had previously provided a detailed response with regard to necessary information to determine technical completeness; however the resubmitted information remained technically incomplete. In the hopes of assisting the Applicant seek a remedy for the outstanding NOV Staff determined it appropriate to · move the current application forward to hearing. It appears that the Applicant has determined that review of the project is only related to the USDA request/application and not the components and standards typically required for a land use permit. This is contrary to the information provided by Staff in the pre-application conference summary form, as well as in the technically incomplete correspondence. The intent of the land use review process is to determine ifthe proposed use satisfies the required minimum standards of the LUDC, including infrastructure such as access, water and sanitation. The fact that the physical facility currently exists and has operated a custom exempt facility does not negate the requirement to determine site, facility and use compliance with the minimum standards of the LUDC. 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ DISCREPANCIES Throughout this review process there have been numerous discrepancies in the application materials including the details of the use itself. The provision of supplemental and sometimes conflicting information has resulted in staff requiring, for Board review, the submission of a comprehensive binder that contains the original submittal and all of the supplements provided during the review and public hearing process with the Planning Commission . Supplements, including new information and response to referral agency comments, appear to be located in Sections 14 -20 of the application binder. A revised application packet was submitted on August 13, 2015, however the application and supplemental information does not provide an adequate analysis with regard to compliance with 20 I P a g e Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 the standards in Article 7 of the LUDC, particularly with regard to water, solid and liquid waste management and access. C. ACCESS Access to the facility is from CR 315 (Mamm Creek Road). The Applicant has not provided sufficient information regarding traffic generated by the proposed use as the traffic study appears to utilize peak traffic requirements rather than ADT. Since the facility is proposed to operate 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. they state that traffic fall outside of the peak hours. The little information provided is that there will be a maximum of 6 employees, the water truck will access the site once a week and traffic hauling for solid and liquid waste will occur daily. No information was provided regarding the total average daily traffic generated by the proposed use: 1) Existing driveway The existing driveway does not meet county standards with regard to road width and grade, to name a few obvious deficiencies. The application continues to propose use this access in the summer for employees only. This access may not be safe and adequate for employee seasonal use. During the site visit we were told that delivery of animals sometimes occurs via this driveway as well. 2) Eagle Springs Ranch Road ·~· ... ·:-~···-•, •i..!!1119.""•,.:.....,-...,• .... •.=-,,..•.----------.,·.•. u•-•-•. -""""""" i. Legal Access -The above plan indicating ~"I!.~"""''~,,. ,.,~. Figure lO -Proposed access map, June 1, 2015 ii. the route on Eagle Springs Ranch Road contains a note referencing an easement recorded at reception number 857779. Research into the Clerk's records indicates that this easement was recorded December 31, 2014 and references the operation of a meat processing facility which allows access to move livestock and allows non-exclusive ingress to, egress from, and travel over Eagle Springs for Ken Sack his employees and agents. The site appears to have adequate legal access. Physical Access -The above plans, Figure 20, indicates an access route different from the route travelled by Staff at the site visit. Photographs of the existing ranch roads, and fire district comments, show that road improvements are necessary for fire apparatus access as well as access generally compliant with the LUDC. Currently physical access is not sufficient to serve the use. Inadequate information has been provided with regard to proposed improvements to the road, other than to state that the road meets the requirements of the fire district. Staff is unable to determine that adequate physical access is available to serve the proposed use based upon the minimum required standards in the LUDC. An example would be the 21 I P a g e 0. WATER Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 proposed 20' ROW to serve the site while the LUDC required a 25 -60' ROW depending upon traffic generated. The Applicant proposes that employees utilize the onsite driveway during the summer months, however this roadway is not to County standard. 1) Legal Water -The applicant proposes to haul water from municipal sources. The Board has found in the past that this is not a long-term dependable water supply, however the Board has on occasion permitted hauled water for temporary uses only. The Applicant has stated that they would cease operations if water were unavailable. Given the commercial nature of the operation, and the concerns with public heath, it would seem prudent to be extremely cautious in allowing a use that relies upon water for sanitary operation of preparing meat for human consumption . It was brought to Staff's attention that the Applicant, in late May, had preliminary discussions with the City of Rifle to determine if there was a possibility of extending water from the Airport area to serve the site. The Applicant has stated that the hauled water scenario may be temporary if water from the City of Rifle is possible. The ability to obtain water from the City would need to be supported by an agreement with the City. 2) Physical Water -Staff questions the numbers provided with regard to water usage for the property. The processing facility under review is not the only use on the property that would access and utilize the hauled water-this water serves multiple uses including the single family home and chicken processing facility, in addition to the meat processing facility. The Applicant has revised the water use requirements several times. The original application stated that the water storage tanks would require refilling once every 64 days and the current calculations for refilling of the water storage tanks is once every 5.3 days. Processing numbers a cow was originally stated as 4 gallons of required water -the proposal is now 10-gallons of water required to process the cow. These same issues may be applied to each of the type of animals processed on the property. Staff research has identified that washing hands on average uses 1 gallon of water, and that processing of chickens uses 11.6 gallons per the EPA (the Applicant states that 4 gallons of water is utilized in the slaughter and cleanup of one chicken. There appears to be a gap between the demand numbers, storage capacity and refill timeline. The trucking of water to the site does not meet County requirements with regard to an 'adequate, reliable, physical, long-term' water supply. However, should the Board determine that hauling water is an adequate water supply to serve the proposed use, it is critical to determine the water usage that is generated by the proposed use simply because on-site water is unavailable and 6,000 gallons of water storage may not be sufficient to serve the use . 22 I P a g e Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 The 6,000 gallon volume of water storage in the existing tanks causes staff and referral agency concern that the facility will run out of water, not adequately sterilize equipment or animals, or attempt to conserve water to the detriment of public health. Should a water supply be provided by well or municipal sources the amount of water necessary to kill a cow is moot as we know that those water sources are reliable and dependable. E. SA NITATION -OWTS permits have been submitted to the Building Division and are pending issuance of a Land Use Change Permit for the proposed use. Staff, including Environmental Health , is unclear as to what sort of materials will actually be entering the second OWTS designed for the facility. The facility is described as having three separate waste streams: 1) Kill Room -Vault and Haul -The fluids from the kill room run into floor drains that drain to daylight in the truck bay on the rear of the structure. The Applicant states that they have a potable water tank mounted on a truck bed . Staff and referral agencies are concerned that there are no valves or shut offs on this PVC pipe from the floor drains that may result in spills and/or pest infestation through the open drains. The application does not demonstrate that a proper drain system is in place to assure healthy sanitation related to the kill room . 2) Employee Restroom -This includes a toilet and lavatory for employee use within the facility structure . An adequate system appears to have been designed to accommodate this restroom. 3) Butchering Room -This system is designed to handle wastewater flow from the butchering room floor drains and sinks. Screens are recommended for all floor drains . This is the area of the facility where the cooled quarters of meat will be processed into individual cuts that will be sold for human consumption. F. SO LI D A N D LIQU I D WASTE - 1) Solid Waste -The animal heads, viscera and carcasses are considered solid waste and are stored in 'gut buckets/buggies' which are SO-gallon rolling carts (anticipated to be 5-10 cubic yards daily). The carts were originally proposed to be stored in the refrigerated room and then hauled daily to the landfill, however the storage of the solid waste materials in proximity to the inspected meat is not permitted -the inspected meat product cannot be held in the same refrigerated room with the gut buckets due to the possibility of contamination of the inspected product. The Applicant has not clearly identified where this solid water will be stored prior to removal to the landfill, other than to say they are " ... filled and rolled to the side of the room while the animal is being finished processed in this location", and that the gut buggies " ... are all hauled to a truck that makes a daily trip to the land fill..." Staff is unsure how the waste will be stored prior to disposal. 2) Liquid Waste-This issue is discussed above in OWTS . 23 I P a g e Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 G. PROVISION OF SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION -The Applicant submitted supplemental information on June 1, 2015, June 22, 2015, June 30, and August 13, 2015. The application materials are not sufficient in planning detail or engineering, or adequately demonstrate the compliance with the minimum standards of the LUDC. Each submittal of additional information has resulted in more questions and/or additional inconsistencies. H. FIRE PROTECTION -The proposed fire protection for the site is to construct a water storage pond adjacent to the facility, however the water well proposed to fill the pond does not currently allow the water to be used or stored for fire protections purposes . The Applicant proposes to amend the well permit and augment the well with water from the West Divide Water Conservancy District. I. NOXIOUS WEEDS -Steve Anthony has reviewed the proposal and attended the site visit to the property. It was discovered that noxious knapweed exists on the site therefore a weed inventory and management plan is required to mitigate this issue. The Applicant has stated that they will complete this documentation if the application is approved. VI. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission considered this application at a public hearing on June 10, 2015 . The Planning Commission was supportive of the proposed use but discussed critical deficiencies in the submittal documentation. Ultimately the Planning Commission unanimously voted to continue the hearing until July 8, 2015 and directed the Applicant to provide information related to five issues: 1. Demonstrate that adequate water was available to serve the proposed use; 2. Demonstrate that the access was adequate for the proposed use, including provision of road design, plans and profiles; 3. Provide location and design specifications related to water storage for fire protection purposes ; 4 . Provide design and method of solid and liquid waste management; 5. Provide information related to the size and scope of the proposed operation. The Applicant then submitted additional information for review, information that was provided to the Planning Commission along with Staff and referral agency review and comments. The Planning Commission met on July 8, 2015 for the continued hearing and discussed the supplemental information submitted , along with project compliance with the LUDC. Commission members were disappointed that the specific information requested was not submitted and that, in general , the information provided was insufficient to determine that the proposal met the requirements of the LUDC. The Planning Commission wanted to be able to support the proposed use ; however the lack of information to be reviewed in support of the standards and findings did not make that possible. 24 I P a g e Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 The Applicant provided Exhibit GG, proposing six conditions and findings in support of a conditional approval. In advance of the hearing Staff had drafted a list of 29 extensive conditions, Exhibit HH, which might adequately condition the application so that eventual demonstration of compliance with the LUDC could would be met. Staff provided these conditions to the Planning Commission but cautioned the Commission that the breadth of the conditions was significant enough that staff did not feel comfortable recommending a conditional approval. The Planning Commission expressed that they felt unable to satisfy their job requirement of forwarding a comprehensively reviewed application to the Board of County Commissioners, specifically due to the lack of required information provided by the Applicant. The Planning Commission discussed the possibility of a second continuance but it was determined that they had already provided the Applicant an opportunity to support the proposal. Ultimately a motion was made and a 3-1 vote occurred to deny the application, incorporating the staff recommendation and findings as follow: 1. That proposal is not compliant with Section 7-104, Source of Water, as adequate legal and physical water is not available to serve the proposed. This is determined due to: a. The hauled water scenario; b. The lack of validation of the water usage numbers for the facility; c. The proposed use of Well Permit 125042 to fill the pond for firefighting purposes, which is not permitted by the Division of Water Resources. 2. The proposal is not compliant with Section 7-105, Central Water Distribution and Wastewater Systems, as an adequate wastewater system is not available to serve the proposed use. This is determined due to: a. Use of PVC floor drains to gravity flow into an potable water container in the back of a flatbed truck located in the 'loading' area of the structure; b. Design parameters discussed in the revised letter dated June 17, 2015 from All Service Septic regarding the butchering room OWTS and its design capacity limitations. 3. The proposal is not compliant with Section 7-107, Access and Roadways, as adequate access does not exist to serve the proposed use. This is due to: a. The lack of demonstration that Eagle Springs Ranch Road is compliant with minimum road standards; b. The lack of information regarding proposed road improvements from Eagle Springs Ranch Road to the proposed facility; c. The onsite driveway does not meet county standards and it has not been demonstrated as an adequate road for the proposed use. 4. The proposal is not compliant with Section 7-109, Fire Protection, as adequate fire protection is not available to serve the proposed use. The pond is proposed to be filled with water from well permit 125042 which is a late registered well not permitted for this use. 25 I P a g e Suggested Findin gs Board of County Commissioners October 5, 2015 MIPA8246 1. That proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the Planning Commission. 2. That the hearing before the Planning Commission was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all interested parties were heard at that meeting. 3. That for the above stated and other reasons the request for a Land Use Change Permit is not in the best interest of the health, safety, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. 4 . That the application is not in general conformance with Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030. 5. That the application has not met the requirements of the Garfield County 2013 Land Use and Development Code, as amended . The dissenting Planning Commissioner explained that he wanted to continue the appl ication so that requ i red and necessary information could be reviewed by the Planning Commission . VIII. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER DELIBERATION AND DECISION The Board has the following options in making a decision on this request : 1. Deny the application; 2. Approve the application; 3. Approve the application with conditions: 4 . Continue the Public Hearing to request and/or revi'ew additional information. DENIAL A decision of denial must be accompanied by findings to support the decision , which the Planning Commission has provided. The motion should clearly state the reason for denying the request. APPROVAL W ITH CO NDITIONS Staff has provided a list of possible conditions, Exhibit HH, for consideration if the Board would determine that conditions of approval could bring the project into compliance with the minimum standards of the LUDC. CONTINUANCE A determination to continue the application should specify a hearing date certain as well as the reason for the continuance . 26 I P a g e EXHIBIT r-= n N V1 ~ )> m :::0 )> :::0 0 0 !lJ n z m ""O m 3 :::::I :::::I !lJ n G> ""O -0 0 rl" "O :::::I rl" ro m :::0 I c -0 O'tl !lJ ..., V1 z m n m ..., rl" V1 V1 ro m )> V1 1 ::::r 0 m m -f 0 ro :::::I :::0 z z :::::I -~ --i "--. VI z C1) < G> ~ ro < n ""O m rl- !lJ (/} :::::I c 3 3 OJ 1 < :::0 :::0 0 I 0.. n s: 7' 7' )> ro c ~ OJ ..., :::0 OJ ro :::::I VI ..., c < OJ ..., :J OJ w rl" 3 0.. --i -ro rl" ro ~ I V1 ro V1 :E OJ OJ 0.. lJ1 I OJ :::::I OJ OJ OJ :::::I n rl" --ti < -:::::I 7' -0 :J ..., OJ 0 s: O'tl 0 ..., 0.. 0 ~ :::::I 0 3 ..., OJ (") s: < 0 ... rl" 3 ro !lJ s: 0 ..., 7' VI ro VI c 3 rl" OJ VI 0. c m ... ..., rl" OJ "O :::::I c OJ :::::I O'tl n I O'tl 3 :::::I (") ..., O'tl z ro ro 0. "O ro ::::r ro 0 I OJ V1 7' n c ro "O I :::::I !lJ V1 ..., :::0 0 VI c 0 :::::I 0 c OJ rl" c O'tl OJ :::::I :::::I < ..., VI 0. rl" 0 (") -..., ro :::0 rl" < :::::I VI OJ 0 m :::::I "O :J (") ..., O'tl ::::r -· :::::I < :::0 OJ ro 0 rl" ro OJ ro ..., 0.. :::::I O'tl SACK PR OCESSING FACILITY W ATER USAGE CHART Monthly and Daily Water Usage calcu lations Location I Description Number of Units Usage per Unit Total Usage per Month 20 Total per (ga l ) Working Days (gal) Day (gal) I Kill Room Water Use: Cow Process i ng per Day 4 10 800 40 Pig Processing per Day 10 8 1,600 80 Goat Process ing per Day 10 8 1,600 80 Sheep Pr ocess i ng pe r Day 10 8 1,600 80 I . Butchering Room Sanitizing of Room (end of day} 20Work Days I 300 I 6,000 I 300 Adjacent Chicken Plant: Chicken Pr ocessing per Month I 2000 I 4 I 8,000 I 400 Singte Family Home: Th r ee Bed r oom Home per Day I 30 Days I 350 I 10,500 I 350 Total Water Usage During Full Monthly Production: 26,100 Ave r age Daily Use: 1130 Days of Water Available with 6,000 Gallon Storage 5.3 Notes: 1.) Average facility use b ased on 20 wor k days pe r mont h. 2.) Kill room daily use calculated using pig processing as the maximum water volume. Only one type of animal can be process in a single day. 3.) Average single family home use based on 30 days per month. I only have the Kill Room drain information that Mark has provided me since I was not there during building construction. The t h ree Kill Room fl9 or drains ar ~ diJ e_f tly pi p e fed from t b_e c:Jrain inlets to the 500 gallon tank o n the exterior of the build i ng sitting on a flatbed truck or trailer via PVC --------· --·-·">czn --~ piping. They do not have traps inline since they are an open air release to the tank, traps would Just cau se bacteria buildup. The truck/trailer sits in a loading bay ramp so it is lower than the floor drains, thus allowing a gravity feed to the tank location. See attached photo of drain outlet. Mark and the crew clean the cows with the water and lactic acid and then do a quick flush of the drains into the holding tank to keep them c l ean a lso. They can only complete 4 cows a day, from my understanding this is not as much liquid volume as you would guess. Approximately 1.5 gallons of blood per cow per my conversation with Mark, around 0.5 gallons for a pig, goat or sheep. Access Legal access to the site exists via two routes -an on-site driveway and Eagle Springs Ranch Road. The driveway is proposed to be utilized seasonally by employees only, the remainder of the traffic will access the facility via Eagle Springs Ranch Road. Inadequate information has been provided to demonstrate that the proposed access via Eagle Springs Ranch Road is compliant with Section 7-107 of the LUDC. Supplemental information provided by the Applicant regarding proposed road improvements includes: The nrn in nccess t o the si t e is from l\.f anun C r eek Road. onto Eagle Spring::; Ran ch Ro a d and then north 011 priv :Jlt e ranch lioacls to the :main pro c ess ing facility. T he roachv ny fi:om :Lvfamm Creek Ro ad to the Solar Panel farm locn tecl on Eagle S p ring::~ Oi:g:m1ic property has.. been approi-,-ecl for fi r e access ill s e by OrrinJ vfoan 8t CReR. The .s e c1:i o11 o f r o ad in fro n t o hhe S obf P an d F<"'.•nn w die pr-o ·c es:s ing fa ci lity i:s l>e i.ng reqmii e d t ci b e upg n1ck t o c'l 2 0 · ',,,,-ide ::iH s e a s o n ro a d th at c <1 n h an d le th e ..-·;;-e igh t of <"t 54.0(iCil h s fi re triu ck :-m iJ m e.et m inimum tinrn ra d ius · s o f the fire t rucks . This r1oad nm s t al so ±l'l c d C aun ty ·s cm:c~11rd:s. T h e mv ne:r-' bJ <! <}~r·eed to u p g r gd ;;: this ro8 d ~ec-ti on. ap p ro x !nrn tdy 2.9 0 0 · of road. w m eet all of ~h e s e st0111clar cl s. P lease see r oad<Nay p la n ::l nd p rofile des ign s h e et s '.v:ithin the Lrmd Us e pa d ::e t. 1-3' "N 10' LANE \_CUTSlr:E OF EXISTING ROAflWAY ALIGNMENT, STRIP ALL TOPSOIL, SCARIFY AND RE-COt.t?ACT SJBGRADE TO A MINIMU~ DEPlH OF c" TD 95?. STANDARD PROCTO'i! l 10' LANE 5• CLASS 6 AGGREGATE 3ASE COIJRSE COVPAClED TO 95% STANDARD PROCTOR ~ ~2" ·~LASS 3 AGGREGATE B.t>.SE COURSE CCMPACTED TO 953 STAl'>DAR'.l PR08TOR TYPICAL 20' 'vVIDE ALL-'vVEATHER ROfaD\Nfa,Y SECTIO~J STA: 62+00 TO 91 +oo I . 'I I I I ... "'· .... ...,_ " '\ 't. \ " 1 J ~ I ID-U I f I J g~ i I I 1 z-o ; I I .I ~~I I ! /I/ ;o.-:<,: I I I I ---~///I/ /-·--cJj .-Q ___ ,,,.,. / / / / / --2': -_,...., ,,,. / / / / / t' / ~-~ ,..,., .... .--o -/ / ,,,... / / ' I / ""-. .-f" .-/ ,-,-/ / / -· _/ I 1 · ~ ~· .-· ~-,_,, / I ( I /. / I ( I ,/,,,. ,..,./ I { I I / 1 \ / / ·n rn \ \ /-ri 1 \ I / r, \ ~ \ \ \ --...-<tD \ \ \ \ (;::: '\ \ ...... --··-I --°' ._ ....... _CJ \ ' ---...... \ ---. -z ' ' \ ··. ·-. ·--I;}--' ~ .... . -----.....,,_ ...... , ' '·· ~ -....... -::::i --~. .... ' ' ' "-. "'\ ----. ' fT1 --. ' ' ' --·~-----'-· " ' ' ' ~ .... ' ........... ' \ .. ....._ m --. '· .... '" \. '-\ ...... ._... r --.. ... ' \.' .---· ., ' ---' r --... --\. ' .------~ -...... ' -yr ---. -----. '' \ \ \.\ .. .-" ..,_ ' \ ----' -----........ ' \ ' _,.,,,,. ----)-... .. --....._ . \ --.. -.. -. ·--·-..... '-' '\ \ \ ..... ----· --. 7 .. , ··---,, ....... '·· '•. \ \ \ \ .... L'~-..... \ \ \ \ .... --/ ', ___ \\\'' _./---,' \. \ \ \ ~. •'/ ....... f1l -a> \ . ' ' "-.: Z I ' ...----._......_, ~00 ', \ \ [ I 'f1l 'r.rl I 1, \ -·· ';:::' 0 ur.. '1 \ \ / -. ~(/) ' / -------)> ~' st~~ \ \ \ / -. --_, -. ·-a-::::. :-t-:;z C:, \ \ I .. -fT1 ' >~ " \ \ /,,. -u::o (';)~ \ / _.. -.... -·--"'·c:;: fT1 :t -\ \ // -·--!5~. \ \ \ .. ----0 \ / / 'I, \ \ // / / --.. ... ~c-=-< \ \ / / _,,_ ~ ....... / // / , '.(/) \ ' / / / / / '"' \ '-!,-,, / ,.,, '< \ \ ', ' / / / / / \ "· 'J/ / // I ' I / / / '--.........._ I r / / ',, ./ / I / n c.. )> n )> )> 0 -; Q.) 0 OJ :J ro ro c.. """'h 0 ""O ""O ro ::::r ::J 0 OJ n ro 0 :J ""O ""O :J ro ro .., Vl n .., ,...... .., .., -< 0.... Q.) -< 3 -· 0 0 OJ 0 Vl :J < < ,...... 0 Vl :J 0 OJ c ro ro ::::r OJ 0 rr l ,...... ... ,...... ro ro 0.... OJ :J .., ro ~ 0 ,...... ,...... c.. ,...... ,...... ::::r ::::r OJ ro ro ::::r 0 :J ::::r ro ro ""O ::::r l 0 """'h . ro ,...... ""O OJ n Q.) ::::r n c.. ""'C OJ OJ Vl --r. ro ::::r ro c ""O ""O n rt ,...... (./) ,...... :J c-""O ""O OJ ::::r n .., ::::r ,...... ro ro 0 OJ ro OJ n n 0 0 0 n OJ OJ """'h Vl ""'C 3 ,...... ,...... :J 0 ::J 0 I -· -· ..... -::J c :J OJ c ro 0 0 0 O' :J Vl OJ :J :J ~ ::J :J ,...... .., .... .., :J c-:J ~ :J rt c.. Otl ro Otl ,...... Otl < ro ::::r n OJ ,...... 0 :J 0 n 0 n ""O n -< 3 n .., 0 ,...... :J 0 ro :J 0 0 Otl 3 3 ..c c.. c ;:::;: :J 3 ,...... -· ""O Vl ::::r ~ OJ ro 0 Vl ro -· :J ,...... :J :J 3 .., 0 -· OJ Vl 3 ro :J ro ..c ::::r c.. :J OJ c.. c OJ c-......... 7' (./) -· ro Vl -< 0 :J (./) Vl ""O ::::n .., Otl ,...... .., :J .., OJ 0 0 c.. ro < -· < c.. ::J -· :J ro ro c.. Otl ro V> ~ n ro c.. Vl . ,...... OJ 0 l 0 c.. -; Vl c.. :J ::::r c ,...... 0 ro ""O 0 :J 3 ""O :J ,...... 0 Q OJ ::::r ,...... ,...... Vl 0 ,...... .., ::::r ro :J ro ..c Vl c ::::r ro 0 Vl ,...... c -c.. From: TOI Subject: Data: Peterson • CDPHE. Bobett Kathy A Eastley lie HIPA8246 -Ken Sick anlmal pnxesslng fidUty Monday, May 04, 2015 9:07:50 AM The solid waste program of COPHE-HMWMD brieHy reviewed the application and noted there will be no solid waste disposal on this site and composting, recyding do not appear to be part of the planned activities. We have no further comments. Bob Peterson CDPHE-HMWMD-Solid Waste and Materials Management Program 222 South 6th St. Rm 232 Grand Junction, CO 81501 970-248-7151 bob peterson@stote co us EXBJBl'F ~ From: Gore, Melvin -FSIS (mailto:MeMn.GQre@fsjs.u sda.govJ Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 2:04 PM To: Kathy A. Eastley Subject: RE: Ken Sack Slaughterhouse Yes, I can try to shed some light on our activities. I will answer your questions by in-putting my response after the question .. Melvin Gore6 DV~ SPHV c/o Colorado Homestead Ranches 741 West 5th St. Delta, co 81416 Office: (970) 874 -8637 Cell: (970) 371 -8093 OFO -Verifying Food Safety and Animal Welfare every day From: Kathy A. Eastley [ma llto:keastley@garlietd-county.com) Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 12:17 PM To: Gore, Melvin -FSIS CC: Gamer, Roger -FSIS Subject: Ken Sack Slaughterhouse Dr.Gore, As you are aware I am reviewing the land use permit for the 'animal processing facility' on Ken sack's property. I am interested in understanding the USDA Inspect ion process associated with this use, as well as the general activities that take place during this process. Any response you could provide to the following questions would be great. 1. My understanding is that part of the USDA process is to 'certify' that the facility meets certain requirements -can you briefly let me know what those physical requirements are? Our standards were re-issued in 1997/1998. The Agenoi had regulations that were very stringent if not micro-managing. I will send you a copy of what we currently go by. Our guidelines now are "Each official establishment must be operated and maintained in a manner sufficient to prevent the creation of insanitary conditions and to ensure that product is not adulterated." There is broad discretion as to what constitutes an "insanitary" condition. 2. Is a USDA inspector required to be on-site for the slaughter /processing in order to be USDA compliant? The USDA inspection appears to be twofold -the facility and the process are part of the inspection, is that correct? Actually, in the Interest of sanitation, our duties are one fold: to assure that product(s) are prepared in a manner that prevents adulteration and the product is wholesome. Now to the first part of your question. For the slaughter process to be an inspected product, the Inspector must be on-site for each animal to be harvested so that we can look for diseases In the animal that would be unwholesome and to assure a safe and humane slaughter. Fabrication or the cutting up and preparation of the meat and poultry products, the Inspector does not have to be there the whole time but needs to stop In and assess the sanitation and handling of the meat and poultry. After the slaughter process is completed, the USDA mark of Inspection can be applied. If the carcass of whatever species is not wholesome, it is condemned and disposed of, in this case I saw ESO would be using the landfill. 3. Does the inspector remain on-site for the entire process or are there only certain stages of the process that are inspected? Please see answer #2. The slaughter process, the Inspector is on· site. The further processing or fabrication of products, the Inspector may come by and observe the sanitation performance of the plant. 4 . A comment was made that in-edible by-products will be properly disposed of by Waste Management, does any agency regulate the storage of those by-products prior to pick-up for disposal? We regulate storage to the extent that the waste material products do not contaminate or adulterate the inspected and passed product. This Agency used to require a letter from the state stating that transport of inedible materials could be transported to local landfills. The Colorado Department of Agriculture State Veterinarians Office no longer issues these letters to official establishments in Colorado. The local health department, at their discretion, would be responsible to address the transport of inedible and condemned products off-site. S. Does the USDA regulate by-products -those that may be used for human consumption (the viscera, blood, intestines, etc) and those by-products that may not be consumed but utilized for other products (such as the rendering process, tallow, hides, etc)? Yes, we regulate any meat and poultry product that is produced at an official establishment that is intended for human consumption to assure the products are wholesome and unadulterated . We do regulate some processes such as rendering if it is done on-site as well as edible fats and tallow which may be used in the cosmetic industry. Hides are not in our regulations unless they are prepared for human consumption (fried pig skin or chicherones). There is an outfit from Scottsbluff, NE currently buying and picking up hides from slaughter plants. 6. Are liquid by-products typically disposed of in the septic system? Some research describes the paunch as being disposed, in whole, in the sewer, is this standard? Others describe a process of washing out the paunch and screening the solids for disposal-any comments on these processes and what the county may need to consider? Blood is mostly disposed of in western Colorado. It may go to the local landfill. Paunch contents from ruminants typically go to landfills or used as fertilizer. The paunch, after being washed, can be used as edible by-product. Our interest would be if the holding or storage would create reservoirs of flies or pests. We would assure that this situation would be rectified immediately. 7. How large a role does potable water play in this process? I understand the need for water to clean up after the process but how is the water utilized in the slaughtering? This is a critical question due to the hauling of water to the site for storage in tanks which could result in possible contamination . It is of paramount concern to USDA-FSIS as well. During the slaughter process and in all departments producing food for human consumption, only potable water may be used. There is continual washing of hands, aprons, tools and equipment that may come in contact with edible product. See 416.2(g). In the case of private water systems and wells, we require testing of water for coliforms twice per year. Connection to domestic water entities, we request the test results yearly from that source . We are aware that Eagle Springs Organics (ESO) will be hauling water to the site. They will be required to test the water at a water site in the plant, such as faucet, hoses used for washing, etc, at a minimum of twice per year. If an Inspector suspects an insanitary condition resulting from the water, additional testing may be requested. 416.2(g)(l). 8. Some of the research I've done states that sterilization is required for cleaning purposes, any idea on how the sterllizatlon may be affected if the plan is to use hauled water stored in outdoor tanks? Yes, there are some equipment and tools that must be sanitized frequently, especially during the slaughter process. The establishment can either use water that is at 180"F at the nozzle or a chemical sanitizing agent that is acceptable in food producing establishments. Sodium hypochlorite (bleach) or an organic iodine are also used at recommended concentrations. I must emphasize again, USDA-FSIS would only use potable water to formulate an acceptable sanitizing agent. 9. Refrigeration would appear to be necessary. You are correct. The carcasses after slaughter must be held at S4S"F to prevent any outgrowth of pathogens. 10. My understanding is that they plan on processing cows, but they also want to retain the ability to use the facility for custom cut orders. Is there an issue With slaughtering multiple types of animals in one facility-cows, pigs, elk and deer? Cattle, swine, goats, and sheep can all be slaughtered there if ESO applied for those species in their application for inspection. Deer, elk, and bison (buffalo) may also be slaughtered if ESO has an approved application for "Voluntary Inspection." These would be ranch raised game animals. We are required to observe all slaughtered animals when the animal is alive to detect some disease conditions. As you may expect, big game animals harvested in the wild state would not qualify for the Federal mark of Inspection because an Inspector does not have the opportunity to observe the animal prior to slaughter. An official establishment may also apply to conduct "custom-exempt" slaughter operations. This situation would be in the case of a person bringing in an animal for slaughter and processing for their own use. In this case, the animals are identified as "custom" animals and the Inspector is not on-site during the total process. In such cases, an USDA-FSIS Inspector also performs a yearly review to check the water certificates, verified handling of the inedible products, written plans that address that all bovines were able to stand and move on their own, and some other items to assure that an official establishment is not handling animals that are unfit for human consumption. This is a record review process mostly but facilities are checked over as well. Any assistance you can provide in this review would be very helpful in understanding the land use. Thank you. I have included the section from our Regulations that are discussed in this email. The Regulation is 9 CFR 416. I also high-lighted some of the concerns you asked about. Kathy Eastley, AICP Senior Planner Garfield County Community Development 108 8th Street, #401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: 970-945-1377 ext. 1580 Fax: 970-384-3470 keostley@gorfield-county.com 9 CFA § 416.1 General rules. Each official establishment must be operated and maintained in a manner sufficient to prev~ru. the creation of insanitary conditions and ~o ~~!I.I'.! that P-rQ.d.1,1_ct is not adulterated. § 416.2 Establishmei'lt grounds and facilities. (a)Grounds and pest control. T he grounds abou t an establ ishment must be mainta ined to prevent conditions that could lead to insanitary conditions, adulteration of product, or interfere with inspection by FSIS program emp loyees. Establishments must have in place a pest management program to prevent the harborage and breeding of pests on the grounds and within establishment facilities. Pest control substances used must be safe and effective under the conditions of use and not be applied or stored in a manner that will resu lt in the adulteration of product or the creation of insanitary conditions. (b) Construction . (1) Establishment buildlngs, including their structures , rooms, and compartments must be of sound construction, be kept in good repair, and be of sufficient size to allow for process ing, handling, and storage of product in a manner that does not result in product adulteration or the creation of Insanitary conditions. (2) Walls , floors, and ceilings within establishments must be built of durable materials impervious to moisture and be cleaned and sanitized as necessary to prevent adulteration of product or the creation of insanitary conditions . (3) Walls, floors, ceilings , doors, windows , and other outside openings must be constructed and maintained to prevent the entrance of vermin, such as flies, rats, and mice. (4) Rooms or compartments in which edible product is processed, handled, or stored must be separate and distinct from rooms or compartments In wh ich inedible product is processed , handled, or stored , to the extent necessary to prevent product adulteration and the creation of insanitary conditions. (c) Ught. Lighting of good quality and sufficient intensity to ensure that sanilary conditions are maintained and that product is not adulterated must be provided in areas where food is processed , handled, stored, or examined; where equipment and utens il s are cleaned ; and in hand-washing areas , dressing and locker rooms, and toilets. (d) Ventilation . Ventilation adequate to control odors, vapors, and condensation to the extent necessary to prevent adulteration of product and the creation of insanitary conditions must be provided. (e) Plumbing. Plumbing systems must be installed and maintained to: (1) Carry suff icient quantities of water to requ ired locations throughout the establishment; (2) Properly convey sewage and liquid disposable waste from the establishn:ient; (3) Prevent adulteration of product, water supplies , equipment, and utensils and prevent the creation of insanitary conditions throughout the establlshment; (4) Provide adequate floor dra inage in all areas where floors are subject to flooding-type cleaning or where normal operations release or discharge water or other liquid waste on the floor; (5) Prevent back-flow conditions in and cross-connection between piping systems that discharge waste water or sewage and piping systems that carry water for product manufacturing; and (6) Prevent the backup of sewer gases. (f) Sewage disposal. Sewage must be disposed into a sewage system separate from all other drainage lines or disposed of through other means sufficient to prevent backup of sewage into areas where product Is processed, handled, or stored. When the sewage disposal system is a private system requiring approval by a State or local health authority, !h._~ establishmen must furnish FSIS with the letter of approval from that authority upon request. (g) Water supply and water, ice, and solution reuse. (1) A supply of running water lhal complies with the National Primary Drinking Water regulations (40 CFB part 141 ), at a suitable temperature and under pressure as needed, must be provided in all areas where required (for processing product, for cleaning rooms and equipment, utensils, and packaging materials, for employee sanitary facilities, etc.). If an establishment uses a municipal water supply, It must make available to FSIS, upon request, a water report, Issued under lhe authority of the State or local health agency , certify ing or attesting to the potability of the water supply. If an establishment uses a private well for its water supply, it must make available to FSIS, upon request, d.ocumentation certifying the potability gf t~ water supply that has been renewed at least semi-annually~ (2) Water, ice , and solut ions (such as tirine, liquid smoke, or propylene glycol) used to chill or cook ready- to-eat product may be reused for the same purpose, provided that they are maintained free of pathogenic organisms and fecal conform organ isms and that other physical, chemical, and microbiological contamination have been reduced to prevent adulteration of product. (3) Water, ice, and solutions used to chill or wash raw product may be reused for the same purpose provided that measures are taken lo reduce physical, chemical , and microbiological contamination so as to prevent contam ination or adulteratlon of product. Reuse that which has come into contact with raw product may not be used on ready-to-eat product. (4) Reconditioned water that has never contained human waste and that has been treated by an onsite advanced wastewater treatment facility may be used on raw product, except in product formulation, and throughout the facility in edible and inedible production areas , provided that measures are taken to ensure that this water meets the criteria prescribed In paragraph (g)(1) of this sect ion. Product, facilities, equipment, and utensils coming in contact with this water must undergo a separate final rinse with non- recondltioned water that meets the criteria prescribed in paragraph (g)(1) of this section. (5) Any water that has never contained human waste and that Is free of pathogenic organisms may be used in ed ible and inedible product areas, provided it does not contact edible product. For example, such reuse water may be used to move heavy solids , to flush the bottom of open evisceration troughs, or to wash antemortem areas, livestock pens, trucks, poultry cages, picker aprons, pick ing room floors, and similar areas within the establishment. (6) Water that does not meet the use conditions of paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(5) of this section may not be used in areas where edible product is handled or prepared or in any manner that would allow it to adulterate edible product or create insanitary conditions. (h) Dressing rooms, lavatories, and toilets. (1) Dressing rooms, toilet rooms, and urinals must be sufficient In number, ample In size, conveniently located, and maintained in a sanitary condition and in good repair at all times to ensure cleanliness of all persons hand li ng any product. They must be separate from the rooms and compartments in which products are processed, stored, or handled. (2) Lavatories with running hot and cold water, soap, and towels, must be placed in or near toilet and urinal rooms and at such other places in the establishment as necessary to ensure cleanliness of all persons handling any product. (3) Refuse receptacles must be constructed and maintained in a manner that protects against the creation of insanitary conditions and the adulteration of product. § 416.3 Equipment and utensils. (a) Equipment and utensils used for processing or otherwise handling edible product or ingredients must be of such material and construction to facilitate thorough cleaning and to ensure that their use will not cause the adulteration of product during processing, handling, or storage. Equipment and utensils must be maintained in sanitary condition so as not to adulterate product. (b) Equipment and utensils must not be constructed, located, or operated In a manner that prevents FSIS inspection program employees from inspecting the equipment or utensils to determine whether they are in sanitary condition. (c) Receptacles used for storing inedible material must be of such material and construction that their use will not result In the adulteration of any edible product or in the creation of insanitary conditions. Such receptacles must not be used for storing any edible product and must bear conspicuous and distinctive marking to identify permitted uses. § 416.4 Sanitary operations. (a) All food-contact surfaces, Including food-contact surfaces of utensils and equipment, must be cleaned and sanitized as frequently as necessary to prevent the creation of insanitary conditions and the adulteration of product. (b) Non-food-contact surfaces of facilities, equipment, and utensils used in the operation of the establishment must be cleaned and sanitized as frequently as necessary to prevent the creation of insanitary conditions and the adulteration of product. (c) Cleaning compounds, sanitizing agents, processing aids, and other chemicals used by an establishment must be safe and effective under the conditions of use. Such chemicals must be used, handled, and stored in a manner that will not adulterate product or create insanitary conditions. Documentation substantiating the ·safety of a chemical's use in a food processing environment must be available to FSIS inspection program employees for review. (d) Product must be protected from adulteration during processing, handling, storage, loading, and unloading at and during transportation from off icial establishments. § 416.SEmployee hygiene. (a) Cleanliness. All persons working in contact with product, food-contact surfaces, and product- packaging materials must adhere to hygienic practices while on duty to prevent adulteration of product and the creation of insanitary conditions. (b) Clothing. Aprons, frocks, and other outer clothing worn by persons who handle product must be of material that is disposable or readily cleaned. Clean garments must be worn at the start of each working day and garments must be changed during the day as often as necessary to prevent adulteration of product and the creation of insanitary conditions. (c) Disease control. Any person who has or appears to have an infectious disease, open lesion, including boils, sores, or infected wounds, or any other abnormal source of microbial contamination, must be excluded from any operations which could result in product adulteration and the creation of insanitary conditions until the condition is corrected. Colorado River Fire Rescue Kathy Eastley May 18,2015 108 81h Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Ken Sack Animal Processing Kathy: This letter is to advise you that I have reviewed File Number: MIP A-8246, Ken Sack Animal Processing, located at 482 CR 315. After reviewing the application and doing a site visit, I have the following comments to the proposed animal processing facility: I. The application makes reference to Fire Protection in the application PDF, page 32, item d. 7-109-Fire Protection for building is addressed in the pending building pennit application. I do not have access to pending building permit and nothing is shown in this referral packet. Information is needed on proposed fire suppression and or suppression water for the facility. 2. In the application the reference is made of two access roads for the facility. Page I 1 The reference is a main access road that is too steep and narrow for trucks and trailers, and the secondary road which appears to access from Eagle Springs Ranch Road. Nothing in the packet shows the entire secondary road or addresses the width or grade of the road. I attended a site visit last summer with the Ranch Manager and I drove through the ranch this morning to refresh my memory. The access road from Eagle Springs Ranch Road starts out as a 20' + gravel road that accesses some area well pads. At the solar panels a two track road travels to the west and ties into another road that accesses the existing house and proposed animal Processing Building. The access road from the solar panels to the intersection of the Main road to the buildings is not adequate for a fire department access road. The fire department access road shall be able to support the weight of a fire truck and be alJ weather driving surface. More information is needed on the proposed secondary access road. Colorado· River Fire Rescue 3. The Main access road has an electric gate at the bottom of the driveway. We (CRFR) do not have access to that gate at this time in case of an emergency. If this access is to be used for emergency access, then we will require the owner to purchase a Knox Box or Knox padlock for the gate. If the secondary access is gated and locked we will also need Knox box or padlock installed on gate. 4. The existing home has an address of 482 CR 315. Depending on access roads as noted above we will need to establish an address for the Animal Processing Building and possibly the existing house as to the best access road, (Eagle Springs, Mamm Creek Rd). Emergency response could be delayed if we are responding to a Mamm Creek address but actually end up accessing the address from Eagle Springs Ranch Road. This issue needs to resolved. Thank you for allowing me to review this referral and please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns .. Thank You, Orrin D. Moon, Fire Marshal CRFR. Page I 2 May 15, 2015 Ms. Kathy Eastley Garfield County Planning 108 gth Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 MOUNT/\IN CROSS fN<ilNffRIN6, INC. Clvll and Environmental Consulting and Design RE: Review of the Ken Sack Animal Processing Faciliiy: MIPA 8246 Dear Kathy: Titls office has performed a review of the documents provided for the Major Impact Review application for the Ken Sack Animal Processing Facility. The submittal was found to be thorough and well organized. The following comments were generated: 1. The water system is proposed to be supplied by third party hauling .of water purchased from licensed municipal sources. This source is not typical but the proposed operation is lower than thresholds listed in the LUDC. The concern is that hauling water may not be a reliable source under drought conditions. A condition of approval that operations would terminate if water hauling ceases may be warranted. 2. The Applicant should discuss what means and methods will be employed to test, treat, and maintain the water system to mitigate any contamination. 3. The Applicant should discuss how water for fire suppression is separate and preserved from the potable water storage. 4. The application materials mentions that animals are raised on the property. The site plan shows pasture areas where the OWTS are located. The Applicant should discuss how animals will be kept off of the OWTS. 5. The application materials do not mention what existing equipment is on-site compared to what will be necessary. The Applicant should discuss if building pennits will be necessary for interior building remodeling for new/additional plumbing, electrical equipment, refrigeration, etc. 6. There is an existing house that shows no connection to the water system or an existing OWTS. The Applicant should identify how this existing house is seryed with water and verify the location and status of the existing OWTS to mitigate potential conflicts. 826 % Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 www.mountalncross-eng.com ---------------------- Animal Processing Page2of2 May, 2015 7. The Traffic Report assumes that the increased traffic would not occur at peak hours and based on this assumption states that increased traffic has no impacts to the peak traffic calculations. This assumption should be elaborated upon. It seems incongruent that increased traffic would not generate some increase in peak hour counts also. The Applicant should explain this in greater detail or revise the calculations to account for increased peak hour traffic. Feel free to call if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, m::Engi ee ing, Chris Hale, PE Mountain Cross Engineering. Inc. CMI and Environmental ConaulUng and Design 826 '/z Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 www.mountalncross-eng.com From: To: Cc: Subject: Dita: Adllchments: Kathy, pron f:!ogo Kathy A. East!ev M!!rt Mgrgm; Qrda Moon Fiie I HIPA8246, Sack An!mal Processing Faclly Thursday, May 21, 2015 11:03:39 AM lmaaeDO I .Dilg I just wanted to let you know that I have reviewed the buildlngs plans for the existing building and addition of the processing facility. I have determined that based on my referral comments about emergency access and unknown fire suppression outlined in the PDF packet, that fire suppression water up to 18,000 gallons of stored and accessible water may be required. This suppression water is calculated according to NFPA 1142, Water Supplies for Suburban and Rural Fire Fighting. This NFPA calculation Is determined by the construction fype, bulldlng cubic feet, and exposure hazards. Please consider this an addition to my referral comments. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns. THANK YOU, ORRIN D. MOON FIRE MARSHAL COLORADO R.IV'ER FIRE RESCUE 970-625-1243 orrjn.moon@crfr.us EXHIBIT I L- from: To: Subject! Date: Kathy llADJilm. Kathy A. Ea!jtley RE: Ken Sade Anllllill Proa:$Slng Tuesday, May 26, 2015 7: 17:26 AM This driveway has been updated with a concrete apron so it meets standards so I they should be good to go on this one. Dan Goin District 3 Foreman Garfield County Road and Bridge 0298 CR 333A, Rifle CO 81650 970-625-8601 From: Kathy A. Eastley Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 10:46 AM To: Dan Goin Subject: Ken Sack An!mal Processing Good morning Dan, Have you had a chance to look at the application for the slaughterhouse on CR 315? You should have received an email In late April asking for comments from Road & Bridge on the request. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kathy Eastley, AICP Senior Planner Garfield County Community Development 108 8th Street, #401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: 970-945-1377 ext. 1580 fax: 970-384-3470 keostle.y@garfield-county com EXHIBIT I M Garfield Co u nty May 26, 2015 Kathy Easlley Garfield County Community Development Department RE: Ken Sack Animal Processing Faclllty MIPA-8246 Dear Kathy, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this permit. Noxious weeds map & Inventory Vel!etation MmraJ!ement Staff requests that the ap plican t provide a noxious weed map and inventOI')' of all Garfield County listed noxious weeds for the 35 acre parcel to a lso Include the easeme nt with the water tanks . The current county noxious weed list Is attached. Of particular concern on th is site is Russ ian knapweed . On the site plan the applicant states th at the "site waed analysis and mitigation to be re viewed with Iha County Vegetat ion Manager In the spring of 2015. Current site conditions are no t conducive to a accurate analysis and remediatio n efforts." Weed managem!'fnt plan Please provide a weed management plan that will address the treatment of any inventoried noxious weeds found on site. Revegetatlon Please quantify the surface area of disturbance, in terms of acres or square feet, created by this project that will require Immediate reseeding. Please let me know If you have any questions. Sincerely , Steve Anthony Garfield County Vegetation Manager 0375 County Road 352, Bldg 2080 Rifle, CO 81650 Phone: 970-945-1377 x 4305 Fax: 970-825·5939 GARFIELD COUNTY NOXIOUS WEED LIST Common name Leafy spurge Russian knapweed Yellow starthistle Plumeless thistle Houndstongue Common burdock Scotch thistle Canada thistle Spotted knapweed Diffuse knapweed Dalmation toadflax Yellow toadflax Hoary cress Saltcedar Saltcedar Oxeye Daisy Jointed Goatgrass Chicory Musk thistle Purple loosestrife Russian olive Also State Listed species: Absinth wormwood Scientific name Euphorbia esula Acroptilon repens Centaurea so/stitalis Carduus acanthoides Cynoglossum ojficinale Arctium minus Onopordum acanthium Cirsium arvense Centaurea maculosa Centaurea diflusa Linaria dalmatica Linaria vulgaris Cardaria draba Tamarix parviflora Tamarix ramosissima Chrysanthemum leucantheum Aegilops cylindrica Cichorium intybus Carduus nutans Lythrum salicaria Elaeagnus angustifo/ia Artemsia absinthium Cit)'. of Rifle From: Nathan Lindquist [nlindguist@r1fleco.org] sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:26 PM To : Kathy A. Eastley cc: Tamra Allen subject: RE: Ken sack Animal Processing EXHIBIT I N Thanks Kathy, We don• t have any specific comments on this. It• s a good use of the property .... if its done the right way, obviously, which we trust the county will ensure. Page 1 From: Toi CC: Subject: Dau: Attachments: Kathy, Qa1o Moon Kathy A East!ev Mike Moraan: ~ RE: Ken Sack Monday, June 01, 2015 12:23:52 PM eagle springs ornanlc.doc EXHIBIT 10 The site visit that I attend with you on May 27,2015, has brought new information to light as to the referral comments that I made on May 19,2015 and May 21,2015. The following is my new and additional comments: The existing proposed fire department access road is not adequate for fire trucks from the solar panels to the Animal Processing Facllity site. The road needs to be designed to carry the weight of a fire truck ( up to 54,000 lbs. ), be 20' in width, with 50' outside turning radius, along with adequate fire truck turnaround at the Processing Facility. The design of the road shall be submitted to me and approved before construction . After a site visit to the Eagle Springs Organic Greenhouses that were built in 2011 where fire department access road and a water supply was required, (see attached), I have found a lack of maintenance to the access road and the water supply. The road is covered with dirt which will make access difficult if not impassable when wet. The pond access road to the dry fire hydrant is covered with weeds which does not show a clear access road to the draft site. The lack of maintenance on the road and pond area is critical for the fire protection of the existing Eagle Springs Greenhouses. The water supply at the greenhouses is not an option for fire protection water supply of the Processing Facility at this time. The Processing Facility will be required to have fire protection water supply of 18,000 gallons of water which is based on the requirements of NFPA 1142 as noted in the e-mail sent to you on 5-21-15. The means of storage shall be submitted to me for approval. A storage tank with a fire hydrant attached is our preferred method, we have fire protection water storage specifications available at request. The ceiling of the Kill Room is exposed wood that is covered with clear plastic . The room and the building shall meet IBC requirements for flame spread as interpreted by the Garfield County Building department. I feel that the requirements are reasonable to the fire protection of this facility. As always, I am open to hear other ideas or proposals. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Thank you, Orrin D. Moon Fire Marshal Colorado River Fire Rescue 970-625-1243 orrjo.mooo@c rfr.us From: Kathy A. Eastley [mallto:keastley@garfield-county.com] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 2:59 PM To: Orrin Moon Subject: Ken Sack Good afternoon Orrin, l am assuming that I will receive additional comments from you on the access issues and fire protection related to the animal processing facility, is that correct? Thank you. Kathy Eastley, AICP Senior Planner Garfield County Community Development 108 8th Street, #401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: 970-945-13n m. 1580 Fax: 970-384-3470 keastley@garfjeld -county com Burning Mountains Fire Protection District h 11mi1wmnr~fps!@'m~n.c •l!ll Ken Sach March 27, 2011 Eagle Springs Organic Growers 5454 County Road 346 Silt, CO Mr. Sack: On March 22, 2011, f was called by your project contractor Brian Steel, to come to the site and conduct a Fire Inspection on the west building/green house as required by the Garfield County Building Department. I arrived at the site on March 23, 201 I and met with Brian Steel. Brian advised me that he was looking for a Final Fire Inspection from me so he could complete his requirements for a Certified Occupancy for the west building. Brian also advised that the east building was not complete yet but would be done in about 6 weeks. After inspecting the buildings, site, and access roads, the following are my concerns that need to be addressed before the sign-off of any co. • Address of the buiJdings need to be adjusted or changed due to the Jack of Fire Department Apparatus access from the existing road address. • Existing access road from County Road 346 or from Eagle Springs Ranch Road is an inadequate Fire Apparatus access road to the buildings. • No site plan has been reviewed by the Fire Department to determine building access or fire truck turnaround areas. • Building plans have not been reviewed by the Fire Depanment to determine fire flow requirements, water supply storage, and or the need of a suppression system. Site plans and building plans are needed for me to review and determine the requirements for this project. Please submit requested plans to my office, 611 Main Street Silt, CO. I can start to review them next week. I am out of town this week until Thursday with the rest of the week booked on inspections. I wiJI be able to return phone messages or e-mails in the evenings. I advised Brian that I would consider possibly al1owing the CO on the west building. Due to the possible need of a suppression system, water supply and access this will not be possible at this time. President, Karen Maddalone·Cochran Secretary, Kevin Erpestad Director, John Moore Jr. Treasurer, Jim Voorheis Director, Megan Richards ~---------- Please feel free to leave me a message on my phone (970-379-2932) or e-mail me with any questions. · Thank You, Orrin D. Moon, Asst. Fire Marshal. &EPA EXHIBIT I p United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water 4601 WATER TRIVIA FACTS 1. How much water does It rake to process a quarter pound of hamburger? Approximately one gallon. 2. How much water does It take to make four new tires? 2,072 gallons EPA 810-F-9 -00 April 1995 3. What Is the total amount of water used to manufacture a new car, Including new tires? 39,090 gallons per car 4. How many households use private wells for their water supply? 17,000,000 households 5. Water Is the only substance found on earth naturally In the three forms . True (solid, llquld, and gas) 6. Does water regulate the earth's temperature? Yes (It b a natural Insulator) 7. How long can a person live without food? More than a month How long can a person Jive without water? Approximately one week, depending upon conditlons. 8. How much water must a person consume per day to maintain health? 2.5 quarts from all sources (I.e., water, food) 9. How much water does a birch tree give off per day In evaporation? 70 gallons 10. How much water does an acre or com give off per day In evaporation? 4,000 gallons 11. How many miles of pipeline and aqueducts are In the US and Canada? Approximately one million miles, or enough lo circle the earth 40 tlmes 12. What were the nrst water pipes made from In the US? Fire charred bored logs 13. How much water Is used to nush a toilet? 2-7 gallons 14. How much water Is used In the average nve·mlnute shower? 25-50 gallons 15 . How much water Is used to brush your teeth? 2 gallons 16. How much water Is used on the average for an automatic dishwasher? 9-12 gallons 17. On the average. how much water Is used to hand wash dishes? 20 gallons 18. How many community public water systems are there In the United Scates? 56,000 19. How much water do these ulilltles process dally? 34 billion gallons 20 . Of the nation's community water supplies, how many are Investor-owned? 32,500 21. How much water does lhe average residence use during a year? 107,000 gallons 22. How much water does an Individual use dally? 50 gallons 23. What does a person pay for water on a dally basis? NatJonaJ average Is 25 cents 24. How much of the earth's surface Is water? 80% 25. Of all the earth's water, how much Is ocean or seas? 97% 26. How much of the world's water Is frozen and therefore unusable? 2% 27. How much of the earth's water Is suitable for drinking water? 1% 28. Is It possible for me to drink waler that was part of the dinosaur era? Yes 29. If all community water systems had to be replaced. what would It cost? Jn excess or $175 billion 30. Whal does It cost to operate the waler systems throughout the country annually? Over $3.5 bUlion 31. How much does one gallon of water weigh? 8.34 pounds 32. How many gallons of water would It take to cover one square mile with one foot of water? 219 million gallons 33. How much water Is in one cubic foot? 7.48 gallons 34. How many gallons of water do you get per acre. when It rains one Inch? Z7 ,ODO gallons per acre 35. Al what temperature does water freeze? 32 degrees F, 0 degrees C -·-~----- 36. At what temperature does water vaporize? 212 degree F, 100 degrees C 37. What ls the most common subsrance round on earth? Water 38. How much of 1he human body Is water? 66% 39. How much of a chicken Is waler? 75% 40. How much of a pineapple ls water? 80% 41. How much or a tomato Is water? 95% 42. How much of an elephant Is water? 70% 43. How much of an ear of com Is water? 80% 44. How much water does It lake to process one chicken? 11.6 gallons 45. How much water does It take to process one can of fruit or vegetables? 9.3 gallons 46. How much water does It take to process one barrel or beer? 1,500 gallons 47. How much water does It take to make one board fool of lumber? 5.4 gallons 48. How much water does It rake to make one pound of plastic ? 24 gallons 49. How much waler does It take to make one pound of wool or cotton? 101 gallons 50. How much waler does It take to refine one barrel of crude oll? 1,851 gallons 51. How much does ii take to produce one ton of steel? 62,600 gallons 52. How much water does It take lo process one ton of cane sugar to make processed sugar? 28,100 gallons 53. How much water does It take to process one ton of beet sugar 10 make processed sugar? 33,100 gallons ---------_____ ,. ___ _ EXHIBIT nft_G_a_rfi_el_d_C_o_u_n_ty____. I Q 195 W. 14., Street Rifle, CO 81650 ~ Public Health 2014 Blake Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-e614 (970) 625-5200 Garfield County Community Development 108 att1 Street Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Attn: Kathy EasUey May21, 2015 Hello Kathy, My comments for the Ken Sack Animal Processing facility are as follows: 1. Nuisance Conditions: a. The applicant did. not address fugitive dust in the nuisance impacts section of the Impact Analysis. Operations that involve livestock being contained in a confined area over a certain period of time can cause de-vegetation of the land; which in tum can lead to releases of particulate matter into the air. We recommend proper dust mitigation be used in animal pens and other bare surfaces if necessary. 2. Water Supply a. The current water supply system of three storage tanks that requires water to be hauled to the slaughterhouse is not a good long-term solution for the life expectancy of this operation. Garfield County Land Use Code requires that a potable water supply be provided that is adequate and of a high enough water quality for consumption by employees; and in this case the processing of meat. We recommend a well be drilled, if possible, that would be tested using the •oeluxe Colorado Package• of the CDPHE Lab Services Division. b. The amount of water used for each animal seems variable and not clearly explained. 4 gallons per cow, even if water is not used in the actual slaughtering of the animal, does not account for other unanticipated washing and seems like too low of a figure. 3. Wastewater Treatment a. It is unclear as to what sort of materials will actually be entering the second OWTS designed for the actual animal processing facility. On our site visit, we were made aware that the blood, intestinal, and other waste coming from the kill room would not be sent into the OWTS but rather stored and hal,lled to the landfill. However, our understanding was that the room where meat is processed into various cuts for clients will drain to the septic system. Before we approve the system designed by All Service Septic, all parties involved should be aware of exactly what will be entering the system to know how large it should be sized and what level of secondary treatment is necessary. b. There is a stipulation in our OWTS regulations that Public Health will permit advanced treatment systems. The applicant may need to work with both Community Development and Public Health on the permit for the second system. 4. Current use of the facility Garfield County Public Health Department -working to promote health and prevent disease a. Eagle Springs Organics, Outwest Meat and Seafood at Eagle Springs, Ken Sack, and Farm Fresh Care needs to be more clear on the relationship between each of their product lines and where their meats are being sourced. There were indicators that the processing facility has already been operating without a USDA license for private clients. We were also made aware that meats being sold at the store have been supplied by US Foods and not from the Ken Sack animal processing facility. b. What will the name of the facility be? I saw several different names throughout the application. c. What is Mr. Sack's intention for a timeframe to sell his own meats that would be processed through that facility? Where is Mr. Sack currently having his own animals slaughtered? Thank you, fl!P~;,, //i_ Morgan Hill . Environmental Health Specialist Ill Garfield County Public Health 195 W. 14111 Street Rifle, CO 81650 (970) 665-6383 Garfield County Public Health Department -working to promote health and prevent disease EXHIBIT I~ CONDITIONS OF PERMIT BLC0-7-14-3288 Ken Sack/Eagle Springs USDA Meat Processing Plant 482 CR 315 Silt, Colorado 1) ALL WORK MUST COMPLY WITH THE 2009 IBC, IMC, IPC, IFGC, IFC, IECC, AND THE MANUFACTURERS INSTALLATION SPECIFICATIONS. 2) ALL WORK MUST COMPLY WITH STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS. 3) ALL WORK MUST COMPLY WITH THE CONDITIONS OF THE CURRENT LAND USE PERMIT. 4) ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING STRUCTURE IS TYPE VB CONSTRUCTION, F 1 OCCUPANCY. 5) CONTACT LOCAL FIRE DISTRICT FOR PERTINENT IFC REQUIREMENTS. FIRE DISTRICT FINAL APPROVAL REPORT IS REQUIRED FOR FINAL/COMPLETION INSPECTION. 6) COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT (CDP HE) FINAL APPROVAL IS REQUIRED FOR FINAL/COMPLETION INSPECTION. 7) ENGINEER AP .PROVAL LETTER FOR EXISTING COOLER CONSTRUCTION IS REQUIRED FOR FINAL/COMPLETION INSPECTION. (SEE LETTER IN FILE) 8) COMPLIANCE LETTER FOR COOLER EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION, SIGNED BY A QUALIFIED MECHANICAL DESIGNER, IS REQUIRED FOR FINAL/COMPLETION INSPECTION. 9) ALL EXPOSED FOAM INSULATION MUST BE COVERED WITH A THERMAL BARRIER AS REQUIRED PER 2009 IBC, CHAPTER 26. 10) ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS PER 2009 IBC, CHAPTER 11, AND ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003. 11) PROVIDE EXIT SIGNS EQUIPPED WITH EMERGENCY LIGHTING AT ALL EXIT DOORS. VERIFY EXIT SIGN LOCATIONS PRIOR TO ELECRICAL ROUGH-IN INSPECTION. 12) ELECTRICAL PERMITTING/INSPECTIONS BY THE COLORADO STATE ELECTRICAL BOARD. 13) ELECTRICAL ROUGH-IN APPROVAL IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO FRAME INSPECTION. 14) ELECTRICAL FINAL APPROVAL IS REQUIRED FOR FINAL/COMPLETION INSPECTION. 15) GAS PIPING DISCONNECT/RELOCATE REQUIRES A PRESSURE TEST/INSPECTION. 16) LIGHT AND VENTILATION PER 2009 IBC, CHAPTER 12. 17) LOCKS, LATCHES AND LANDINGS PER 2009 IBC, SECTION 1008. 18} GARFIELD COUNlY FINAL INSPECTION REQUIRED FOR FINAL/COMPLETION APPROVAL. ---- Eagle Springs Organic eea1e SpNnvs o~ 4/iatllf 'd' q/0 111 fllrYour1'l11n1g1 TOP SIRLOIN STEAK EAGLE SPRINSS HEATS SAFE HAtlOUNG INSTIIUCTIONS TlllS PRODUCT IV.IS PRIPA!lfO f'ROM P/5Pf.C7EO AllO PASSlD MEAT AllDlf111 POOLmY, $(}ME FOOD PROOllCTS Al-IY COllTAl·Y BAC1U7U TIUTCGULD C.WSE IW1£S$ Ir 111£ PRODUCT IS ~!JS. IWIDLED on CIJO/i(D 1/.IPRO!'ffll~ fOll t'OUR Mam;noo fCLI ow mES!. SAil: llA.~DLl/IG llJS m1JJ;11011s. ' EJ IG:D' 1'1Jl!J!;ElW!ll OR 11,Qlflt lll.IWUI W~IGEAAIOROltll!Ql(llVA\t. ~ mPRAl'llltU.WOfGUlmSEl'AAAIHJ;QUOll<(llllJODS. lll.SlllVOl!JQllG SllF/J,QS fj.'".tUll)W!:Cllll\llG i!BOJ10S1. UlDIZ:t.S.IJlll IWIOS .lillll l!UJlllJ; RAl'I UW Oii f6innn: --coo11 ( ll mr H01rooosHOr.RlrnlGlJWt _. IOltO\JClt.Y, V--.... WltMRS illlllIIWO.Y Cll OISCAAO. KEEP REFRIGERATED Uf.t CcmmeOI Sho:e 1 e peop11 Ilk• lhi•. fl1: V\tlfe • COtt11M:ir d!:a EIOI• Sprlnga Organic ~ Mity3,:?D1.4 Club fre$h al Fann Fresll Cafe end Stelll<houa.wlll be apen!ng thls wee~. The biggest, nlcesl dub In Color&do C<>mlng lo Rine. Enjoy steaks and dinner, lhen enfoy dandng, k11t11Cke . pool tables. comedy nlghl, and big name bands and C<>n<:erla . NlghUy drink and appeUzer specials . If you ore FRESH, we loOk ferwanl lo seeing yoo. ui:.e Convnenl 6~nt 2 peo~I• ~~o lllia, ~ Wnte a eo~.menl M Ea'11• Springs Organic lfil ~plil 13, Wl4 Enjoy Eagle Sprin111 produce al our car~ and 11eakhouse 1733 Railroad Ave Rllle, next to Dollar Sten . Enjoy the Weslem Slopes largesl denc:e end enlertalnmenl cent.,, We can hosl and caleryour psrtlea lor up to 400 people Qulnceanera1. Weddings, PartlH and M9Ungs. Farm Fresh Cafe and St~c;_1}<house 5 peepl• fike L.,;s, f.I ~·.-i~e r >::~-:-i ~r.l dla Eagle Springs Org•nlc ~ .i.;>r11'! :t-1.;i We ere gelling n!edy for a big swnmer. We wll grow p!onty ol S\veel walermelorui, cantaloo?e•. pumpklne, squash and our usual greal lomaloes and cueumbors Enjoy cur nalura! b~f. pork, lamb and poullry. all processed al Eagle Springs Mesia . https://www.facebook .com/pages/Eag1e-Springs-Organic/1718864195257 I 1 EXHIBIT I s I! OrayMallo ''•• Ii) Dlmion l!Jlwollh ~h IJ Poncio H1mllon W f!lloy Ell--ih •cm w Ttl!ndtRtlll i;.,, If) ........ Eftlworth :h ~ JodySwtl!ow 5~ ~ JJI Sulcdi em fl.. Shell Summt11 t1'I & MmyMillet .,m ~ Ro•H•l!:!I [aJ ~--w.i;.,,,. l h ff.I Cltbbl1 Ooad ~. Ii!: Erin Bu1ey Slephons b 6/8/2015 Eagle Springs Organic I EeoJe Sp(r11os Orv onic L1-o !!s /; /(<!.. -1-/; ~ /. J. /.. e- f K iJGe~ (rvC, 1/1W 'f!.o, c r,{.i ·hJl'/7 e. /LS Eagl• Spring• Org1nle ~a:m:::er6 201.t Our greenhcuae I& planled . Producing lomntcas year round We are slartlng cur salad mix SQ II will be ready lor our raslauraols In Aspen and Vall Eagle Springs Organic IJc-yefTftr 9 201 .. Looks like •~nler la hero We Ju•I finished plan Ung 37 .000 doves of garlic for next year Organic garlic on pizza 0/ garlic bread .•... Preparing for o big year to comu. Going from 1 ~ planted acres 10 130 planted acres. Melcns . lomaloos. cukes... · Our greenhouse ls looking good Fully planled lor winier See More Lit.• Comrrumt Sharo Na LHh Gciwer1Ma you M growing organic •WffC cam? ~ No~mt:er91 2014 .t tt ~•m u ... e O Eoglo Sprtngl Org•nl< ye1 "ii uo,'<lmber 9 201.c 11 • 01pm U•.e ~ V..'rr1~ 1 c:imme.111 Eagle Springs Oiganlc 0.;lwbtr 19 Wt.a Eagle Springs Meals 1733 Railroad Ave in Rine Is processing wi ld ~ame Moster butcher Mm l,tonlgornery lfo<mer1y with Ou~vesl Meats) wll cuslom process yom meats. 971).797-4970 aid 3 Eagle Springs Meats Is waiting lor our USDA processing approvnl tor domesUt anlmuls . In the mean lime, we can =tom exempl process your COWli, pig• , lamb, poullry and goats •1 our stale of the art lacilty at Eagle Springs Renc:h (off Msmm Creek Rd near elrpor1) V-tew l P'QA~m .,.irr!t ~ Mi ka Mc ke on lhanh malt. rci r pro~ssing Out olk Rwt:sl!Vil!ll ULI UQ f' t11 •w11 ~ t pp ..ciat• u Iii !he "4 <Kocn l•mlly ll~.-emoitr9 ..:0 1.:ai t&O:pm Uh C&:l y Wut Mile Ttl g \J t t:c ... emtie, 10 ZC1.d I t 120~.m Ul.• Eagle Springs Ortianlc O<Ui• ·> ::1• End of Summer season, E~cept for our brocccll end cabbage In lhe fields PlenUng s:res of garlic this weak . Greenhouse looks great wilh tomotoes and cukes •. Preparing lo go from 10 acres or summer c:rop to 120 aaes ol aummer crop. ~ o/:r-;;:....·.1t-.r.r https://www.facebook.com/pages/Eagle-Springs-Organicll 718864195257 l 1 Page 4of12 61812015 Eagle Springs Organic Eoglo Springs 0'tlon!c ·-----"l U~ED &YT!~• PACE I @ Rine Moms for Mom 1 Uko Eight K • Viceroy Ut.1 "' ~ Whoto Food1 Mart.11 Roortng F u~a !r.;r1:!11US' Fn••=1 T•r:ns Ca~I; cs ,c;.d,-ert;!:rlO rd Ch::iic:.1 M~re Fa-::ebock ~ (01S r,it.n\J .'I 09bb· He.ma 20• Find Frk.i¢.& 1.011 dldn"I aae , ... ;:.;lion. ~111 'ltl•rtt c:ocr -Mlh m111 h1.o't\l)g fu S Uk.a Reply r:ditu3f'J 16 01 1 ~Carn ~ .bn::in BrownCoW KaHm lo1prot:zibtj11'1 Ill farm hi ff )'CU c:an won.. till )IOU la.JI fuve UJ-,e Rl'PY Fet:oruar1 ;& ~I J Np;n Eagle springs Organic F1b"\J:ir; 7 W• are planning on plan!lng ovor 130 seres lhlo year. A big Increase from 1he 15 oere• we planted lssl year Oreel orgenlc gar11c. mclono. tamale. Cllkes. broccoli. onions. herbs and mOle , 14 pooplo lol<e 1hlt , 1 sbore ~ E.llglo Springs Organic • Fet+-,::1ry7 Process )'DUI came en<I p01JllrY al Eaglw SpJing1 Meels In Sill. No more driving lo Delta end waiting 3 morlhs. Our •lale or the art facility can process custom e•~mpl while we 11<8 walling ror ovr USDA lnspedod facDlly npproval. We can further process y01Jr moalll. Smoke In our new 1,500•1 •mokehouse. We can also mako pastrami. eomed be•I. sausage. bacon and Jer1<y .... See More UI;<' Commenl e:nare Loult tAi71er, Rlci'Ultd J I.lube and' 157 :.~'1!;':11 ~u th is 4Da.~ru Viow i 5 m:>fe c;gmmenl1 ~ Sl"phanfe lJJc•ra do you gvyt 1et1 gu'lle~. trai:tlees. lnpe 1or dog1? • tia Uke Rl!'pfy Morm 8 of 3 STpm PEI Kavln CosL:ln:.O Has any orie had any meat done yel hOW"WBs h? Iii U~.e RepJy ft Pri' 4 Ill i 32~:n Q EIQI• S:prfng• Orgoink: ~M MCH1 fpOmier:t i1 .111 m1s1er buldtet C.\-1' faollly b do•n, la~ tMil d~ I uy c:lU'1 We lhould also I>~ under USDA lnsp•dion 1oon 1.Jk& ;,.pnlS11 o4 ~IFm [l1' V\.'trle • c:irnmtnl * iC'tii Eoglo Springs Organic ... January 1i Ed.1ed Process your caltle end poul!ry •I Eagle Springs Meals In Slit. No more drl..tng to Della Dnd walling 3 months . 11i ~ / '--/-,Y/ -/, : / J/(.t7ce5Y 1, · _,_I Our slate of the art ladUty <an proeesi OJslcm ex•mpl wllne we are walUng . .::'., :,i-7 / lor our USDA lnspe<:led facilily approval. We can further proce~s your rneeis. Smoke In our new Bx19 loo! smokehouse. Wo can also make paslraml, cmned beef, sau>age bac-0'1 andjerl<y Marl< Monl~orn<ry, master bulcher {fom1erty wllh Oulw~sl Mnla) wl cuslom cut. vacuum pack, and procuce lhe fines! pr~duots. Localed al Eagle Spring• Ot11anlc-exit 04 (airporl exit) 1-lol a R•ncher, You can olso purchase your fresh moals and sesrood at Eagle Springs Meals -173~ Rellroad Ave Rifle (farm Fresh Cal~ 11n~ S!eekllouse) For more informaUon conleCl M!llk e! 970.625-~:?~9 Orgar.ie Ve~Qies year round lor restauranlt end Sup,niarl\o!! G70.67S. 2967 l_.,I~ ( :-~-'. ·:7.l~& https://www.facebook.com/pages/Eagle-Springs-Organic/171886419525711 Page 3 of 12 6/8/2015 _K_a_th~1y_A_._e_a_st_1e.!v._ ________________ --____________________ __.I From: Sent: To: Cc: Whitehead -DNA, Dwight (dwight.whitehead@state.co.us] Monday, June 22, 2015 4:12 PM Kathy A. Easlley William West -DNA EXHIBIT VJ Subject: Ken Sack, Project no. MIPAB246 and Water Well Permit no. 125042, Water Supply to fill a pond Kathy, per our phone conversation today, Water Well Permit no. 125042 would not be allowed to fill the proposed fire protection pond for Mr Sack, project no . MIP A8246. Filling of the proposed pond with well permit no. 125042 would expose Groundwater to e vaporation which will create injury to the stream system . A plan of augmentation or replacement water and a new well permit will be needed to prevent injury to the stream system. It appears that the subject well is located in service area "A 0 of West Divide Water Conservancy District (WDWCD)and the applicant might be able to purchase replacement water from the WDWCD, and submit a new Water Well Permit Application form to our agency, proposing to expand the use of permit no. 125042. Please note all statutory requirements must to be met prior to the issuance of any new weH permit. WDWCD website address: http://wdwcd.org/ Hope it helps. Let me know if you have any questions. Dw19ht Whitehead Well Commissioner Division 5 Water Resources PO Box 396 Glenwood Sprlnss, CO 81602 COLORADO Department of Natural Resources p 9 70·945·566511 5011 , 970-945-8741 dwlght.whf tehead@state.co.us J www .water.state.co .us 1 ·. State of Colorado Water Resources -View Well Details: Receipt 9114665 Cabido-of-- Colo1"11do'1 Well Permit Scard'I Wt!! ConaSn!ctml Rec:mlpt= 111"665 r.mlt #': 1251142-• W..Nmmll/#: DmlgnatM lluln: cu. Number. WDJD; I C-J ~OWnenlll*'Y I C-J Location Information Apprvwed Wei l.Dmllon: Cltf/stmtle/Zlp SILT, CXI 11'52 Q40 QllO 5eclfort T--'tlp bnge PM Foot.ge fromSedlon U- '/NI NE 18 6.0S 92.0W Sixth 1!100 N 1750 E Northl1111 (UTM Y}I Lac811011 Acamlcr. 437892'.9 b9tlng (UIM x): 267407.0 DM9 lsual: 04/)J/1982 u.(1): OOHESTIC srocx &PedalU- 5pGbd fnlm sedlon "* SUbdlvlllon ,.._ Fllng Block Loi Ara "'911ch '""be lnfgatled: 1 NllE5 MuJnun lllVlu.I YDlume of appnlpltetlon: S'talutal "-"It~ Totalblnll Row Meller' GeaphJllal Log "'-donlMllt bport No No No a-....._. Pmmlt Number ll8Cllpt Demiptlon "9mllt(•): eo-a:~ 11o hl5ta!tc; use Piiot' Ml1 a. 1m Pl1V addftss: 0482 CR Jis, sa, co 11652. Tix fR009599. mnw 1/12/07 Well Conllrudlott Dllll: Pwnp ~tlon DMa: W.il Plugged; 1d llerHllldlal Ule1 02/2://1952 Elftm1ia111 &Jeptll Perfat'•tild cuing (Tap) Parl'-lied <Ming (lattDm) st.tic W.lllr IAlwl Pump bbl " 1S I c-1 ·.-..don/.PenNtllldDry 04/23/1982 ~04/1982 02/27/19$2 oaa-tNenw ... rm.-AllnotallMI OdQ!nal FUc ~/1007 No Qmor In Qwner Nnrn!:fAM:r:sslM!l!on 11"J/1JKf1 No Mam llcc<ls " ' """ Demk!!!gm umf2JKJ7 No QillW"cht 0 2.1111!1 CQkndo 0 lllvlslon "'W1111r-AD rtptJ nmrV9d. Heme I Conlad:U. I Help I Wa~l.inb I Cdcndo.ga. I DNll I Miocv Poky I T~OMnel'rcject (TOPJ http://www.dwr.state.eo.us/WellPermitSearch/View.aspx?receipt=911466S EXHIBIT x 10/20/2014 Fram: Ta: Subject: Date: Gare. MeJv!p • F5!5 Kathy A. East!ev RE: Ken Sack Animal Processing Tue5day, June 23, 2015 12:33:37 PM I USDA-FSIS is concerned that Federal Regulations are followed, and specifically in this case 9 CFR 416.2(f) "Sewage disposal. Sewage must be disposed into a sewage system separate from all other drainage lines or disposed of through other means sufficient to prevent backup of sewage into areas where product is processed, handled, or stored. When the sewage di~pos~I sy~t~_rra is a private sys~em requiring approval by a State or focai health au,Jhe>dw, th~ este1~.fi~!m:t~nLmust furnish FSIS with the letter of approval from that authority upon request." It was the high-lighted sentence that eventually brought Garfield County Planning and Health Departments into review of this project. Without approval of the septic sewerage disposal system by a State or local health authority, USDA-FSJS could not grant inspection of meat and poultry products privileges to Eagle Springs Organics. This being stated, I see two areas of clarification for USDA-FSIS: 1) Will Garfield County require connection of the processing (slaughter and product fabrication) facility to the OWTS prior to issuing a permit for use? and 2) Will the chicken processing facility be connected to the OWTS as part of the permit of use? When Eagle Springs Organics presents your letter of approval of the sewerage/septic system, USDA-FSIS review will start over to ascertain that Federal sanitary standards will be met. One final observation: The engineering reports stated upon occasion that the USDA-FSIS Inspector will be "grading" the carcasses. This is a semantic issue. USDA-FSIS does not grade the slaughtered animals which would place the USDA "Prime," "Choice," grades on the carcasses. USDA-FSIS inspects the carcasses for wholesomeness and no adulteration to insure food safety; USDA-FSIS does not involve inspection for quality grades. EXHIBIT y Have a great day! Melvin Gore, DVM, SPHV c/o Colorado Homestead Ranches 741 West 5th St. Delta, CO 81416 Office: (970) 874 • 8637 Cell: (970) 371 .. 8093 OFO -Verifying Food Safety and Animal Welfare every day From: Kathy A.Eastfev[mailto:keastlev@garfield-county.OJm] Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 12:48 PM To: Chris Hale; Morgan Hdl; Orrin Moon; Gore, Melvin • FSIS cc: Tamra Allen; Kelly cave Subject: Ken Sack Animal Processing Good afternoon, Ken Sack has submitted additional materials related to the request for a USDA Animal Processing Facility. You had all reviewed and commented upon the application therefore I would appreciate it if you could review the attached documents to see if your concerns and comments have been adequately addressed. There is a short timeframe for your review so I would appreciate it if you could respond with any comments at your earliest convenience. I do need comments by the end of the day Friday, June 25th. Thank you and feel free to contact me with any questions. Kathy Eastley, AICP Senior PlaMer Garfield County Community Development 108 8th Street, #401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: 970-945-13n ext. 1580 fax: 970-384-3470 keostley@garfield -county com EXHIBIT I z. Fl'Dm: To: Cc: Subject: Dale: Dear Kathy, Matt LanghDrst Kathy A Ei1$11ev Karl J. Hanlon; Tamra Allen; ~ RE: Ken sack Question Tuesday, Junl! 23, 2015 8:47;22 AM I only have the Kill Room drain information that Mark has provided me since I was not there during building construction. The three Kill Room floor drains are directly pipe fed from the drain inlets to the 500 gallon tank on the exterior of the building sitting on a flatbed truck or trailer via PVC piping. They do not have traps inline since they are an open air release to the tank, traps would just cause bacteria buildup. The truck/trailer sits in a loading bay ramp so it is lower than the floor drains, thus allowing a gravity feed to the tank location. See attached photo of drain outlet. Mark and the crew clean the cows with the water and lactic acid and then do a quick flush of the drains Into the holding tank to keep them clean also. They can only complete 4 cows a day, from my understanding this Is not as much liquid volume as you would guess. Approximately 1.5 gallons of blood per cow per my conversation with Mark, around 0.5 gallons for a pig, goat or sheep. Please let me know if this answers your question. Thank you, Matthew Langhorst High Country Engineering, Inc 1517 Black Avenue, Suite 101 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (o) 970-945-8676 (c) 970-379-9847 NOTICE; Use of this electronic media by an)'one other than High Country Engineering, Inc. shall be at the sole risk of s11ch useT and without liabilicy or legal exposure 10 High Country Engineenng, Inc. By saving these: file(s), the user accepts Tesponsibility for this demonic media. From: Kathy A.Eastley[mallto:keastley@garfield-county.com] Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 4:26 PM To: Matt Langhorst cc: Karl J. Hanlon; Tamra Allen; Kelly cave Subject: Ken Sack Question Matt, Could you further explain the floor drain system and how the kill room liquid waste gets from the floor drains into the exterior ground level tank mounted on a flat bed truck? I am assuming that It is not gravity fed. Is there a holding tank under the building or does the flow go straight to the tank? How are those drains cleaned? Thanks. Kathy Eastley, AICP Sehior Planner Garfield County Community Development 108 8th Street, #401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: 970-945-Un ext. 1580 Fax: 970-384-3470 keostley@garfield-county com Fram: Ta: Subject: Date: Kathy; ddexrer@ bo mestea dm eats.com Kathy A Eastley Re: Meat Proc:esslng and water usage Friday, June 26, 2015 9:12:24 AM EXHIBIT I AA I don't have numbers by species. In general, we slaughter and process about 100 head of beef, 65 hogs and 20 lambs per month. On average we use about 50,000 gallons of water per month. We also make other products, such as sausage-these products are not related to the slaughter of these animals. So some of ttiat water is used for those unrelated activities. Hope this helps, Dale 970-874-1145 From: Kathy A. Eastley Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2015 1:25 PM To: ddexter@homesteadrneats.com Subject: Meat Processfng and water usage Mr. Dexter, I am a land planner for Garfield County and we are currently reviewing a proposal for a USDA Inspected animal processing facility. I am interested in understanding the amount of water used in the process -for holding of the anlmals to slaughter, clean-up and butchering for cows, goats, sheep, pigs and chickens. Could you provide me any estimates on how much water It takes to process one of each of these anfmals? I have received varying Information -anything from 1 gallon of water to process a chicken to 2 gallons of water to process a cow and am just trying to get a ball- park amount of water needed for a facility. Any Information you could provide would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Kathy Eastley, AICP Senior Planner Garfield County Community Development 108 8th Street, #401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: 970-945 -%377 ext. 1580 Fax: 970-384-3470 keastle~@ggrfield-cgunty com Contact -Homestead Natural Meats Page 1 of2 Home Beef Pork Bacon &Ham Lamb Sausage Jerky Beef Halves About Us Whereto Buy Custom Processing Contact Homestead Natural Meats Homestead Meats (processing facility and retail store) 741 West Sth Street Delta, Colorado 81416 Phone# (970)874-1145 Fax# (970)874-1147 Email: ddexter@homesteadmeats.com Email: jburns@homesteadmeats .com Email: ppatton@homesteadmeats.com http://bomesteadmeats.com/12.html 6126/2015 EXHIBIT I 0PJ Ftvm: To: Cc: subject: Dille: Kathy, Orrin Moon Kathv A East!ey Mike Moman: Rpb Jpnes RE: Ken 5ack Anlmal Processing Frldly, .June 26, 2015 8:17:47 PM J have reviewed the latest changes to the Animal Processing Facility and have the following comment; 1. The latest changes cover my concerns for this facility. I will request that engineered plans be submitted to me on the Fire Pond and Ory Hydrant. I have concerns on the fire hydrant location and the location of the suction pipe and would like to see further detail. 2. The access road from Eagle Springs Ranch Road looks to be adequate in design and structure. I would like to have insurance that the road is built as designed. I am assuming that the engineering firm will have an inspector. 3. I noticed that the entrance gate at the Intersection to the entrance road showed no lock. 1 want to be clear that if this gate locked that we need to have a Knox lock installed for access. Thanks again for allowing me to comment on this referral. Thank you, Orrin D. Moon Fire Marshal Colorado River Fire Rescue 970-625-1243 orrjn moon@cdr us From: Kathy A.Eastley[mallto:keastley@garfleld-county.com] Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 12:48 PM To: Chris Hale; Morgan Hiii; Orrin Moon; Gore, Melvin -FSIS Cc: Tamra Allen; Kelly cave Subject: Ken Sack Animal Processing Good afternoon, Ken Sack has submitted additional materials related to the request for a USDA Animal Processing Facility. You had all reviewed and commented upon the application therefore I would appreciate it if you could review the attached documerits to see If your concerns and comments have been adequately addressed. There Is a short tlmeframe for your review so I would appreciate it if you could respond with any comments at your earliest convenience. I do need comments by the end of the day Friday, June 25th. Thank you and feel free to contact me with any questions. Kathy Eostley, AICP Senior Planner Garfield County Community Development 108 8th Street, #401 Glenwood Sp r ings. CO 81601 Phone: 970-945-1377 ext. 1580 Fox: 970-384-3470 keastley@garfie ld-county com EXHIBIT I ce- Garfield County 195 W. 141" Street Rifle, CO 81650 · Public Health 2014 Blake Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-6614 (970) 625-5200 Garfield County Community Development 1 OB a'h Street Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Attn: Kathy Eastley June 26, 2015 Hello Kathy, My comments for the Ken Sack Animal Processing facility amendments are as follows: 1. WaterSupply a. I stand in support of my earlier comments regarding the supply of water using holding tanks that must be filled on a regular basis. i. The current water supply system of three storage tanks that requires water to be hauled to the slaughterhouse is not a good long-term solution for the life expectancy of this operation. Garfield County Land Use Code requires that a potable water supply be provided that is adequate and of a high enough water quality for consumption by employees; and in this case the processing of meat. We recommend a well be drilled, if possible, that would be tested using the "Deluxe Colorado Package" of the CDPHE Lab Services Division. b. The new estimate on water usage per animal is even lower in the revised updates, indicating that only two gallons per cow of water will be required. While I understand it might be physically possible to use that little of water, this does not allow for the potential to need extra cleaning in thi:, event that animals might be dirty or for other processes requiring water. I recommend significantly increasing the amount of water per animal needed to ensure adequate supply for cleanliness during slaughtering and processing. 2. Wastewater Treatment a. In All Service Septic's Design Specifications, Carla Ostberg indicates that the applicant still has not provided information regarding effluent quality from the Butchering room. This should be provided to both Carla and the Community Development Department. i. It is unclear as to what sort of materials will actually be entering the second OWTS designed for the actual animal processing facility. On our site visit. we were made aware that the blood, intestinal, and other waste coming from the kill room would not be sent Into the OWTS but rather stored and hauled to the landfill. However, our understanding was that the room where meat is processed into various cuts for clients will drain to the septic system. Before we approve the system designed by All Service Septic, all parties involved should be aware of exactly what will be entering the system to know how large it should be sized and what level of secondary treatment is necessary. Garfield County Public Health Department -working to promote health and prevent disease b. The MicroFAST treatment system proposed for use in the OWTS from the butchering room requires an operation and maintenance contract that they will have with the client. Copies of this contract and maintenance records should be submitted to Garfield County Public Health and Community Development. 3. Solid Wasts Disposal a. The piping that comes from the kill room should be connected fully to the tank that will be used to haul solid waste to the landfill, rather than an open air spout that empties into the tank. This will reduce the potential attraction of files and other pests to this area, as well as the potential for spills. 4. Product Labeling and Sale a. I did not see an update in the application revisions answering my questions about the names of the various components of Mr. Sack's operations. Several of their listings onllne indicate that there is a "USDA Meat and Poultry Processing Plant on site" which is not correct as of this date. This must be removed and all mislabeling addressed. b. Eggs that are produced at the farm are being sold in the Farm Fresh Cafe. Eagle Springs must be a certified egg dealer through the USDA in order to sell eggs at a retail food establishment. Please contact Heather Nara, the current retail food establishment inspector for the Rifle area, with questions at (970) 683-6648. Thank you, (ibJb;tflk ~ti. f/l[<!, Morgan Hill Environmental Health Specialist Ill Garfield County Public Health 195 W. 14th Street Rifle, CO 81650 (970) 665-6383 Garfield County Public Health Department -working to promote health and prevent disease EXHIBIT I DD From: To: Subject: Date: Kathy: ~ K;ithV A East!ey RE: Ken Sack Animal Processing Monday, June 29, 2015 9:53:30 AM I have reviewed the additional material provided for Ken Sack Animal Processing. The review generated the following comments: The fire suppression pond, location, and access should be reviewed by the Fire Department. The Applicant should discuss if the site wells allow fire suppression as a use; the Applicant should provide well permits to be used for filling of the fire suppression pond. A condition should be included to fence off the OWTS from pasture/animal grazing areas. Feel free to call or email with any questions or comments . Sincerely, Mountain Cross Engineering, Inc. Chris Hale, P.E. 826 1/2 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 61601 Ph: 970.945.5544 Fx: 970.945.5558 From: Kathy A. Eastley [matlto:keastley@garfleld-county.com) Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 12:48 PM To: Chris Hale; Morgan Hill; Orrin Moon; Gore, Melvin -FSIS Cc: Tamra Allen; Kelly Cave Subject: Ken Sack Animal Processing Good afternoon, Ken Sack has submitted additional materials related to the request for a USDA Animal Processing Facility. You had all reviewed and commented upon the application therefore I would appreciate it If you could review the attached documents to see if your conce.rns and comments have been adequately addressed. There Is a short tlmeframe for your review so I would appreciate It if you could respond with any comments at your earliest convenience. I do need comments by the end of the day Friday, June 26th. Thank you and feel free to contact me with any questions. Kathy Eastley. AICP Senior Planner Garfie.ld County Community C>evelopme.nt 108 8th Stre.e.t I #401 EXHIBIT I GE r PollcyOl-14 Waivers for Roads and Demonstration of Compllance March 3, 20~ /'r. 5 Section 7-107, Access and Roadways, of the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code (LUDC} requires all roads to be designed to provide for •adequate and safe access" and reviewed by the designated County Engineer. The LUDC defines "roadn as "a County road, State highway, public road, street or alley, or private thoroughfare which affords primary access to abutting property, excluding a driveway accessing a single property." The LUDC defines Hprivate road" as "a rlght-of·way constructed, established, owned, and maintained by a private party for access exclusively to private property." Many of the roads In Garfield County are private roads In that they are gated and do not serve the seneral public and they pre-existed the design currently required by the County's Road Standards as defined In Table 7-107. The LUDC allows for the waiver of specific standards provided that the following criteria have been met: 1) an alternat!Ve design achieves the Intent of the subject standard to the same or better degree and 2) the proposed alternative wlll Impose no greater Impacts on adjacent properties than would occur through compliance with the specific standard (Section 4-118). In applications that include roads that do not meet current County road standards as outlined In Table 7- 107, the County has asked that Applicants request a waiver of Section 7-107.F, Design Standards, and Include In the Application submittal sufficient Information, prepared by a professional qualified In the specific discipline, to demonstrate that they meet the criteria outlined In Section 4-118 for granting a waiver. In doing so, the application must Include: A Statement of Adequacy • The evaluation of the existing roadway and waiver wlll need to Include a clear statement that finds that the road will be adequate for the proposed ~se. This statement must be signed by a professional engineer qualified In traffic engineering and licensed by the State of Colorado. To support this evaluation, the following Information wlll be required to be provided: o Geometry of the road - A description of how the private road does/does not meet the design standards In Table 7-107. This should Include a chart that compares the private road design to those standards In Table 7-107, as well as a map that shows the existing road design and highlights those areas that deviate from the standards. A narrative may also be helpful In describing the characteristics of the road as they compare to Table 7- 107 design standards. Unless available, this ls not Intended to imply construction-level drawings. llPage .... o Safety/Structural Issues - A description of obvious safety and/or structural issues observed and a statement about how these Issues will be addressed. o Maintenance - A description of how the road ls and/or will be maintained. This should be supported with the submittal of any existing or proposed maintenance agreements for the road sections. o Travel Demand -An accurate count of the existing peak travel demand as well as the Average Dally Traffic on the road. This should also Include the types of vehicles that currently use the road as well as the additional amount and type of traffic that the proposed use will generate through all phases of its development. Other Evidence of Compliance. In addition, Sections 7-107.A, B, C, D, and E are required to be addressed, which Includes documentation about legal access. Sufficient evidence will be required to be submitted to demonstrate compliance with these sections of the Code. 21Page -1 i _J EXHISrT I FF CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYIN'~G~------ To: From: Revised: Project: Subject: MEMORANDUM RECEIVED Garfield County Community Development Dept. Matthew Langhorst .JUN .1 O Z0l5 GARFIELD COUNTY June 30 111 , 2015 MMUNITY DEV ELOPMENT 482 County Road 315, Silt. Eagle Springs Meat Processing Center Submittal Comment Reponscs Letter The purpose of this letter to is to review the comments received from Chris Hale, Colorado River Fire Rescue, Melvin Gore (USDA), Garfield County Environmental Health Department and a water usage email from Homestead Meats in Delta Colorado. I. Chris Hale Comments from June 29 1h, 2015: Email Correspondence I. The fire suppression pond, location and access will be reviewed by the CRFR. They have requested some small changes to the intake location and hydrant location, but nothing that will affect the overall design of the facility or quantity of water available to them. 2. The site wells will need to be augmented through a West Divide contract to allow for water usage out of the wells for pond/above ground usage. This process is in the works through the permitting and augmentation process. 3. If the County and County Engineer are requesting o fence around the OWTS system fields at this time, the owner of the property will abide by this condition. II. Colorado River Fire Rescue from June 26 111, 2015: Email Correspondence I. More detailed fire hydrant and pond drawings will be worked through with CRFR. The current plans allow for 45,000 gallons .plus of water to be located r to 3' above the intake per the CFRF details for a pond intake structure. HCE will work with CRFR to provide the detailed information that they require for final pond approvals. 2. As per the Access Report a Geotechnical Engineer will be onsite during the construction of the road to make sure that the proposed road section is 100% appropriate with the existing onsite soils. The roadway section design was compiled from a sampling of site soils that were available and consistency in the soils along the entire roadway will need to be verified as will the compaction of the placed material during construction. HCE will also provide a Design Engineer onsite as needed to assure that drainage, alignment and width of roadway are being maintained as per the design and as field conditions regulate. IS 17 BLAKE A VENUE, SUITE I 0 I GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 8160 I 97Q-945-8676•PHONE 970•945-2555 • FAX WWW.HCENG.COM 3. There will be no lock added to the main entrance gate. This gate/access is utilized by multiple parties and a lock would hinder that use. !fa lock were ever added to the gate it would be a CRFR approved Knox Lock. III. Melvin Gore Response to Kathy Eastley Email, June 23n1, 2015: I. The sewage disposal system for the waste water leaving the processing room is to be directed to a OWTS system designed to handle the flow from this room, estimated at 300 gallons per day at maximum processing requirements. The BOD/Effluent quality from this room has been confirmed and the information has been sent to All Service Septic. Prior to the Final OWTS system permitting an updated design packet will be submitted and approved through Garfield County. A final system design acceptance letter will be provided to the USDA-FSIS. IV. Garfield County Environmental Health Development, Morgan Hill Letter, June 26 1h, 2015: 1. A11swers to st1bsectio11s per commellt lei/er: a. The facility owner agrees that the water tank storage and water hauling method is not the ideal situation for the facility. If the facility were to run out of water for any reason the facility would have to shut down until water was made available again, which is not ideal for a business thus the alarms on the tank levels. The water delivery service can have water to the facility within one days' time, which with the tank alarms for half full tanks, provides enough security in timing that the water delivery company can make their need delivery and the facility can maintain a reliable operation. A long term potable pressurized piped water supply is being investigated for feasibility with the City of Rifle. The extension of the Cities mainline at the airport is being discussed and worked out if possible with the City. b. As stated above, if the facility uses more water than the estimate due to unforeseen circumstances and the facility runs out of stored water, they will have to shut down the facility until water is delivered. Due to the tank alarms, no matter what amount of water is being utilized that day, the alarms will sound and the plant manager will order more water. The owner can only predict the water usage that they see on a standard day; all other usages will be outside of a nonnal day and will be handled with a water delivery if necessary. Water usages were lowered when the overall water requirements shifted from a combination of the kill room and production room to individual water usages for each room, not a combined number. 2. A11swers to s11bsectio11s per commelll email: a. To my knowledge All Service Septic has not requested the effluent information from Mark (plant manager) or Ken Sack (owner) directly. The effluent quality information has now been provided to All Service Septic as of this date. Any revision to the OWTS system design that may follow with the information that was provided will be caught up in the Building Permit process when the OWTS system is officially permitted for. 1517 BLAKE AVENUE, SUITE 1 0 1 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 8160 I 97().945-8676 • PHONE 970-945·2555 • FAX WWW.HCENG.COM b. The MicroFast system is required by the State of Colorado to have a service contract for the life of the system to ensure that the system is functioning properly. Garfield County does not have a system for regulation on the MicroFast system or other second level treatment systems available to the public. The Owner of the property will need to.supply the County the initial 2 year contract for the system that Valley Precast provides upon installation of the system and then also provide the year to year contracts to the County for the remainder of the life of the system. c. A hard pipe connection that is detachable via a union or other method of construction will be attached to the solid waste disposal piping flowing from the building to the tank as per the County request. V. Water usage cmaiJ provided to Kathy Eastlcy from Dale Dexter at Homestead Meats in Delta Colorado, June 26 111 , 2015: I. Kat/ly Eastley llad requested Homeste11d Meats provide a water usage q11a11tity for tlleir similar processi11g procedures from Dale De.uer. a. The response from Dale on their water usage is fairly unusable for a comparison to this facility. As per Dale's comments they utilize approximately 50,000 gallons of water at their facility during a single month to process JOO head of beef, 65 hogs and 20 lambs. This amount of processing is above and beyond the agreed upon numbers for the proposed facility. Dale also states that they produce other items such as sausage. Upon review of the Homestead Meats website the facility also provides custom cuts on a daily basis for store customers in addition to their actual processing facility in the shop. They also have a store to sell their product to the public. This appears to be a larger facility than the proposed facility with more staff, restrooms for staff in the store, restrooms for the plant staff and other facility options that this processing plant is not requesting or providing for. The Homestead Meats processing facility has machinery onsite for grinding meat, sausage packing, smoking meats, etc. Grinding and packing machines require significant water to clean and the process of producing the sausage also requires water. This facility is hooked to a municipal water supply and Mark the Plant Manager at the proposed facility has stated that if they were hooked to a municipal facility they would be less conservative with their water usage. Maybe all facilities should have limited water so water conservancy is a must. A more defined water usage chart from this facility would need to be reviewed prior to making a comparison or a comparable facility that is run from a limited water supply should be reviewed for comparison. Please let me know if you have questions pertaining to this Land Use comment response letter. Thanks, Matthew Langhorst, P.E. High Country Engineering, lnc. 1517 BLAKE AVENUE, SUrTE 101 GutNWOOD SPRINGS, CO 8160 I 970-94S8676•PHONE 97().945-2555 • FAX WWW.HCENG,COM Mountain Cross Engineering, Inc. (Chris Hale) June 29th Comment Letter: 1517BLAKE.AVENUE,SUITE 101 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 970-945-8676•PHONE 970-945-2555 •FAX WWW.HCENG.COM 0 tJ 0 [] •I ..J ., -· ...J ... From: To: subject: Date: Kathy: ~ !Cathy A. East!t:y RE: Ken Sick Animal Pnlcesslng Monday, )Jne 29, 2015 9:53:30 AM I have reviewed the additional material provided for Ken Sack Animal Processing. The review generated the following comments: The fire suppression pond, location, and access should be reviewed by the Fire Department. The Applicant should discuss if the site wells allow fire suppression as a use; the Applicant should provide well permits to be used for filling of the fire suppression pond. A condition should be included to fence off the OWTS from pasture/animal grazing areas. Feel free to call or email with any questions or comments. Sincerely, Mountain Cross Engineering, Inc. Chris Hale, P.E. 826 1/2 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Ph: 970.945.5544 Fx: 970.945.5558 From: Kathy A. Eastley [mailto:keastley@garfield-county.com] Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 12:48 PM To: Chris Hale; Morgan Hill; Orrin Moon; Gore, Melvin -FSIS Cc: Tamra Allen; Kelly Cave Subject: Ken Sack Animal Processing Good afternoon, Ken Sack has submitted additional materials related to the request for a USDA Animal Processing Facility. You had all reviewed and commented upon the application therefore I would appreciate it if you could review the attached documents to see if your concerns and comments have been adequately addressed. There is a short timeframe for your review so I would appreciate it if you could respond with any comments at your earliest convenience. I do need comments by the end of the day Friday, June 26th • Thank you and feel free to contact me with any questions. Kathy Eastley, AICP Senior Planner Garfield County Community Development 108 8th Street, #401 • 1 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: 970-945-13n ext. 1580 Fax: 970-384-3470 keostley@gorf!eld-coynty com Colorado River Fire Rescue (Orrin Moon, Fire Marshal) June 26th Comment Letter: 1!517 BLAKE AVENUE, SUITE 101 GUOIWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 970-94&8676•PHONE 97C>-945·2555 •FAX WWW.HC&:NG.CDM 0 0 0 r • 1 u , -1 -1 From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Kathy, Orrto Moon Kathy A Eastley Mike Mqrgan: ~ RE: Ken Sack Animal Processing Frldily, June 26, 2015 8:17:47 PM I have reviewed the latest changes to the Animal Processing Facility and have the following comment; 1. The latest changes cover my concerns for this facility. I will request that engineered plans be submitted to me on the Fire Pond and Dry Hydrant. I have concerns on the fire hydrant location and the location of the suction pipe and would like to see further detail. 2. The access road from Eagle Springs Ranch Road looks to be adequate in design and structure. I would like to have Insurance that the road is built as designed. I am assuming that the engineering firm will have an inspector. 3. I noticed that the entrance gate at the intersection to the entrance road showed no lock. I want to be clear that if this gate locked that we need to have a Knox lock installed for access. Thanks again for allowing me to comment on this referral. Thank you, Orrin D. Moon Fire Marshal Colorado River Fire Rescue 970-625-1243 orcjn. mppn@crfr.us From: Kathy A. Eastley [mailto:keast:tey@garfield·county.com] Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 12:48 PM To: Chris Hale; Morgan Hiii; Orrin Moon; Gore, Melvin -FSIS Cc: Tamra Allen; Kelly cave Subject: Ken Sack Animal Processing Good afternoon, teen Sack has submitted additional materials related to the request for a USDA Animal Processing Facility. You had all reviewed and commented upon the appllcatlon therefore I would appreciate It if you could review the attached documents to see If your concerns and comments have been adequately addressed. There is a short tlmeframe for your review so I would appreciate it if you could respond with any comments at your earliest convenience. I do need comments by the end of the day Friday, June 26th. .1 J J J J J Thank you and feel free to contact me with any questions. Kathy Eastley, AICP Senior Planner Garfield County Community Development 108 8th Street, #401 Glenwood SfJrfngf, CO 81601 Phone: 970-945-13n ext. 1580 Fax: 970-384-3470 kegs1Jey~rfjeld-county com USDA (Melvin Gore) June 23rd Response Email: I !517 BLAKE AVENUE, SUITE I 0 I GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 8160 I 970-945-8676 • PHONE 970-945-2555 • FAX WWW.HCENG.COM ' ,_.! 1 J J ' .J ..J Prvm: Garg MeMn • FSJS To: Kathy A Ea:;t!ev Subject: RE: Ken Sack Animal Processing Date: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 12:33:37 PM USDA-FSIS is concerned that Federal Regulations are followed, and specifically in this case 9 CFR 416.2(f) "Sewage disposal. Sewage must be disposed Into a sewage system separate from all other drainage lines or disposed of through other means sufficient to prevent backup of sewage into areas where product is processed, handled, or stored. When the sewage disposal system is a private system requiring approval by a State or local health authority, the establishment must furnish FSIS with the letter of approval from that authority upon reguest." It was the high-lighted sentence that eventually brought Garfield County Planning and Health Departments into review of this project. Without approval of the septic sewerage disposal system by a State or local health authority, USDA-FSIS could not grant inspection of meat and poultry products privileges to Eagle Springs Organics. This being stated, I see two areas of clarification for USDA-FSIS: 1) Will Garfield County require connection of the processing (slaughter and product fabrication) facility to the OWTS prior to issuing a permit for use? and 2) Will the chicken processing facility be connected to the OWTS as part of the permit of use? When Eagle Springs Organics presents your letter of approval of the sewerage/septic system, USDA-FSIS review will start over to ascertain that Federal sanitary standards will be met. One final observation: The engineering reports stated upon occasion that the USDA-FSIS Inspector will be "grading" the carcasses. This is a semantic issue. USDA-FSIS does not grade the slaughtered animals which would place the USDA "Prime," "Choice," grades on the carcasses. USDA-FSIS inspects the carcasses for wholesomeness and no adulteration to insure food safety; USDA-FSIS does not involve inspection for quality grades . . ..., ., i -~ -, ! i J 1 -, Have a great dayl Melvin Gore, DVM, SPHV c/o Colorado Homestead Ranches 741 West 5th St. Delta, CO 81416 Office: (970) 874 • 8637 Cell: (970) 371 • 8093 OFO -Verifying Food Safety and Animal Welfare every day From: Kathy A. Eastley [mallto:keastley@garfleld-county.com] Senti Monday, June 22, 2015 12:48 PM To: Chris Hale; Morgan Hiii; Orrin Moon; Gore, Melvin -FSIS Cc: Tamra Allen; Kelly cave Subject: Ken Sack Animal Processing Good afternoon, Ken Sack has submitted additional materials related to the request for a USDA Animal Processing Facility. You had all reviewed and commented upon the application therefore I would appreciate it if you could review the attached documents to see If your concerns and comments have been adequately addressed. There Is a short tlmeframe for your review so I would appreciate It If you could respond with any comments at your earliest convenience. I do need comments by the end of the day Friday, June 26 1h. Thank you and feel free to contact me with any questions. Kathy Eastley, AICP Senior Planner Garfield County Co1T1munity Development 108 8th Street, #401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: 970-945-13n ext. 1580 f(l)(: 970-384-3470 ke.gstl~@iQCfie l d-county cotn Garfield County Environmental Health Development, Morgan Hill, June 26th, Letter: 1517BLAKEAVENUE,SUITE 101 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COB 1601 97o-94&8676•PHONE 970-945-2555 • FAX WWW,HCENG.COM c -.J .J .., ..J 195W.14111 Street Rifle, CO 81650 cG'" Garfield County Public Health 2014 Blake Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-6614 (970) 625-5200 Garfield County Community Development 108 81h Street Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Attn: Kathy Eastley June 26, 2015 Hello Kathy, My comments for the Ken Sack Animal Processing facility amendments are as follows: 1. Water Supply a. I stand in support of my ear lier comments regarding the supply of water using holding tanks that must be filled on a regular basis. i. The current water supply system of three storage tanks that requires water to be hauled to the slaughterhouse is not a good long-term solution for the life expectancy of this operation . Garfield County Land Use Code requires that a potable water supply be provided that is adequate and of a high enough water quality for consumption by employees; and In this case the processing of meat. We recommend a well be drilled, if possible, that would be tested using the "Deluxe Colorado Package" of the CDPHE Lab Services Division. b. The new estimate on water usage per animal is even lower In the revised updates, indicating that only two gallons per cow of water will be required. While I understand it might be physically possible to use that little of water, this does not allow for the potential to need extra cleaning in the event that animals might be dirty or for other processes requiring wa ter. I recommend significantly increasing the amount of water per animal needed to ensure adequate supply for cleanliness during slaughtering and processing. 2. Wastewater Treatment a. In All Service Seplic's Design Specifications, Carla Ostberg Indicates that the applicant still has not provided information regarding effluent quality from the Butchering room. This should be provided to both Carla and the Community Development Department. i. It is unclear as to what sort of materials will actually be entering the second OWTS designed for the actual animal processing facility. On our site visit, we were made aware that the blood, intestinal, and other waste coming from the kill room would not be sent Into the OWTS but rather stored and hauled to the landfill. However, our understanding was that the room where meat is processed into various cuts for clients will drain to the septic system. Before we approve the system designed by All Service Septic, all parties involved should be awara of exactly what will be entering the system to know how large it should be sized and what level of secondary treatment is necessary. Garfield County Public Health Department -working to promote health and prevent disease D D 0 r1 L; n ' ' I J -~ I ...J . , J 3. 4. b. The MicroFAST treatment system proposed for use in the OWTS from the butchering room requires an operation and maintenance contract that they will have with the client Copies of this contract and maintenance records should be submitted to Garfield County Public Health and Community Development. Solid Waste Disposal a. The piping that comes from the kill room should be connected fully to the tank that will be used to haul solid waste to the landfill, rather than an open air spout that empties into the tank. This will reduce the potential attract ion of flies and other pests to this area, as well as the potential for spills. Product Labeling and Sale a. I did not see an update in the application revisions answering my questions about the names of the various components of Mr. Sack's operations. Several of their listings onrine indicate that there is a "USDA Meat and Poultry Processing Plant on site" which is not correct as of this date. This must be removed and all mislabeling addressed. b. Eggs that are produced at the farm are being sold in the Farm Fresh Cate . Eagle Springs must be a certified egg dealer through the USDA in order to sell eggs at a retail food establishment. Please contact Heather Nara, the current retail food establishment inspector for the Rifle area, with questions at (970) 683~6648. Thank you, fl~ll f!i_. f:Jtte Morgan Hill Environmental Health Specialist Ill Garfield County Public Health 195 W. 14111 Street Rifle, CO 81650 (970) 665-6383 Garfield County Public Health Department-working to promote health and prevent disease Water usage email provided to Kathy Eastley from Dale Dexter at Homestead Meats in Delta Colorado, June 26 1h, 2015: 1517BLAKEAVENUE,SUITE: IOI GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 8 I 601 970-945-8676•PHONE 970-945-2555 •FAX www.HCENG.COM ·-' 1 1 i ..J j , i .J J J .., ._; Frvm: To : Subject: Date: Kathy, <fderlrr@bomcstradmeats.mm Kathy A Ea:;t!cy Re: Me11t Proasslng llnd water USllge Friday, June 26, 2015 9:12:24 AM I don't have numbers by species. In general, we slaughter and process about 100 head of beef, 65 hogs and 20 lambs per month. On average we use about 50,000 gallons of water per month. We also make other products, such as sausage-these products are not related to the slaughter of these animals. So some of that water is used for those unrelated activities. Hope this helps, Dale 970-874-1145 From: Kathy A. Eastley Sent: Thu rsda y, Ju ne 25, 20 15 1:25 PM To: ddexter@homesteadmeats .com Subject: Meat Processing and water usage Mr. Dexter, I am a land planner for Garfield County and we are currently reviewing a proposal for a USDA inspected animal processing facility. I am interested in understanding the amount of water used in the process -for holding of the animals to slaughter, clean-up and butchering for cows, goats, sheep, pigs and chickens. Could you provide me any estimates on how much water it takes to process one of each of these animals? I have received varying information -anything from 1 gallon of water to process a chicken to 2 gallons of water to process a cow and am just trying to get a ball· park amount of water needed for a facility . Any information you could provide would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Kathy Eastley, AICP Senior Planner Garfield County Conununity Development 108 8th Street, #401 Glenwood Sp rings , CO 81601 Phone: 970-945-1377 ext. 1580 fQX: 970-384-3470 keostlgy@1i4rfield-cgunty cgm EXHIBIT AfpuUt--rr Suggested Findings GG 1. That proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the Planning Commission. 2. That the hearing before the Planning Commission was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts , matters and issues were submitted and that all interested parties were heard at that meeting 3. That for the above stated and other reasons the request for a Land Use Change Permit is in the best interest of the health, safety, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. 4. That the application is in general conformance with Garfield County Comprehensive plan 2030 and further meets the goals of economic development and agricultural needs of Garfield County. 5. That the application as conditioned meets the requirements of the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code, as amended. Conditions of Approval 1. All verbal representations of the applicant are incorporated as conditions. 2. OWTS and Building Permits shall be issued in conformance with the Land Use Permit. 3. Eagle Springs Ranch Road and main access road to the facility shall be improved to meet County and Fire District Standards prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit. 4. Applicant shall install a minimum 18 ,000 gallons of water dedicated for fire protection services per the comments of the Fire District prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit. 5. Applicant shall obtain a new well permit for the onsite late registered well, Permit No. 125042 and a West Divide Conservancy Contract for augmentation of the well and onsite fire protection pond for fire protection purposes prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit. 6. Monthly maximums for animal processing shall be no more than 80 cows, 200 sheep, 200 pigs and 200 goats. Total monthly maximums can be comprised of any mix of the foregoing animals provided that the design parameters of the OWTS systems for 300 gallon per day maximum flow shall not be exceeded. 7. The OWTS shall be fenced per Chris Hale 's review comments. EXHIBIT HH Planning Commission, July 8, 2015 Ken Sack Animal Processing KE SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION CONDITIONAL APPROVAL A recommendation of approval with conditions should include required additional information or mitigation measures related for identified issues in order to bring application into general conformance with the ULUR and Comprehensive Plan: RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS General Conditions 1. That all representations made by the Applicant in the application and at the public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners, shall be conditions of approval unless specifically altered by the Board of County Commissioners in the public hearing. 2. This land use approval is granted for the following activities: a. USDA certified animal processing facility, including cut and wrap of products, for cows, goats, sheep and pigs; b. Maximum processing per month permitted at the site. is 680 animals restricted to 80 cows and 200 each of goats, sheep and pigs. 3. The Land Use Change Permit shall be valid for a period of two (2) years from the date of issuance, whereupon the permit shall expire if a public water supply or private (well) water supply is not provided for the processing facility. This water supply shall repla.ce the water hauling scenario which is approved for a temporary period of time of 12 months. 4. Any modifications to the current approval shall require an amendment to the Land Use Change Permit pursuant to the land use regulations in effect at the time of the request. Conditions required Prior to Issuance of the Land Use Change Permit 5. Prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit the Applicant shall provide Community Development a copy of the USDA approval for the facility. 6. Prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit I scheduling of the application for BOCC review the applicant shall provide construction related information regarding proposed physical access via Eagle Springs Ranch Road, compliant with LUDC and fire district standards. 7. Prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit I scheduling of the application for BOCC.review the applicant shall provide sufficient engineer plans of the proposed pond and dry hydrant for review and acceptance by Colorado River Fire Rescue. 8. Prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit the Applicant shall demonstrate that proposed access improvements to the facility will be consistent with those standards contained in Section 7- 107 of the LUDC. 9. Prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit the Applicant shall complete required improvements including, but not limited to, access, water, wastewater, and fire protection measures or enter into an Improvements Agreement with the Board of County <;:ommissioners to llPage collateralize these improvements. Planning Commission, July 8, 2015 Ken Sack Animal Processing KE 10. Prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit the Applicant shall provide an acceptable noxious weed inventory to the County Vegetation Manager and a Weed Management Plan, if deemed necessary by the findings of the inventory. The Vegetation Manager shall inform Community Development whether the submitted documents are acceptable. 11. Prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit the Applicant shall demonstrate that a valid well permit has been issued for the fire protection water storage pond and prior to scheduling the application for BOCC review the Applicant shall provide evidence of applying for said permit and any required augmentation. 12. Prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit the Applicant shall demonstrate that the waste vault and haul is equipped with an overflow alarm and shut-off valve. 13. Prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit the Applicant shall validate the proposed water usage numbers utilizing scientific means or comparison with other facilities of this type. 14. Prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit the Applicant shall provide a copy of an Operation and Maintenance contract for the MircroFAST treatment system for the OWTS. Copies of the annual contract and maintenance records shall be submitted annually to Garfield County Public Health and Community Development departments. 15. Prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit the Applicant shall design and construct an adequate vault and haul system to assure tl:lat the piping system for the floor drains in the kill room prevents possible spills and attraction to pests to the area. The design and construction shall be reviewed and found acceptable by Community Development. 16. Prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit the Applicant shall fence the OWTS area to prevent livestock from grazing above the systems. Annual Review 17. Garfield County shall conduct an annual review of the operations to assure compliance with all conditions of approval and standards of the LUDC. Building and OWTS Permits 18. The Applicant shall comply with all requirements and conditions of the Building and OWTS permits issued by Garfield County. Solid and Liquid Waste Management 19. The facility shall abide by all requirements for the OWTS as required by All Service Septic in a letter dated June 17, 2015 and attached as Exhibit V to this report. 20. By-products of the processing activity, including solid or liquid waste, shall not be buried or discarded onsite, but shall be properly disposed of at the Garfield County Landfill. 21Page Planning Commission, July 8, 2015 Ken Sack Animal Processing KE 21. The facility shall abide by all requirements for water quality testing for the potable water tank storage related to the facility. Access 22. All vehicles hauling equipment and materials for this application shall abide by Garfield County's oversize/overweight system. All vehicles requiring oversize/overweight permits shall apply for them at Garfield County Road and Bridge Department. All vehicles applying for these permits shall have on file with Garfield County Road and Bridge Department a letter or e-mail stating said vehicles can obtain oversize/overweight permits under their road bond on file with Garfield County. 23. The sole access to the processing facility shall occur via Eagle Springs Ranch Road and the on-site driveway access shall not be utilized for any activity associated with the animal processing facility, including employees . Compliance with Standards 24. The Property Owner acknowledges that the County has performance standards in place that could lead to revocation of the Land Use Change Permit if continued violations of the permit occur over a period of time. 25. Site operations shall not emit heat, glare, radiation, dust or fumes which substantially interfere with the existing use of adjoining property or which constitutes a public nuisance or hazard. 26 . If any lighting is proposed to be located at this facility the Applicant shall provide a lighting plan indicating location, height and source of power. Any lighting proposed shall comply with ULUR standards including, but not limited to, lighting directed inward and downward towards the interior of the property. 27. Operation of the facility must be in accordance with all Federal, State and Local regulations and permits governing the operation of this facility of this type. 28. Slaughter and processing activity for meat to be used for public sale and consumption shall not occur without a USDA Inspector on site, as required by law. 29. No materials or wastes shall be deposited on the property in a form or manner that may be transferred off the property by any reasonably foreseeable natural cause or force. 3IPage EXHIBrr IT L :~~-- 1/ •' ! . . . 0 I ! ~ ~ c.1.tti·w.:.nc°"""1'V co..onA.."X> ~ ! ~ \ '82C:OUNTTROIJ:l3U!.SIL.T 2 ; ) S1TEEX18TINGGRADINQ i 0 : fllAH &Hta .. " ., PARCEL JD : 2179JB!00681 PARCEL JD : 2179JB100691 PARCEL ID: PARCEL ID: PARCEL 10: CRi\PKIC SCAL.£ 1S;U~ -i t.l,ll'-IACCE55Elfi1U.~ ONTO [.t,Q..E Sf'f(INGS R'Ah01 ROAQ, Dff Of WA.I.LU CREO: ROAO 4<1' E.AS£U£NT, 20~ £11liEJl SIOE OF RO-"> PER EASOIOo1 0£!>1..ll:l>Tl(>,I l!..':--n. ' ' ~ , ... '~· '\. ... __ I ('' \ \ ~ \ ... ~. 179 17.l007J2 ) ~~ Sl'RlNCS ORGANIC. lJ.C . .._ \ ' '- ~ \ ~ . "'.....- \ "· '· ."" ~ \, Design Capacity (ADT) Minimum ROW Width (Feet) Lane Width (Feet) Shoulder Width (Feet) Ditch Width (Feet) Cross Slope Shoulder Slope Design Speed Minimum Radius (Feet) 80 12 8 6 Min. Paved 10 2% 3% 35 mph 425 Ma•imum % Grade I 8% 60 50 12 11 6 6 4 Min . Paved 4 Min. Paved 10 6 2% 2% 3% 5% 35 mph n/a 185 80 8% 50 I 40 I 1s to 301 30 11 8 Single Lane Single Lane 12 12 4 2 0 0 2 Min. Paved 6 4 32 0 2% Chip/Seal 2% Chip/Seal 2% n/a 3%Gravel 3%Gravel 5% 5% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 80 50 40 n/a 12% 12% 12% 12% Asphalt or I . I Chip/Seal or I I I Native Surface I Chip/Seal Chip/Seal Gravel Gravel Gravel Material I n/a 1 As determined adequate in an engineering review Primitive road shall be dedicated ROW, driveway can be dedicated as either an easement or ROW. 2 If determined necessarv for adeauate dra!nasie. 1 . Circulation and A li gnment. The road system shall provide adequate and efficient internal circulation within the development and provide reasonable access to public highways serving the development. Roads shall be designed so that alignments will join in a logical manner and combine INith adjacent road systems to form a continuous route from 1 area to another. · 2. Intersections. No more than 2 streets shall intersect at 1 point, INith a minimum of 200 feet between off-set intersections, unless otherwise approved by the County. 3. Street Names. Street names shall be consistent INith the names of existing streets in the same alignment. There shall be no duplication of street names in the County . SACK PRO CESSING FACILITY WATER USAGE CHART Monthly and Da ily Water Usage Calculations Location Description Number of Units Usage per Unit Total Usage per Month 20 Total per (gal) Working Davs (gal) Day (gal) Kill Room Water Use: Caw Processing per Day 4 10 800 40 Pig Processing per Day 10 8 1,600 80 Goat Processing per Day 10 8 1,600 80 Sheep Processing per Day 10 8 1,600 80 Butchering Room Sanitizing of Room (end of day) 20 Work Days 300 6,000 300 Adjacent Chicken Plant: Chicken Processing per Month 2000 4 8,000 400 Single Family Home: Three Bedroom Home per Day 30 Days 350 10,500 350 Total Water Usa ge D uri ng Full M onthly Production : 26 ,100 Average Daff y Use : 1130 Da ys of Water Available with 6,000 Gallon Storage 5.3 Notes: 1.) Ave ra ge facility use based on 20 work d ays per month. 2.) Kill room daily use calculated using pig processi ng as the maximum water volume. O nly one type of animal can be p rocess in a single d ay . 3.) Av erage single family home use based on 30 d ays per month. 4.) Ch icken p rocessing usage incl udes clean u p of prcxessing roo1 Suggested Hndinj!s I. That pro~r public nolic.: was pr<widod a.' roquircd for the hearing hd'orc lhc Planning Co mmis.,ion. 2. ·mat the hearing before lhe Pl:uming Commission was <xtcnsiw and compldc. that all p:rti~nl facts. mallc.'rn and issu~ weri: submitt.:d and that all inkr..:st\!d partii:s w~r.: hoard al lhat m.:eling 3. lliat for the above staled and olh.:r rcasmL< tho r.:qucsl for a Land Us.: Chango l'ormil is in lhc hos\ inl<r<sl or the health. safety. conwniencc. ordor. prosporily aml wolf:m: or the citizens ofGarlkld County. 4. ·niat the application is in gen.:ral confom1ancc with Garlicld Co1mty Comprch<nsivc plan 2030 and l'i.Jrthcr mcclS lhe goals of oconomic dcvclopni<nl nnd agricullural needs of Garfield County. 5. ll1al the application 'L' conditi1mcd 111ce1s tho requin:mcnls of the Garlichl Counly Land Use and D.:wlopmcnl Co1k as a111.~1ded. Conditions or Approval I . All verbal reprcsenlutions oflhc applicant ar< incorporah:d as conditions. 2 . O\\'TS and Building Pennils shall 1"' issued in confom1ancc witl1 tho L:uul Uso Pcm1it. 3. Eagl< Springs Ranch Road and main ru:cess road to the facility shall b.: improved lo meet Counly m1d Fire District S1andards prior to issuance of the Lm1d l!•e Change Pennit. 4. :\pplicm1t shall in•1all a mmnnum 18.000 gallons of waler dedicated for lire prot~ction s~r\'iC~S pi!I" th~ C'Ol\Uncnts or the Fir.: District prior to lssU30(.'-C of th.: Land Use: Change Pennit. 5. ,\pplicant shall ohtain a new wdl ~nnit for the onsitc late registered well. Penni I No. 125042 and a West Di\'id< C:onser\'ancy Contract for augmentation of the well and onsite lire prolection pond for lire protection purposes prior lo issuance of the Land l'se Chang< Pl!nniL 6. ~lontllly maximums for animal processing shall be no more thm1 80 cows. 200 sheep. 200 pigs and 200 goats. Total monthly ma.ximums c:u1 be comprised or any mix of tl1 c foregoing animals pro\'idcd that the design parameters of lhc O\VTS systems for )(JO gallons per day maximum now shall nol be excoeded. 7. TI1e O\\'TS shall be 1;,n.-.:d per Chris Hale's re\'icw commenL'. 11!1 WI\~ ,~~M .~ i~~f .M:~i .rtir\I rw ~ I~.~·~ 1111 I Reeeptiontt : 754441 · 08/21/2008 11 :02:10 AM Jean Alberico 1 or 14 Rec Fee :$0 .00 Ooc Fee :0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO A VIGATION AND HAZARD EASEMENT ' ... \\101(€. do..te..~ 7/?../08 lf\ vo·1 (..t:, ·~: l ~JS WHEREAS, Specialty Restaurants Corporation hereinafter Called Grantor, is the owner in'fee of that certain parcel of land known as Parcels 217917400686 which is situated in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado in the vicinity of the Garfield County Regional Airport, hereinafter called "Grantor's Property," and, WHEREAS, THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY, Colorado, hereinafter called '°Grantee," owns and operates the Garfield County Regional AiJJ>Ort. hereinafter called "the Airport," and is the sponsor of. the Airport under tenns of the federal Airport and Airway Improvement Act, · NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the swn of Eight Thousand Nine Hundred Twenty and 52/100 Dollar$ ($8,920.52) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grant.or, for himself, his heirs, administrators, personal representatives, successors and assigns, does hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey unto Grantee, its successors aod assigns, for the use and benefit of the public, an easement and right-of-way appurtenant to the Airport, including any additions thereto hereafter made by the Grantees or its successors and assigns, for the unobstructed use and passage of all types of aircraft ( "aircraft" being defined for purposes of this instrument as any device now known or hereafter developed, invented, designed or used for navigation of or flight in air) by whomsoever . owr_ied or operated, in and through the navigable air space above the surface of Grantor's Property and to an infinite height above said Grantor's Prop~rty, together with the right to cause, in all air space above the swface of Grant.ors' Property, such noise and vibrations; smoke and :fumes; deposits of dust, fuel particles, and other particulate matter; and any and aU other effects which may be incident to or caused by the normal operation of aircraft taking off, landing, or otherwise operating at or on the Airport. Grantor hereby waives, remises and releases any right or cause of action or claim for damages which he may now have or which he may have in the future against Grantee, its successors and assigns, due to any such noise, vibrations, smoke, fumes, deposits of particulate matter, lights and radio emissions from aircraft and/or the Airport and all other effects which may be caused or may have been caused by the operation of aircraft landing at, talcing off from, or operating at, on or near the Airport at any time of day or night and .on any day of the week. Nothing stated in ~e foregoing waiver, grant, and release sbaJJ divest the Grantor, his heirs, personal representatives, successors and assign5 from any right or cause of action for damages to any person or property resulting from the unlawful or negligent operation of any aircraft at any altitude over and aqoss Grantor's Property. TO HA VE AND TO HOLD said easement and right of way, with all rights appertaining thereto, unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns until the Ailpprt shall be abandoned and shall cease to be used for public airport purposes. FURTIIBR. Grantor recognizes and hereby agrees and covenants, for himself: his heirs, administrators, personal representatives, successors, and assigns, to comply with the Federal Aviation Administralion ("FAA") regulation Part 77 (Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace) including the submittal of FAA form 7460· I , Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration (available in the office of the Airport Director), prior to undertaking any construction oo Grantor's Propeey. Notwithstand~g this Easement, Grantor reserves the right to construct, ~ alter or grow upon Grantor's property any building, structw-e, tree or other object extending into the airspace. If the FAA fo1111 7460·1 identifies an obstruction that may adversely affe.ct aviation safety, the Airport and or FAA may then negotiate and offer just compensation to the Grantor as needed for the preservation of unobstructed over flight activity. Just compens3.tion may be detennined by mutual agreement, arbitration or though the judicial system. Fwther, nothing in this easement shall be construed as limiting or restricting Grantor (and/or its successors in interest) from building on, occupying or using Grantor's Property in any manner and for any type ofland use . .The aforesaid covenants and agreements shall run with the land and shall be forever binding upon the heirs, administrators, personal representatives, successors., and assigns of the Grantor. Pagel of3 1111 Wl1r\f~~Wf.~lk~f,M:~~1fft'i~rtf1 ~rP.a11~ ~I~ 11111 Reception#: 754441 ' 0812112008 1\:02:10 RM Jean Alberico 2 o f 14 Reo Fee :$0 .00 Ooc Fee :G.00 GRRF!ELD COU NTY CO · Myc.ommla.!lonaxphes: _y..J,( ~IO '30'+t...., 'D. · 'Vu .. ,Jca.\i"r CH-Ai,("'tA~ NcWyl'ubUo •: j . ! 1111 ~·,~~?if,~iM~,,M:~~.rrv.fi!iW,rft\~l~ ~·y II Ill ReceptlonH: 754441 08/21/2008 11 :©2 :1 0 AM Jean Alb~rico 3 o f 14 Re c Fee :$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO SUBORDINATION In consideration of the premises and to assure Grantee of the continued benefits accorded it under this Avigation and H_a7Md Easement,-------------~· M=o=rtg""a .... g_....ee/~O=b=li=-gee/L==i=en~H~ol=d=er."""'/Le=---n=de~r, identified in the Mortgage/Deed of Trust, dated ___ _J __ and recorded at Book____, Page __ · of the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder, arid associated documents covering Grantor's Property, ·above~ described, does hereby covenant and agree that said Mortgage/Deed of Trust shall be subject to and subordinate to this A vigation and H87.ard Easement' and the recording of this A vigation and Haz.ard Easement shall have preference . and shall be superior to said Mortgage/Deed of Trust, irrespective of the date of making or recording of said security instrument(s ) .. MortgageeJObligee/Lien Holder/Lender (Title) STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this __ day of _______ _, by _________ ...,(N'""am=e_.), ________ "'"'CT'""itl=e""") and an authorized representative of (entity name), a __________ __.(==state=-=an=d=-=fo=nn=-=o=f=b=us=in=e=ss entity) on behalfof the -----~<=fro~m~o=f~e~nti~·tv ........ l. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: ___________________ Notary Public Page 3 of3 ~. ,, H :j !I " i: I· 1111 Wl\\f~~M.~l~fiill,,t'IY:~Lf4fl.~' ri\l,!m«.~1 1i 11111 Re~eplionij: 754441 00/21/2008 11 :02 :10 RM Jean Alberico 4 of 14 Rec Fae :$0 .00 Doc Fee :0 .00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO Specialty Restaurants Coi:poration 8191 East Kaiser Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92808 Dear property owner. Offer and Acceptance Letter Garfield County respectfully requests you to execute the enclosed A vigation and Hazard easement over your property located in Garfi eld County Colorado and described as assessor parcel numbers 217917400686 totaling, more or l~ 72.315 qualifying acres in consideration of the sum of$8,920.52 We feel that given the nature of this easement that is outside ofour runway protection zone and therefore Dot required by the Federal A viatioD Administration for aircraft operations, you will find this amotmtjust compensation for an easement. If you are amenable to this offer please sign. a.ad return a copy of this letter along with a W-9 focm to the Garfield Coun1y Airport Manager pn or before February 28, 2008. An official .registered copy of your original executed avigatioo easement must the~ be retumed to the Airport Manager on or before March 31, 2008. We will process your payment upon the return of this acceptance Jetter and W-9 form aud .make arrangements for you to obtain the fee immediately upon receipt of the easement document Our aviatlon consultant is familiar with these d~urnents and will assist you, at no charge, in the execution of the easement if you wish. Should you decide not to execute this agreement, we thank you for your time and consideration of this offer. Please !mow that we intend to COO) ply with all regulations and recommendations of the Federal Aviation Administration regarding avigation easements that are not required for aircraft operation, specifically that we have made the same offer ro all similarly affected property owners, that this is the best offer and l ()0% of the funds authorized (there is no contingency fund) and acceptanc~ timelines should not be extended. Thank you again fur your attention to this offer Sincerely, Brian Condie, Airport Manager · [ J I am able and willing to execute this avigation easement offer from Garfield County and intend to ~oo~U.lhlsaff..-ond '"°"""''"''" Owners Signature \) • 'f · Date " ( \ \ f O S S~Ptt...'l\ ~~ eti~ · .. ' 1111 ~~-..~~~l'ii,~ikM/l,M:i~~,MLr¥ri ~.l.+1i.~·y 11111 Reception#: 754441 08/21/2009 11 :©2 :10 AM Jean Alberico 5 cf 14 Rec Fee:$0 .00 Occ Fee:0 .00 GARFlELD COUNTY CO A VIGATION AND HAZARD EASEMENT If\\} O ~ (.€.. d Cl... \-e. ·. r J .LJc;o .i f\~0 lc.e. ::ii.: I WHEREAS, Specialty Taverns Inc. hereinafter called Grantor, is the owner in fee of that certain parcel ofland known as Parcels 217917300723, 217917300719, 217918400720, and 217917400722 which is situated in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado in the vicinity of the Garfield County Regiona1 Airport, hereinafter called "Grantor's Property," and, · WHEREAS, TlIE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY , Colorado, hereinafter called "Grantee," owns aJ,td operates the Garfield County Regional Airport, hereinafter called "the Airp-Ort," and is the sponsor of the Airport under tenns of the federal Airport and Airway Improvement Act, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the sum ofThirty two thousand two hwidred sixty one and 13/100 Dollars ($32.261.13) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor, fo_r himself; his heirs, administrators, .personal representatives, successors and assigns, does hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, for the use and benefit of the public, an · easement and right-of-way appurtenant to the Airport, including any. additions thereto hereafter made by the Grantees or its successors and assigns, for the unobstructed use and passage of all typeS of aircraft ( "aircraft" being defined for purposes of this instrument as any device now known or hereafter developed, invented, designed or used for navigation of or flight in air) by whomsoever owned or operated, in and through the navigable,air space above the surface of Grantor's Property and to an infinite neigbt above said Grantor's Property, together with the right to cause, in all air space above the surface of Grantors' Property, such noise ~d vibr3tions; smoke and fumes: deposits of dust, fuel particles, and other partic_ulate matter; and any and all other effects which may be incident to or caused by the normal operation of aircraft ta1cing off; landing, or otherwise operating at or on the Airport. Grantor hereby waives. rem.ises and releases any 'right or cause of action or claim for damages which he may now have or which he may have in the t\Iture: against Grantee, its successors and assigns, due to any such noise, vi"brations, smoke, fumes, deposits of particulate matter, lights and radio emissions from aircraft and/or the Airport and all other effects which may be caused or may have been caused by the operation of~ landing at, taking off from, or operating at, on or near the Airport at any time of day or night and on any day of the week. Nothing stated in the foregoing waiver, grant, and release shall divest the Grantor, his heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns from any right or cause of action for damages to any person or property resulting from the tmlawful or negligent operation of any aircraft at any altitude over and across Grantor's Property. · · TO HA VE AND TO HOLD said easement and right of way, with all rights appertaining thereto, unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns Wltil the Airport shall be abandoned and shall cease to be used for public airport purposes. FURTHER, Grantor recognizes and hereby agrees and covenants, for himself, his hem, administrators, personal representatives, successors, and assign5, to comply with the Federal Aviation Adminism¢on ("PAA") regulation Part 77 (Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace) including the submittal of FAA form 7460-1, Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration (avmlable in the office of the Airport D.irector ), prior to undertaking any construction on Grantor's Property. Notwithstanding this ~meat, Grantor reserves the right to construct, erect., alter or grow upon Grantor's property any building, struciW'e, tree or other object extending into the airspace. If the FAA form 7460-l identifies an obstruction that may adversely affect aviation safety, the Airport and or FAA may then negotiate and offer just compensation to the Grantor as needed for the preservation of tmobstructed over flight activity_ Just compensation may be determined by mutual agreement, arbilriltion or though the judicial system. Further, nothing in this easement shall be construed as limiting or restricting Grantor (and/or its successors in interest) from building on., occupying or using Grantor's Property in any manner and for any type of land use. The aforesaid covenants and agreements shall run with the land and shall be forever binding upon the hein;, administrators, pef'¥lnal representatives, successors, and assigns of the Grantor. Page 1 of3 · · .. .· 1111 M'l'J. t'~~ll'i(,U WM'tl! ,NT;~f 11~1 fflf ~J' ~ 1lf!111 •1 HI Reception ~: 754441 08 1-2112009 11 :02 :1ll l'IM Jean Alberi co 6 or 1q Rec Fee :$0 .00 Doc Fee :0 .00 GARFrELD COUNTY CO ~4L.1!:/ 7}11J~ ::;...,.,c. 'Tl- . IN WITNESS WHEREOF ~ , the Grantor has heieunto set his hand and seal this L!_ day of 'JYAJe I 2008, STATEOF~) )ss. COUNTYOF~ ) °JOi.tA) P. "TAu..,~Er f~~io~r 'The foregoing instrument was iu:knowledgcd before me this 11..!day of___,~>f""""u+Y~~--' rJtdL by $HAJJ?. -O,u,c. Her. WitneS:S my hand and official seal_. My commission expires: .J -c:l { ~ I 0 NotaJy Public '· Page 2 of3 . . 1111 ~\~ ~~~M.~ lk~~ ,M:~~ .~r~~ ~L ~ii. ~'Y 11111 Reeept1on~: 754441 09/21/2009 11:02 :10 AM Jean Alberico · 7 of 14 Rec Fee:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COU~TY co SUBORDINATION In consideration of the premiseS and to assure Grantee of the continued benefits accorded it under this Avigation and HazMd Easement, _____________ ..._, =M=o:..:..:rtg=ag=-=ee/i=..:::O:c::b=li:.Qg.:.:eelL=i=en~H=o=ld=er/Len==de==r, identified in the Mortgage/Deed of Trust, dated ___ ___,, __ and recorded at Book__. Page __ of the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder, and associated documents covering Grantor's Property, abo~e- described. does hereby covenant and agree that said Mortgage/Deed of Trust shall be subject to and s1lbo!9inate to this A vigation and Haz.ard Easement and the reeording of this A vigation and Haz.ard F.asement shall have preference and sha:JJ be sµperior to said Mortgage/Deed of Trust, irrespective of the date of making or recording of said security instrwnent( s ). Mortgagee/Obligee/Lien Holder/Lender By its: ----------(Title) STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this __ day of _______ _, by _________ .>..:CN..,,,am=e~), ________ _,....CT=i=tle=) and an authorized representative of (entity name), a __________ _...(=state=-=an=d:o...=fo=rm=. --=o=f=bus=in=e=ss entity) on behalf of the _____ __,(=fro~m~o=f_..e ..... nmv=· ......,.). Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: -------~-----------Notary Public Page 3 of3 1111 M\\ ~~~M1~ l~~'t' 1NW:~! 1r~Ltl\' 1!*V.l~~1 i1 11111 Reception ~: 754441 0912112008 11 :02 :10 AM Jean Alberico 8 o! 14 Rec Fee :$0 .00 Ooc Fee :0 .00 GARFlELO CO UNTY C~ May20,2008 Specialty Taverns Inc. 8191 East Kaiser Slvd. Anaheim, CA 92808 Dear Landowner: My name is Brian Condie and I am the AiTporl: Manger of the Garfield County Region.al Airport here in Rifle Coiomdo. You may be aware that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Garlield County are in the process of tipgrn:"Jlng the runway safety area from the 1980 FAA airpo;rt sbmdards to !he cunCJlt FAA airport standnrds. Part of this upgrade involves the ocquisition of avigation and hazard easements. An avigation easement is a conveyance of airspace over anolher property for use by the airport. Easement rights acquired typically include the right-of-flight of aircraft; the right t.o cause noise, dust, etc.; the right to remove all objects protruding into the airspace together with the right to prohibit future obstructions or interference in the airspace. The avigation easem.ent on the property shall "run wilh the land" and any"future owne:ra' use of the servant parcel is also reslrict.ed as described in an avigation easement. For land owners within 1,700' off the runway end, specifically located within the Runway Protection Zone, an avigation easement is required and must have a professional appraisal completed to determine its value. Further specific negotiations protocol must be followed to secure an casement if federal funds are used to purchase the easement. J have identified one property owner to the east of the airport who qualifies in this category because a portion of their property lies within th.e runway protection zone . For land owners not within the runway protection zone but in the proximity of an aircraft approach path an easement is recommended but not required. These easements are not required because city and county building codes and regulations are usually more restrictive than the FAA's as far as height restrictions are concerned and Federal 4vialion Regulation J>art 91 Gene~l Operating & FlightRules authorize aircraft flights in close proximity to property located around an airport. Because these easemcrus are not required they are conducted strictly on a one price at1d single offer basis. Under the FAA procedures, protracted .negotiations should not be conducted, nor should administrative settlement criteria be applied to secure individual settlements. The airport should rely on a concise negotiations effort involving well developed written offern and presentation to property owners thJlI as.sure and convince the property owner that the offer made reflects sound valuation consideration$ and represents the airport's best offer for the acquisition of the avigation easement 1111 ~'P\fj~M.~l~M,M:~L~~~~ ~.I~~ ~·ii 11111 Receptionij: 754441 08/21/2008 11:02 :10 AM Jean Alberico 9 or 14 Rec Fee :$0 .00 Doc Fee :0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO [have identified six property owners that I believe are within reasonable proximity to the ai:tport AND associated aircraft flight path wfficieot to warrant lhat an attempt is made to secure an avigation and hazard easement with them. Your properly falls within thls category. In detennini.ng a value for this easement I used the FAA guidelines of 1. Sound valuation considerations as recommended by professional consultants in recognition of a The owners time to review documents and information b. An owner potential to seek legal counsel c. Other fees {bank, not.aiy eel.) that may be associated with the execution of an avigation easement d. Over-flight of aircraft, land owners presently receive e. Continued compliance with County building codes 2. Equitable money offer to all similarly affected property owners 3. The aiiports best offer for thi: acquisition of the avigatioo easement 4. Concise tenns of the offer. After these considerations 1 am able to offer each projlerty owner the sum of $3, 750 in consideration 'of tllcir time and potential associated fees and S7L50 Per qualifying acre in consideration of over-flight Of>Crations and continued compliance with Garfield Cowity building codes. As I wish to secure an easement with each property owner I want you to Jcnowthat I have been open and upfront with you regarding this matter. Bach property owner is made the same offer, terms and conditions. To ass ist you in your consideration I have enclosed contact infomiation for fue airport's FAA project manager, our professional aviation consultant, two professional appraisers that handle aviga~on easements and myself Please feel free to contact any ·of us 10 answer questions you may have. Thank you for your attention to this matter and I hope you will find tlUs offer satisfactory. Sincerely, Brian Condie, .Airport Manager enc): Coatnct information Offer letter Avigation Easement W~9 1111 M\\ fl~rYhf t( .itT.MiC~ ,1 •n:Wrr-f/r.1 ~~1 1l 11111 Receptio~~= 754441 08/21 /2008 11 :02 :10 AM Jean Alberico 10 of 14 Rec Fee :$0.00 Doc Fee :0 .00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO Offer and Acceptance Letter Specialty Taverns Inc. · 8191 :East Kaiser Blvd. Aitaheim, CA 92808 Dear property owner: Gar.field County respectfully requests you to execute the enclosed A vigation and Hazard easement over your property located in Garfield County Colorado and described as . assessor parcel numbers 217917300723, 217917300719, 217918400720 and 217917400722 .totaling, more or less, 398.757 qualifying acres in consideration of the sum of$32,261.13. V(e feel that given the nature of this easement that is outside of our runway protection zone and therefore not requUed by the Federal Aviation Administration for aircraft operations, you will find this amount just compensation for an easement If you are amenable to this offer please sign and return a copy of this letter along with a W-9 form to the Garfield County Airport Manager on or before February 28, 2008. An official registered copy of your original executed avigation easement must then be returned to the Airport Manager on or before March 31, 2008. We will process your payment upon the return of this acceptance letter and W-9 form and make arrangements for you to obtain the fee immediately upon receipt of the easement document. Our . . aviation consultant is familiar with these documents and will assist you, at no charge, in the execution of the ~ment if you wish. Should you decide not to execute this agreement, we thank you for your time and consideration of this offer. Please know that we intend to comply with all regulations and recommendations of the Federal Aviation Administration regarding avigation easements that are not required for aircraft operatio~· specifically that we have made the same offer to all similarly affected property owners, that this is the best offer and I 00°/o of the funds authorized (there is no contingency fund) and acceptance timelines should not be extended. Thank you again for your attention to this offer Sincerely; Brian Condie, Airport Manager · [ ] I am able and willing to execute this avigation easement offer from Garfield County and intend to comply with the conditions set forth in this offer and acceptance letter. Owners Signature Date ... Federal Aviation Administration Denver Airports District Office Hanz Anker 26805 East 681h Ave Room 224 Denver, CO 80249 (303) 342-1260 Aviation Appraiser Amie Butler Appraiser Amie Butler 300 Main St Ste 301 Grand Junction, CO 81501 (970) 241-2716 Garfield County Aii;port Manager Brian Condie C.M. 0375 County Road 352, Bldg l 070 Rifle, CO 81650 (970) 625·J091 Contact Information Aviation Consultant PRT Consulting Peter Muller 1340 Deerpa1h Trail, Suite 200 F.ranktown, CO 80116 (303) 532-1855 ~ v iationAp,pnUs:er MAI Bonnie Roerig & Associates, LLC BOnnie D. Roerig 1873 S Bellaire St. Suite 1222 Denver, CO 80222 (303) 757-5525 -·~-::-:::--::;-::-.. -.-.• --·7:""."':':'::.=-:-:=::::~.:.:...-:::::::::-;-:.·::-:-:-..:=...-:.:==-:::.-:::;:;a.•• .-:..-::--::::-:."':... -~--· -:"'-:-7 -,7:=::::::-.~:."7.::.7 -:: ........ ___ -...... -..... ----------...... ---. -~ Adjoining 2177 !::! ' N ; ' 0 0 1 ~ ~ '~-~ § . r-... • \ I ;;;) .,... ..... -I ·--, , I ~~ "lh i r,c ~ -w-' ~· /1 ~~' ~~ ~ !! -!r ' :e ~ ~ ~ ~· ,~-,.,.T'f'c ~~ ..... ~-~-·~ . 8 ~ I . . ' ' ,_ 4£~~~ ~ "f.1 \Ill N ,e I I I ' 1 ~ lJ ~ ~ -~ ....,) ·1'1'l.-~~ ~ VJ ,. A:::" . >· ~ -~-~~~~ ~ < ~ :;. '""· -~-~~~ '\ \{.\ \ I V) \fJ \JI ~ e e .,.. :~ I':!® r-., ® ® ® . _,,, bs:us:s .cdowo•J.... ;. ------t 1111 M'r\ ~lV.l"llk~~~ .Nr.Hic~ ,l.Wrfr'~M'r.'lr\\ ~·il 11111 Receptiontt: 754441 . 08/21/2009 11 :02 :1 0 AM Jean Alberico 12 of 14 Rec Fee:$0 ,00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO \ 1111 ~ ,~r.w~~t·~ l~.N1cr-u, 11rr.Wiiw~11-\\ ~·~ 11111 Recept i on#: 754441 08 /21 12008 11 :02 :10 AM Jean Alberico 13 o f 14 Rec Fee :$Q .00 Doc Fe ~:0 .00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO IN WITNESS WHEREOF ----....J the Grantor ~ hereuntO set his hand and seal this __ day of 2008. (Name) STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrwnent was acknowledged before me this __ day of ______ _, ___,by ______ _ Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: -------------------N~taryPublic Page 2 of3 A VIGATION AND HAZARD EASEMENT. WHEREAS, Specialty Taverns Ioo. hereinafter called Grantor, Is the owner ih fee of that cedaln pal'Clll of l11nd !mown as Parcels 217917300723,217917300719, 217918400720,and 217917400722 whlcll is situated In ihe County ofGadield, Slate of Colorado in the vicinity of the Oatfield County Regional AiJport, be'rciMftot called ''Grantor's Property," aod, WHEREAS, THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF GARFTELD COUNl'Y, Colorado, hereinafter called "Grantee," owns and operutcs lhc Garfield County lagiomtl Ahport. hereioafler called "Che Airport," Md is lhc spansoc of the Aitport undcrlilmls of the federal Airport and Airway Improvement Act, NOW, THEREFORE, in coraideration of the S1.Wl of Thirty two thousaud two hundred sixty one and 13/100 Dollars ($32,261.13) llDd «her good and valoab!e consider.11.ioo, the Rcelpt and sufficiency of which Is hmiby scla!owlodgzd, the Gr.mt.or, for himself, his heirs. administrmol3, petsoua1 rcprcscnllllives, 511ccessors and '5Sigus, de~ hereby grant, bargain, sell and oonvey uuU> Grantee, lrs su~ and asi;igns, for the nse Bild benefit of lhe public, an Cl3Selmlll md rigbt-of-way appumnant to !be Airport, including any additions lhmtc l>crea&r made by Ou: Gl'B.lllees or its successors and migns, for lhe unobstrucl.cd usc and pwagc of all types of oim'aft ( "aircnrft" bciDg defined for pU!pO.!tS of lb.Is instnnuc:nt as any device now lcnoWD or hereafter deve)Qped, in mi led, designed or used for oav igarion of or flight ill air) by whomsoever o~ed or opcr.ned, in and lhrough the oa.vigablc air space above the: surface of Grantor's Property and to on illfmito height above said Grantor's Property, iogcther with the right to cause, In all air space above lhe smface of Graotors' Property, 5U<:h noise and vibl'ations; smoke and fumes; dCJ10$il3 of dust, "file! particles, aod othu puticu~ote matter, and any and oil other cffilcts whi~ roay be incident 10 or cansed by the DOIOJal operation of aileiaft lllking oft; lll!lding. or otherwise ~rating at or co the Airport. Gran tor hero by waives, rcmises and re lesses any right or C8llSe of acriOll or claim fo r dlllllogcs wbidi he may now have or which be may have in lhc fiJture against Granu:c, its successors and assigns, due lo 211y such QQiSl!, vi"bralions, ~ finncs, deposits ofpmtkulalc ma1ter, lights B.Dd radio emi.ssiON &om aircmft 811d/or the Airport and all Olher effecis which maybe call5Cd armay hove been caused by tho operatioa of aim-aft lm:idiug at., laldog olf ftom, or oJ)C!Zin& at, on or near the Airpon at wzy time of day or nigb1 and 011 eny dny oflhc week. Nothing ~ in the farcgo .ing waiver, grant, and releD.SC sh nil divest the Granlor, his heirs, pcrsolllll repn:senl:Btivcs, suoceisar.; and DSSigns from any right or cause of action for damages to aay pcnon or propeey ttSlllting from lhc Wilawful or neglige111 operation of aoy aircraft atany altitude over a!ld llCl'OSS Graotar's Property. TO HA VE AND TO HOLD said casement end right or way, with all rlghls appertaining lbcreto, tlll!O the Gmnlce, its suCUSSOJ'll and. ass.igns until the Airport shall be abandoned llld &hall cease to be used for public aispostpurposes. FUR'l'HER, Granter recoeniz.es mdllcreby agms and covenants, for himsctt; his heirs, administnlbm, ~aal rep.resenllltives, StJcccssors, and ns:signs, to comply with the Fed~ral Aviation AdminiStrarioo C"FAA '? rcgu1atloo Part 77 (Objeca Affecting Na\'igablc Aiispaa) including the subroitl.al of FAA form 7460-I, Notice of Proposed Constroctioo or ' Al!eriilion (available in tho office oftlie Airpolt ~or), prior lo undertaking illY construc:tioo on 0ranlOl''3 Property. Notwithstanding this Easement, Ormuor reserves the right10 C4llS1Mt, erect, alter or grow upon Ollllltor's properly may building. mucture, tree or other ollject cxt.endiog iDto the airspace. If the FAA fonn 7460-1 identifies an ob$1Nction that may aiYC.cScly affect avilllion safety, the Airport Md or.FM m&y then 11egotiolc Glld offer just compensation to the: Gnultor as nccsfcd.for the prcsemdion ofu.aobsUucied ovl?f flight activity. Just compenSation may be detennlned by llllltUll agreemmit, arbilr.11ion or though the judicial syslem. Further, nolhillgin this easemenl sbaJ I be consll\lcd as limiting or n::stricting Gran.tor (aodlor its successors in interest) from building 011, ~pying or using Grantor's Property in any manner ond for any type of land me. The aforesaid coveolUIU and agreements shall run with the land and shall be furcver binding upon the heirs, admln1stnuors, per.son.al representatives, successor.;, aad ~igns of the Granter. Pagel of3 i 783817 03/26/2010 03:06:43 PM Page 1 of 7 Jean Alberico, Garfield County, Colorad.o Rec Fee: $41.00 Doc Fee: $0.00 eRecorded A. VIGATlON AND HAZARD EASEMENT WHEREAS, Phyl..lis R. andFred S. Billmeyer, as joint tenants with full rights ofsmvi¥o:rship, hereinafter called ~ors, are ~e owners i:n fee of that c~r'.a:in parcel of land located in Garfield County, Colorado, known as assessor parcel number 217918100681 and more particularly described on pages 1 and 2 of Exhibit "~," attached hereto and made a pw:t of this Avigation and Hazard Easement by refe.tence, hereinafter called "Gran.tors' property," and, WHEREAS, THB BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIBLD COUNTY, Colorado, hereinafter called "Grantee," OWIIS and operates the Gar.field County Regiomu Alrport, hereinafter ~ed ''the Airport, ".and is th.e sponsor of the Airport underterins . of the federal Airport and Airway Improvement Act. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration oftb.e sum of One Hundred Twenty One Thousand Dollars ($121,000.00) and other good and val.uabie consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which . are hereby acknowledged, the lliantors, for fuemselves, their hells, administrators, personal · . i;epresentatives, successors anclassi.gos, do hereby gran~ bargain, sell. and convey unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, for-the use and be11efit of the public, an easement and rigbt-of-way appurtenant to the :A:irport,.including any additions thereto hereafter made by the Grantee or its succe.ssors and assigns, for the unobstructed us~ Olld passage of all ti,pes of aircraft ("aircraft" being defined for purposes of this instrument as any device uow known· or hereafter developed, i.iivented, designed or ·used for navigation. of or flight in air) by wl!on:tsoever owned or operated, in and through the ·navigable air space above the surlace of Grantors' property, above the imaginary planes qe:fi.ned as "proposed ~aseine!i.t elevation" on sheet 3 of 3 ofExht"bit "A." together with the right to cause~ in all air space above the surfuce of Grantors' property, s1!¥h wise and . VIprations; smoke and fumes; deposits of dust, fuel particles, and othet particulate matter; and any and all other effects which may be incident to or caused by the opera:tion of aircr!!ft takillg o~ landing, or otherwise operating at or on the Aiip~ twenty four (24) hours a day, three :hundred and sixty five -~~· . Granters hereby waive, remise and release any righ~ or cause of actio~ or claini for damages which they may now have or Which they may have in the future against Grantee, its successors and assigns, due to such noise, vibzations, smoke, fumes, deposits of particulate matter, lights and radio em.isaio.ns from aircraft and/or the Alrpo.rt and all other effects which may be caused or may have been caused by the operation of aircraft landing at, takiu& off from, or operating at or on the Airport. Nothing stated.in the foregoing waiver, grant, and xelcase shall divest the Grantors, their heirs, pc;r~onal representai:i.ves, succes~ors and assigns :from any right or cause of action for damages t~ any person. or property resulting from the unlawful or negligent operation· of any aircraft at ®.y altitude over and across Grmtors' property. · The easement and right of way hereby granted includes the continuing right in the Grantee to prevent the erection or growth upon GranJors' property of any building; struCtuic, tr~ or other object, extending into the air spac~ above the af'oresaid imaginary planys arid to remove from said air space or, at the sole option of the ~tee, as an altcmative, to ma;k andlightas an.obstruction to .air navigation, Page 1 of4 ···· .. ... any such building, strucUJ.re, tree or other object now upon, or which in the future may be upon, Grantors' property, togethe.r with th!'l rights of reasonable ingress to~ egress from, and passage over Grantors' property for the purposes ofprevem:ion, removal, mar.king and lighting. The Grantee and Grantee's authorized designees shall have the right to enter onto Grantor's property upon five days written notice for the purpose of inspection to verify compliance with the tenns of this eas.eme!lt J?xcept in. the case of an em~ncy, Grantee sball give ' Grantor written notice of any identified breaoh of this Avigation and Hazard Easement, including without limitation an obstruc'tion extending into the eaiement, and provide afive-day opportunity lo cure prjor ta entering onto the Grantor's property to engage in self-help. Such cure period may be extended in writing by the pai;fies hereto. Jn the case of · an emergency Grantee shall take reasonable.steps to notify Grantor of the entry. This prorision outlines the sole circumstances under which Grantee can enter onto the Grantor's property. TO HA VE AND TO HOLD said easement and right of way, with all rights appertaining thereto, unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns until the Airport shall. be abandoned and shall cease to be used for .public airport purposes.· · FURTHER. for the consideration set forth above, Granters, for themselves, their heirs, administrators, personal representatives, successors, and assigns, hereby agree and covenant that for and during the life of said easement and right-of-way, they shall not erect, permit the erection or growth of, or permit or suffer to remain upon Grantors; property any building, structure, tree· or other object ex.'tending into the aforesaid prohibited air space and they shall not use or p~nnit or suffer the use of Grantors' property in such a manner as to create electrical interference with radio communication between any installation upon said Allport and aircraft, or as to make ·it difficult for fly~rs to distinguish between aiiport lights and other lights, or as to impair visibilitY in the vicinity of the Airport, or as to otherwise endanger the landing, taking off, or rnaneu.vering of aircraft. Garfield County will recommend to the FAA anci. Holy Cross Energy, owner of the facilify, in writing, that the existing power pole that penetrates the imaginary approach surface by 9.4' remam in place and be fitted with a fixed red obstruction light with a shield preventing the light from shining on the r~sidence windows. If installed by Holy Cross Energy, under no circuinstance shall Grantor be. respons~ble for the ownership, m,amteoance or liability associated with the placement and operation of the fixed red obstruction light and shield. Grantee shall provide Grantor with flie contact infonnation for the individual or entity responsible for the maintenance of the fixed red obstruction light." Without limiting the generality of the above ccivenants, it is specifically recognized that waterfowl are currently present in the area and may present a hazai:d to aircraft; therefore, Grantors, for themselves, their heirs, administraiors, personal representatives, successors and assigns, further agree, that they shall discourage the attraction of waterfowl by means of selective landscaping on Grantors' property. Activities such as feeding waterfowl and enhancing habitat, in order to attract waterfowl, are prohibited. The existing pond and associated irrigation ditch on Grantor's property may remain · provided their use and size is limited to the use and size they have historjcally been subjected to. The Gr?11tors for themselves, their heirs, administrators, 'personal representatives, successors and assigns do hereby further specifically agree that for and during the life of this Avigation and . Hazard Easement, they shall not erect or construct, permit the erection or construction of, or pen:Dit or suffer to remain on said portions of Grantors' property: (1) fuel handling and storage facilities, or (2) places of scheduled ot regular public assembly, such as churches, scbpols, office-buildings, shopping centers, restaurants, child care facilities and stadiums; provided; however, that nothing here~ prohibits Page 2 of4 .· '. · ... ·. . . the Gran.tor from continuing to operate a lawful home occupation and/or any other FAA and County lawfully permitted business or other land U.Se on the Grantor's property, incluiling receiving occasional customers, and to sell, transfer or otherwise devise the business to a third party as part of any sale or' transfer of the Grantor's property, in accordance with the Conditional Use.Permit issued subject to · Resolution 2003-45 and recorded as Reception No. 631261; or ip:acco~dance with any otlier lawfully obtained land us approval(s). · The aforesaid cove~ts and agreements shall nm with the land and shall be forever binding upon the heirs, administrators, personal representatives/ successors. and assigns of the Granter. . 'P""v 11 ,· s · '' . 311 \ M '!.-; e.lf" Q.\I\ a r..-Q..el s. !3111 WIJl..'fe.,,.... . . 1""' .Ilf WlTNBSS WHEREOF , the Grantors, have hereWlto set their bands and seals this li dayof Mca...-c...\.) ,2010. Phyllis R . Billmayer ~uwt+ STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNfY OF GARFIELD ) """" The foregoing instrument was acknowledged befor~ me this 2 S day of M 4 rL.h 2o\O by f?h'i l I is R. f.3(\ ! Me.'f~r"".asajointte00ntwithfullrightsofsurvivorship. PATRICl\..?.:JHIBli~expL~ ;: NOTA'l!'l~.W.u •• STATE OF COLORADO My Commission Expires 1 O/l<l/2012 STATE OF COLORADO ) ).ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) No~Public . . . -'1'4'\ The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 2., day of _ _...M-=-c.._.r_c._L". _ _, Z.O\O by &~cJ... 5. l'.3 I\\ Me.'j"-V"" .,asajointtenantwithfullrightsofsurvivorship. Witness my hand and ofticiru seal. l PATRI.CKP.-BURWELL NOTARY PUBLIC ~ STATE OF COLORADO 'My Commiss ion Explm9 f0/14/2012 Page 3 of4 SUBORDINATION · In consideration of the premises and to assure Grantee of the continued benefits accorded it under this Avigation and Hazard Easement, J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA, "qualified lien holder" under the Notice of Election and Demand for Sale recorded as Reception No. 778428 in connection with the Deed of Trust for the use of Washington Mutual Bank, FA , Mortgagee/ObligeeiLien Holder/Lender/Beneficiacy, identified in the Mortgage/Deed of Trus t in the original amount of $376,000.00, dated December 28, 2006 and recorded January 4, 2007 at Book 1880, Page 557 of the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder, aoa associated documents covering Grantor's property, above-described, does hereby covenant and agree that said instruments shall be subject to anQ. subordinate to this Av igation and Hazard Easement. ·The reco~ding of this Avigation and Hazard Easement shall have preference and shall be-superior to said instruments, irrespective of the date of making or recording of said security and statutory foreclosure instruments; and said qualified lien holder has no claim for compensation against Grantee for the real prope1ty interest granted herein or the subordination contained herein. Barbara Hindman Vice Presideht STATE OF f.lorlcla ' COUNTY OF Duval ) )ss. ) J. P: Morgan Chase Bank, NA (Title) The foregoing ifistrument w!IJl acknowledged before me this .J,QJO by · (Name) , representative of Barbara Hindma!l Vice President . JP Morgan Chase Bank National Associa.tion , a Witness my hand l!nd official seal. My commission expires: 17 day of/Yl~ (Title) and authorized on behalf WENDY MCEWEN /Notary Public 526045-1 Ii I . l ·EXHIBIT A SITUA1ED IN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 92 WEST OF THE 6TH PR!NCIPAL.:MERIDIAN, COUNTY Of GARFffiLD, ~TA1E OF COLORADO. LEGAL DESCRIPTION PER SCHEDULE A OF TITLE COMMITMENT NO. 0610097, HAVlNG AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF OCTOBER 18, 2006 AT 7:59 AM, PREPARED BY COMMONWEAL TH TITLE COMPANY OF GARFIELD COUNTY, INC.: A 'TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 92 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M . BEING ' MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT FROM WHENCE THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18 BEARS SOUTH 18~48'43" EAST 2736.17 FEET; THENCE NORTI-173°57'56" WEST 84. 78 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 82°36'32" WEST 46.72 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 58°04'05",WEST 135.69 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 74°39'03" WEST 73.66 FEET;·.,THENCE NORTH 80°55'21" WEST 78.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 68°38'29" WEST 108.08 FEEr; THENCE NORTI-1 68°53'03" WEST 71 .82 FEET; TH ENCE SOUTH 89°30'19" WEST 79.15 lFEEl'; THENCE SOUTH 72°51'07" WEST 70.62 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 58-"Q3,'4.Q' WEST 148 ,75 FEE:T; THENCE SOUTH 46°15'00° WEST 56.32 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 41°58'31" WEST 98.48 FEEi; THENCE SOUTH 54°42'50" WEST 125.13 FEET; Tf1EN CE SOUTH 79°59'58 " WEST 43.68 FEET; TI-IENCE SOUTH ·81°24'12" WEST 39.30 FEET TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY OF COUNTY ROAD 315; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT OFWAY AND ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT WITH AN ARC LENGTH OF 307.60 FEET, A RADIUS Of. 783.33 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 22°29'57", A CHORD BEARING OF NORTH 52°16'12" WEST, A CHORD LENGTH OF 305.63 FEET; THENCE NORTH 41°01 '13" WEST 536.04 FEET; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT WITH AN ARC LENGTH OF 127.44 FEET, A RADIUS OF 1789.03 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 04"04'53", A CHORD BEARING OF NORTH 43°03'40" WEST, A CHORD LENGTH OF 127.41 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ' NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE NORTH 00"21'29" WEST 902.06 FEET TO THE · NORniWEST CORNER OF THE SW1/4NE1/4 OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE NORTH 89'20'17" EAST 447.79 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SW1/4NE1/4; THENCE SOUTH 48'24'.49" EAST 16n.41 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 1,531,003 SQUARE FEET OR 35.147 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. EXHIB IT ATTACHED AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF. PREPARED FOR AND ON THE BEHALF OF. OLSSON ASSOCIATES BY: DANA L. SPERLING ; PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR l ;·coLORADO REGISTRATION NO. 38012 I• : . SHEET 1 .OF 3 CHECKED BY: DlS . P.AlH: F:\Prii}edJ\20051.~4\U:OAl.S.d'#g GARFIELD COUNTY AIRPORT PARCEL681-LEGAL NOTE.: nus DOES NOT REPRESENT. A MONUMENTED LANO SURVEY. IT IS INTENDED ONLY TO DEPICT THE AlTAGHEO DESCRIPTION. O\oLSSON ASSOCIATES ------------·-----··-··--···--·' • L.:9 13.S.69 SS8'04j)S~·Y. ·uo .73.66 '·" S74 '39!03.~" w · 7.S:OO 1 -N9015S(211 M· · u2 · · • · . .ros;os r-"J N681'3B;29.':\./.: 1" . U3 · 7:1-.82 N68!53'03'·1J· ·L·H 7~.lS -ss9.'30'19'\.l l.:15 10:'62 :S72'51!07'9. :;'1-.....:.._-·...:·U:::·:=6+:-, --.1.:;:·~.:.:·8.:,::;7c::::5+. ---,..-....:S::.:5.:.:8:..;'0:,:3:,.,:'~;.;9.....:';'W:;,:i:. U7, '-, , .S6.32· ·S46115!0,0~'W. ua : 9s,4a ·s1tlssi31•"' !!19 !25;}3 SS4'142.'.50~\;I . £20'.. '43,68 S75~59 '.58~W. I Let 39,SO " " .. -·"' S0 1 ~24f12~11/ GARFIELD COUNTY AIRJ'O.RT -PARCEL 6.81 -IDrn:mti' '.' :; I i : ; 'I . ' .. •:: • • t • ~ : : 1 . II 1: .. •: _ ! : I . ' ... I ' .• . :. : !· ~ .·· .. •I ... :--:· i : i .. : :.:: : I . ~ . .. , :'•.· r ; ··: • :-i ···-· . . -. . .. . ·· . ·-; . . . ··' . i ·. I ••' I'. ·, \I : I : ' '"t .. • ' .· ... - : l •• f .: . ... : .. ; ·: -.. ···: I ': i ~ • • I; '