Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSTERLING SPECIAL REVIEW - COUNTY REFERRAL - 40-88 - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSITEM NO. 16 PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING OF June 27, 1988 STAFF REPORT PROJECT: Sterling Special Review, County Referral - #40-88 APPLICANT: Sterling Sand & Gravel Company P. O. Box 2187 Fort Colins, CO 80522 OWNER: First Interstate Bank 205 W. Oak Fort Collins, CO 80524 PROJECT PLANNER: Sherry Albertson -Clark PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A request for special review approval to permit gravel extraction on a 58-acre site, located on the west side of Taft Hill Road, north of the Poudre River, zoned FA-1 Farming. RECOMMENDATION: Approval, with conditions: The structural integrity of Taft Hill Road be monitored and any improve- ments determined necessary by Larimer County (based on the results of monitoring) to maintain the structure integrity of the road, be the financial responsibility of the applicant, and; 2. Signage regarding truck traffic entering the highway and speed restrictions (as identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis) be installed by the applicant. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This request for special review approval would extend the area west of Taft Hill Road that Sterling Sand & Gravel is using for gravel mining. The applicant has made a series of commitments regarding operation of the mining process, mitigation of noise and dust pollution, traffic impacts, and buffering from area residences. These commitments address the issues raised on this proposal. Staff has determined that this proposal is compatible with existing land uses, and therefore, recommends approval. Concerns regarding the traffic impact on Taft Hill Road (impact of truck traffic on existing road structure and safety concerns of trucks entering the road) are being addressed by the conditions recommended by staff. OFFICE OF DEVELOPMENT 300 LaPorte Ave. • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 • (303) 221-6750 SERVICES, PLANNING DEPARTMENT Sterling Special Review County Referral #40-88 P & Z Meeting - June 27, 1988 Page 2 COMMENTS 1. Background: The surrounding zoning and land use is as follows: N: FA-1; existing farm S: FA-1; existing gravel mining E: FA; existing residences W: FA-1; vacant This site is located within an area of high quality commercial mineral deposits. Sterling Sand & Gravel has been mining gravel in the area since the 1950's. In 1985, Sterling received approval for sand and gravel extraction for 45 acres west of Taft Hill Road and just north of the Poudre River. A request for special review approval to extend the original 45 acre -site by an additional 58-acres was first submitted to Larimer County early this year and was recommended for denial by the County Planning Commission in February, on the basis that: The proposal does not comply with the intent and purposes of the Compre- hensive Zoning Resolution and the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposal is incompatible with the surrounding land uses. 3. The proposal may impair the public health, welfare, prosperity or safety by creating undesirable traffic congestion, undesirable environmental condi- tions. 4. There is the potential that the proposal may negatively affect land values in the area. This item was re -submitted to Larimer County in March of this year and referred for city review in April. The applicant withdrew this second applica- tion because of concerns expressed by Larimer County staff and area residents, that many issues, identified prior to the February 1988 Planning Commission review, were still not addressed by the applicant. The applicant, with the current proposal, has attempted to address all of the issues previously identified. 2. Land Use: The commercial mineral deposits in Larimer County are found along the exist- ing and historic flood plains of the Poudre River. The State of Colorado recognizes the importance of commercial mineral deposits by prohibiting a County from any action (or inaction) that would interfere with the present or future extraction of such a deposit. This does not imply that a County must improve a gravel mining request, but does suggest the importance of the resource. Sterling Special Review County Referral #40-88 P & Z Meeting - June 27, 1988 Page 3 Sterling Sand and Gravel has been operating in the Taft Hill Road area for many years and according to County records, mineral extraction (and the intent to expand extraction areas) occurred prior to construction of many of the existing residential units. Although mineral extraction adjacent to residential areas is not ideal from a land use standpoint, in this case, the mineral extraction appears to have preceded many of the residential uses in the area and the applicant has attempted to address the mitigation of land use conflicts. 3. Operations: Mining is presently taking place on the 45-acre site that lies immediately north of the river and south of the proposed site. Initially, an earthen berm will be constructed along Taft Hill Road to match the highway grade. This berm will be planted with a mix of deciduous trees, evergreens and shrubs. The proposed mining operation will consist of removing approximately 10 acres of top soil in the western -most corner of the site (Phase III) and placing it along the road to create a berm. Overburden will be removed and de -watering of the pit will occur. Crushing and stockpiling of material will occur on the floor of the pit, which is to be 15-20' below the highway grade. The material is crushed, screened for sizing and washed by equipment in the pit. The final products are then conveyed to the ground and stockpiled by front end loaders or loaded directly into trucks by a loader and transported to the batch plant off -site. The applicant has indicated that there would not be a batch plant located on the 58-acre sit, nor would there be any blasting. The actual mining activity on Phase 4, which is located adjacent to Taft Hill Road, will not take place until the landscaping has been in place 3-5 years. Hours of operation for the crushing and screening will be 7am-5pm Monday through Friday. There will not be any storage of waste material or construction equipment on this site. Excess overburden not used for production or reclamation will be removed from the site. Mining of each phase is expected to take three to five years to complete. The applicant has stated that no mining activity will be commenced on any portion of the 58-acre site for at least three years from the date of approval and that no activity will take place within Phase Four until at least three years after planting of the proposed landscaping (planting to be com- pleted by Spring of 1989). 4. Traffic Impact: Access to the site will be from an existing access road at the south end of the 45-acre mining site near the river. This will be the only access point to Taft Hill Road, with internal circulation occurring near the western area of both sites. The applicant has stated that the purpose of the additional 58-acre site for mining is for securing future gravel reserves, not to increase current production output. As mining ceases on the 45-acre parcel to the south, the minerals on this site would be obtained. While the amount of truck on Taft Hill Road (as a result of the proposed 58-acre mining operation) may not be increasing over the present demand, the safety concerns over slow moving trucks entering and crossing the highway will continue to exist. Although Taft Hill Road appears to be in good shape at the present time, the continued truck traffic may have a detrimental affect on the structural integrity of the road. Sterling Special Review County Referral #40-88 P & Z Meeting - June 27, 1988 Page 4 Also monitoring the structural integrity of Taft Hill Road would provide a means of determining the present condition of the highway, as well as any structural problems caused by the heavy truck traffic. Results of monitoring could then be used to determine if and when any work is necessary to main- tain the roadway's structure. The applicant should be financially responsible for any necessary testing/monitoring, as well as for any future improvements deemed necessary by Larimer County to maintain the structural integrity. Providing some means to assure that the structure of Taft Hill Road is main- tained (and/or improved) becomes particularly important in the case of gravel mining. Once the mineral has been extracted, there will not be another poten- tial user of the site to provide any future needed road improvements. 5. Dust/Noise Pollution: Fugitive dust can occur from a gravel mining operation in four ways: crushing of aggregates; haul roads; associated processing equipment (i.e., concrete or asphalt batch plants) and from stockpiles. The applicant has proposed the following measures to mitigate dust: 1. Powered water spray with the crushing of aggregates. 2. No crushing during extremely high wind conditions. 3. Powered water spray on haul roads. 4. pave the entry to the access road with oil. 5. Associated process equipment, such as batch plants, will not be placed on this site. 6. Stockpiles will be located on the pit floor at least four hundred feet from Taft Hill Road. 7. The applicant will comply with State of Colorado standards for air quality in all other applicable respects. Noise from the mining operation has also been a concern of area residents. The applicant proposes to reserve a minimum 75' setback from the centerline of Taft Hill Road west and will not excavate any material within 200 feet of any residence. This setback area would be bermed with fill to match the elevation of Taft Hill Road. In the spring of 1989, approximately 600 trees and shrubs will be planted. Placement of crushing equipment and stockpiling in the pit will occur 15-20' below the grade of Taft Hill Road. This equipment will not be located any closer than 400' from the centerline of Taft Hill Road (which is 500' from the nearest residence). 6. Buffering: Buffering the visual and noise aspects of the proposed gravel mining operation from the existing residences in the area has also been of major concern to area property owners and residents. The applicant has proposed a series of measures Sterling Special Review County Referral #40-88 P & Z Meeting - June 27, 1988 Page 5 to buffer the proposed mining operation from area residences. These measures are as follows: 1. Creation of an earthen berm (at roadway grade) with plantings of decidu- ous trees, evergreens and shrubbery. 2. Landscaping will be completed by Spring 1989 and will be allowed to develop and mature for 3-5 years before any mining activity will begin oh Phase 4. No mining activity will occur anywhere on the 58-acre site for three years from the date of approval. 3. Mining activity will not occur any closer than 200' from the nearest residence. 4. Crushing equipment will be placed on the floor of the pit, 15-20' below grade and will be a minimum of 490' from the nearest residence. SUMMARY The proposed 58-acre gravel mining operation is located in an area that has been actively mined for many years. The existing operation to the south was approved in 1985 and was the first area west of Taft Hill Road and north of the river to be mined. The potential for land use conflicts between area residences and the proposed mining operation exists; however, the applicant has provided a series of commitments to address the issues raised by both Larimer county staff and area residents to mitigate these potential conflicts. RECOMMENDATION The proposed gravel mining operation appears to be compatible with existing area land uses, given the measures the applicant has committed to for mitigat- ing conflicts. Staff recommends approval, with the following conditions: 1. Any improvements determined necessary by Larimer County (based on the results of monitoring) to maintain the structural integrity of the road, be the financial responsibility of the applicant; 2. Signage regarding truck traffic entering the highway and speed restrictions (as identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis) be installed by the applicant. +: �• " i '' Urban Gro th Area Bouno• rY s,5065 1 A J 1 p - �1f RRY - 7. _'... I •, ,::, F A I• s. ` � . w I r . VILA co • • Sol' FA y` - ...... R 4e t . 4 ... ITEM STERLING SPECIAL REVIEW NUMBER 40-88 I * ti- 5H►. WON Wo 15 r. M to Z W,. W-1 Mt D99)"'►/YD►t4. A. Existing and Proposed Access to Nearest Public Road B. Location and Type of All Equipment and Operations on Site. C. Type and Weight of all Trucks, Frequency of Types and Expected Travel Routes D. Irpact of Trucks on Existing Traffic in the Area E. All Application Material Submitted to the State Mined Land Reclamation Board F. Hours and Days of Operation G. Plan for Storage of Overburden and Disposal of Waste Material and Rubble H. Frequency of Blasting I. Identification of Any Residence within 1000 feet of this Excavation J. Schedule for Mining and Reclamation K. Plans for Minimizing Dust and Noise Pollution L. Detail of Landscaping M. Explanation of Associated Processing N. Right of Way and Fencing 0. Analysis of Vicinity Impacts as a Result of Gravel Mining P. Response to Planning Staff Concerns --Exhibit Map C-3A —Tarimer County Encroad -ent Permit No. 001575 —Table VII A -Table VII-B --1985 Traffic Analysis —All Application Material Submitted to the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Division --Hcme Office Mine Exhibit Maps C-1 C-4 C-7 C-2 C-5 F C-3 C-6 Photo Map --Hc me Office Mine Exhibits A through P --Evaluation of the Ground-W&ter Resources Analysis of Vicinity Impacts as the Result of Gravel Mining Analysis of Noise Emissions and Methods of Control 0 Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. has served the Fort Collins area since 1946. It has maintained its main office and performed sand and gravel extraction operations at 1800 North Taft Hill Road since 1950 (long before most of the development of businesses and residences north of the Poudre River on Taft Hill Road). This location on the PoLdre River is in the center of an area of high quality caamTercial mineral deposits. These gravel reserves have been identified by the State of Colorado as a critical natural resource that must be protected for extraction. Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. and other aggregate producers attempt to provide low cost building materials to ccmmunities by acquiring gravel reserves as near as ispossible to construction activity, since the cost to deliver the material often far exceeds the cost of the material itself. This particular parcel of land is zoned FA-1 Farming, which allows the permitting of gravel extraction. It borders property currently being mined, and in general is surrounded on three sides by land currently planned for mineral extraction. This land, currently for sale by First Interstate Bank, is ideal for gravel mining. Acquisition by Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. is logical in that it adds to Sterling's gravel reserves for long term planning and it is cost effective to mine since it is adjacent to Sterling property. Although Sterling does not intend to mine this Property 1=iediate- ly, approval of this mining request is necessary in order to complete the purchase of the land from First Interstate Bank. • The Proposed project is consistent with the Mineral Preservation Act and the Mined Land Reclamation Act, as well as the mineral 0 • • extraction plan for Larimer County. Sterling has obtained all required permits for air and water quality, and has obtained Health Department Sterling is aware that its neighbors are concerned about a variety of "Quality of Life" issues. We have met with them, listened to their concerns, asked for their suggestions, and offered possible ccupramises. Considerable effort has been made to confer with experts with regards to property values, dust and noise pollution, water issues, and landscape planning. We have made a substantial effort to make concessions so as to not interfere with the neighbors' use of their properties. The following narrative stmparizes Sterling's plans to operate a • gravel miring operation on the subject property. It refers to detailed plans, exhibits, studies, etc., which are included as a part of this application. It also provides specific commitments that Sterling is now prepared to make to relieve the concerns of its neighbors. 0 • • • 0 The nearest public road, County Road 19 (Taft Hill Road), borders this property on the East. Currently, there exists a one -lane east to west roadway through the middle of the property servicing the Seaworth residence directly onto Taft Hill Road. As the mining develops from the south, it will be necessary to relocate this driveway to the northern edge of the property adjacent to the Taylor -Gill ditch. A forty -foot (401) right of way has been reserved for this pursuant to an agreement between Seaworth and Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. Access to the area by Sterling Sand & Gravel Co.'s equipment shall be frm the south through property which is owned and currently being mined by Sterling (see exhibit rap C-3A). This access road just north of the Poudre River, west of Taft Hill Road, will be extended north within the existing pit to the 58 acre parcel. Please reference Tarim r. County Encroachment Permit No. 001575. Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. will not open a new access to Taft Hill Road as a result of this proposal. Instead, it will continue to obtain access onto Taft Hill Road by using its current access point. • • The initial activity to take place on site will be the construc- tion of an earth berm along the entire eastern boundary adjacent to Taft Hill Road. the berm will be built to a height five (5) feet higher than the roadway. 'The width will be frcm the borrow ditch west to a point seventy-five (75) feet from the centerline of Taft Hill Road (see exhibit map C-3A). The berm will then be planted with three (3) rows of shrubs, pines, and large deciduous trees (see landscape plan in Section L of this text and Table VII - A & B). This will be completed by the Spring of 1989 and the landscaping will be allowed to develop and mature for 3 to 5 years before any mining activity will is commence within Phase IV of the mining plan. As mining progresses north and then east towards Taft Hill Road during the next 5 to 10 years, the tree and shrub planting would be mature before the final removal of material from the property closest to Taft Hill Road. The equipment used to construct the earthen berm will be Caterpillar 623B elevating scrapers or haul trucks, loaders, and road graders, all similar to the kinds of equipment currently in use on adjacent property. The minim operation will consist initially of removing ap- proximately 10 acres of tap soil in the southwest corner of Phase III (see mining plan map C-4) and placing it within the twenty -five-foot set back from the property boundary. The equipment used for this operation will be a 623 B Caterpillar elevating scraper. The over- burden material is the lower grade soil between the top soil and the • gravel. This 2 to 4 foot seam of material will be removed in the same manner and set aside to be blended in with other aggregate products. Next, a dewatering trench will be established between Phases III and IV to allow water to pass to the pump located in the southeast corner of Phase I. The equipment used for this trenching will be a hydraulic backhoe excavator. The material from this face of gravel will be moved to the crashing equipment located directly south by means of a Caterpillar 980 front end loader or a hydraulic backhoe excavator. Crushing and stockpiling of materials will take place on the pit floor some 15 to 20 feet below the surface. This 20-foot face will increase the buffering of noise from the crushing equipment as well as the visual buffering of product stockpiles. The typical crushing equipment consists of a • feeder into which the pit run gravel is placed by means of a front end loader, a dozer, or a truck. This material is then fed uniformly onto a sixty -foot (601) conveyor and/or transferred directly to the primary crusher. This is typically a CedaRapids Jaw crusher or a Humbolt Wedag input crusher. The material is then screened and the oversized material, is then conveyed to a secondary cedaRapids cone or roll crusher for further reduction. The material is then conveyed to a second screen for final sizing and or washing. The final products are then conveyed to the ground and stockpiled by front end loaders or loaded directly into trucks by a loader and transported to the batch plant site or off site. No batch plant will be located within the 58 acre property boundary. ,Ihis sequence of operation will repeat itself as the face of • mining continues north and east through phase III and then progresses east into phase IV. wing each sequence, concurrent reclamation will • take place; that is, grading and sloping of the trailing pit walls and top soil replacement by a Caterpillar D8 dozer. Revegetation of set backs and slopes will optimally occur during the fall season, when the success rate of seeding native grasses is the greatest. Reclamation equipment consists generally of farm -type tractors, plows, discs, seeder, and mulching equipment. Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. will never place either an asphalt or concrete batch plant within this 58 acre parcel, will adhere to the hours of operation set forth in Section F, and will not begin any material removal operation within phase IV until the landscaping has been in place for 3 to 5 years. • 0 • • • SITE, AND FEE= TRAVEL RI= Tabled below are the three (3) basic types of trucks that typically haul materials from the Sterling operation: TYPE $ OF TOTAL USE M)SS VEHICLE WEIGHT' 1. Tandem Axle 75% 54,000 lbs. 2. Tractor/trailer 20% 85,000 lbs. 3. Single Axle 5% 28,000 lbs. Attached is the 1985 traffic analysis that was completed for the 1985 Special Review #Z46-85 "Seaworth Pit". The proposed 58-acre use is for future reserves associated • with the "Seaworth Pit". The operations, truck counts, and traffic survey scenarios are as valid today as they were 3 years ago when the independent traffic survey was updated. As with most local businesses, the economy and market place dictate the activeness of the construction industry. Sterling Sand & Gravel Co.'s business is currently such that there are fewer trips per day on Taft Hill Road than projected in connection with prior approvals and the 1985 estimates. Therefore, the attached survey is still representative of the average trends of our operation. r� • D. IlMPACP OF THE TMMS ON E=ra]G TRAFFIC C, The addition of 58 acres to the Sterling Sand & Gavel Co. operation is for the purpose of securing future gravel reserves. It is not for the purpose of increasing current production output. There- fore, there will be no additional in1pact of trucks on existing area traffic. only the activities previously approved in the 1985 Special Review #Z46-85 "Seaworth Pit" will take place. As the aggregate reserves from the Z46-85 acreage are exhausted, then mining will continue into this new 58-acre parcel. STERL 1w, I S aCHMIITAEN r : The proposed 58-acre gravel reserve purchase will not increase truck traffic on area roads. • • •va•i ►• •: •:1i • •�■a ►• ■ These materials have been provided with the application. We have also provided more detailed mining and reclamation exhibit for Larimer County Review (see exhibit Table VII-A, Table VII-B, and exhibit map C- 3A). 0 • The regular hours of operation of crushing and screening equipment on the 58-acre site will be: 7:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday If anyone hears or observes a crusher or screen operating on site other than these hours, they may call: Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. 482-7464 Mike Refer John Owen 223-2479 (home) 221-1836 (home) Larimer County Planning Dept. 221-7683 Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. will adhere to these hours of opera- tion, and will pr rptly provide documentation to support compliance. 0 • Topsoil will be removed and placed on the perimeter of the excavation area for future reclamation and for berms and landscaping. If excess topsoil is to remain on site for more than one year, then it will be seeded with crested wheatgrass. overburden material will be stockpiled temporarily and then blended in with other crushed products during production. Excess overburden will be removed from site. No rubble or waste material will be allowed to accumulate on the proposed site. If rubble or waste material is generated on site, then it will be removed to a suitable place. Construction equipment not in use for extended periods will not be • allowed to be stored on this site. Construction equipment will be stored on the east side of Taft HI11 road in areas already designated and being used for these purposes. No rubble will be allowed to accumulate on site. No waste material will be allowed to accLms-date on site. Excess overburden not used for production or reclamation will be removed from the site. Construction equipment not in use will not be stored on site. C, 0 0 • gyp• •• r im • y:la.•_ 121. y1 • 1.1 - I e� Absolutely no blasting will occur on site. C7 • � 0 � 0 • NAME MAILTr1G ADDRESS PROPEFZIY LDCATION 1) Stegner, John F. & Gary T. 2129 N. US Hwy 287 33869-1 NW Section 2) First Interstate Bank 205 West Oak 33869-2 NW Section 3) Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. 1800 N. Taft Hill Rd. 33869-31 NW Section 4) Seaworth, Inc. 2305 N. Taft Hill Rd. 33869-3 NW Section 5) Stegner, Ira Ray 1817 N. US Hwy 287 34869-10 NE Section 34869-15 NE Section 34869-47 NE Section 34869-48 NE Section 6) Roe, Darwin M./Leora J. 2320 N. Taft Hill Rd. 34869-11 NE Section 34869-39 NE Section 34869-40 NE Section 7) Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. 1800 N. Taft Hill Rd. 34869-12 NE Section 8) Slatten, David L. 2412 N. Taft Hill Rd. 34869-29 NE Section 9) Martin, Bill R. & Mary Ann 2200 N. Taft Hill Rd. 34869-36 NE Section 10) Kuhlman, Steven R & 2240 N. Taft Hill Rd. 34869-49 NE Section Veni.s, Georgeann • • Sterling Sarni & Gravel Co. will make the coumitment that no mining activity will be ccumienced on any portion of the 58-acre parcel for at least three (3) years from the date of approval. No activity will take place within Phase IV until at least three (3) years after planting of the landscaping improvements described in Section L. It is currently anticipated that mining of each phase will take fran three to five years to ccoplete. Reclamation will be concurrent with mining as set forth in the Master Reclamation Plan (see Home Office Mine Permit exhibits D, E, and F). • • • 1. DUST There exist four (4) identifiable sources of possible fugitive dust emissions that may result frcHn the proposed operations. a. Crushing of agcr�eates will be acccrplished on site by means of portable crushing equipment. The crushing equipment will be located on the pit floor. Crushing operations will not be active during extremely high winds. This will minimize the blowing of dust. Water will also be added to the crushing process to help minimize the generation of dust. The equipment and method used will be to locate a 1,000 gallon water tank on site. A 1 1/2" water pump will pump water to a spray bar located prior to the crushing chamber. This method has proven to be an effective solution for minimizing dust from crushing and has been approved • by the Colorado Department of Health. b. Haul roads can pose a problem by creating dust as trucks travel to and from the pit area. However, Sterling will continue to use its existing haul road to Taft Hill Road, thereby reducing potential dust. This haul road access entrance will be paved with asphalt for fifty (50) feet. In addition, locating the crusher on the pit floor will minimize dust created from activities around the processing area, as the pit floor has more moisture from ground water than the surface area. When travel routes along the pit are traveled frequently, it may become necessary to use a water truck to keep the dust down. Also, Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. will use an oil- based dust suppressant on the access road from the existing entrance on Taft Hill Road westerly to the pit floor, a water truck will be used for the most part (see map exhibit C-3A). c. Associated processing equipment, such as concrete batch plants and • asphalt batch plants will not be located on the 58-acre site. • d. Stockpiles will be located on the pit floor so that the height will not be greater than 15 feet above surface elevation. In addition, no stockpiles will be allowed on the 58 acre parcel closer than four hundred (400) feet from Taft Hill Road. b no 114 a 121, •• U hOINIZI� 1. Powered water spray with the crushing of aerates. 2. Will not crush during extremely high wind conditions. 3. Powered water spray on haul roads. 4. Pave the entry to the access road with oil. 5. Associated process equipment, such as batch plants, will not be allowed on 58-acre parcel. • 6. Stockpiles will be located on the pit floor at least four hundred (400) feet from Taft Hill Road. 7. Sterling will ccuply with State of Colorado standards for air quality in all other applicable respects. u 0 • 2. NOISE Even though the parcel is within an agricultural zone and is surrounded by industrial -type operations, allowing the highest sound levels to be emitted under state law, Sterling has designed its operations to comply with a much lower ccmre=ial standard. See report of Engineering Dynamics. There are eight (8) residences approximately 100 to 1200 feet from the centerline of Taft Hill Road to the east. Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. proposes to reserve a minimum. seventy -five-foot (751) set back from the centerline of Taft Hill Read west, and, in addition, will not excavate any material within two hundred (200) feet of any residence. This set back will be bermed with fill and topsoil 2 to 4 feet to match the elevation of Taft Hill Road. In the Spring of 1989, this area will be planted with approximately 600 trees and shrubs to create • a visual screen, modified wind break, and noise reducing buffer. The design of this planting detail (see Table VII-A) has been approved by the Larimer County Forester, Mr. Frank Lancaster. The tree and shrub planting will be allowed to mature approximately ten (10) years before final removal of material takes place adjacent to the reserved set back. In order to create an additional twenty -foot buffer, plans for crushing and stockpiling of materials has been reconstructed to allow the placement of uipment on the pit floor same 20 to 24 feet below the elevation of Taft Hill Road. The mining will occur from the west end of the property in an easterly direction allowing the advancing pit wall to act as buffer both from a visual and sound perspective. Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. will reserve a four hundred -foot (4001) set back from the centerline of Taft Hill Road for the crushing and screening equipment • (five hundred -foot (500-) set back to the nearest resident). A feeder and three hundred (3001) feet of conveyors will be utilized to move the pit run material • • • from the eastern most property to the crushing equipment. Another method will be to use a combination of a backhoe, loaders, and trucks to haul the material to the crusher. Most importantly, Sterling will ccaTply with applicable State noise standards for its zoning classifications. 6UNDILARIL GOULIM Sterling Sand & Gravel Co., through a combination of earthen berms, dense landscaping, a twenty -foot pit wall, and a set back of five hundred (500) feet of crushing equipment from the nearest building will provide an excellent method for minimizing noise. It will comply with applicable State noise standards for its zoning classifications and uses. • 0 • .7 Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. will construct an earthen berm of fill and topsoil frcxn a point seventy-five (75) feet from the centerline of Taft Hill road to the borrow ditch alongside Taft Hill Road. The elevation of the berm will be constructed to a height equal to Taft Hill road. Then in the Spring of 1989, a planting of one row of tall deciduous trees (8 to 10 feet in height), two rows of evergreen green trees (one to five gallon size), and one row of large shrubs (one gallon size) will form an extremely functional barrier between the residences on the east side of Taft Hill Road and the proposed 58-acre parcel. Please reference Table VII A following this text. This planting will include 600 trees and shrubs and will provide an effective visual screen, modified wind break, and a sound buffer. See profile detail Table VII-B. This planting will be irrigated • by a water drip system, fertilized, and allowed to mature for a period of three to five years before any activity occurs in Phase IV. The design and tree/shrub selection were the result of consulting with the following professionals in this field of science. Each of these individuals conducted a personal on -site inspection of the proposed 58-acre parcel. The final design was a culmination of efforts by: Mr. Frank Lancaster, Larimer County Forester Mr. Lincoln Sherman, Colorado State University Forester Mr. Bradford Janes, University of Texas Graduate Forester Mr. Frank Riggle, District Conservationist, S.C.S. Mr. Don Bogart, Colorado Division of Wildlife This landscaping design (Table VII-A) was submitted to and given final • approval by the Larimer County Forester, Mr. Frank Lancaster. - W IMIWID� W The proposed landscape plan will be one of the most corrprehensive landscape designs found in Larimer County in conjunction with a gravel extraction opera- tion. • 0 w = = 0 c') c o a z o :�o z rn H � rn x rn H •C w Z O o r rn z aozar- xc�zcnr, H C7 O H H O z O O d z ro c') 0 00 n z r x r 0 r �o moo O cn O z 9 ay H � r a H c_— H Z rn z rn z C H C] ro rn rn r z z ;a n 0 a a = x o r z H cn O r 9 x r� cn x o zraac�z n b rn E oc�roz�-+ a m .< r O ;o < O N m H N r1 r 75' EXCAVATION SET -BACK 25' SCREENING co _ t 20 0 ,DO m 0 H ro rn rn H b rn H 0 ro 0 rn cn r 0 rn • 0 • Asphalt batch plants and concrete batch plants will not be located on this 58-acre parcel. Crushing, screening, and washing will be operated as described in the previous text titled, "Location and Type of All Equipment and Operations on site" (Section B). �• •• U LINK,12, The Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. makes these statements as a commitment. • C7 • I 14 e 1 • ' ►• • 16 A fifty -foot (501) right of way will be deeded to 7arimer County, and fencing along the 50-foot right of way will be reestablished after the landscap- ing planting in the Spring of 1989. No mining will occur within twenty-five (25) feet of the new right of way easement and seventy-five (75) feet from the centerline of Taft Hill Road. • 0 • O. ANALYSIS OF VICIIT.CI'Y IMPACI5 AS A RESUILT OF GRAVEL MINING Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. retained the services of a professional real estate appraiser, Ross B. Milliken, R.M., to study the impacts gravel mining may or may not have on surrounding property values. A copy of his analysis is provided, and in summary Mr. Milliken has concluded that "There is not an indication that any diminution of the surrounding property values will oc= as the result of the Seaworth Mine Expansion" (58 acres parcel). • 0 • 0 • 1. ANY IMPACT UPON THE GROUND WATER OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES CAUSED BY STEp=G SAND & GRAVEL CO.'S OPERATIONS WILL BE MONITC)RED AND MITIGATED. At the initial hearing before the Planning Commission, several adjoining landowners expressed concern that Sterling Sand & Gravel Co.'s proposed opera- tions on the site would adversely affect their ground water. Subsequent to the hearing, Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. retained George Palos, a professional hydrology engineer with Resource Consultants, Inc. of Fort Collins, to inves- tigate these questions. A copy of his reports has been submitted with the application materials as exhibit G. • Mr. Palos analyzed the ground water resource in the area by first reviewing data from eighteen separate test borings which had been completed by Empire Laboratories at Sterling Sand & Gravel Co.'s request in 1985 and 1988. Charts and tables of these tests are included within the report. He then reviewed the water imports by ditches and agricultural irrigation in the area, since that is the primary manner of sustaining ground water. He found that the water -year annual runoff, taken from figures published by the State Engineer, was in excess of 100,000 acre feet above average in 198, and an equal amount below average in 1987. This extraordinarily low runoff, together with damage and blockage (not caused by Sterling Sand & Gravel Co.) to the Callahan Drain which delivers water to Taylor and Gill Ditch, in his opinion were contributing factors to any lower ground water table in the area. Significantly, Mr. Palos concluded that, beyond the slight reduction in the • level of water in the test holes immediately adjacent to Sterling Sand & Gravel Co.'s dewatering trench, "no evidence of water -table decline was found that could • • • be attributed to the lxmmirxX." In addition, he found that even considering the much higher water table in 1984 due to the exceptional runoff that year, "no benefit is evident to agricultural crops due to the water table naturally approaching the root zone." In short, the water table even in the exceptional year was well below the topsoil, much less the root zone. In sumTary, Mr. Palos concluded that Sterling Sand & Gravel Co.'s proposed operation "revealed no prohibitive negative effects on existing ground -water users in the area. only two shallow gram -id -water wells are sufficiently close to the mining pit that they may require mitigative measures through a part of the mining period." He concludes by stating the "if any injury is recognized at all, a direct delivery of surface water to the injured party would be the most desirable solution." . Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. has submitted the Rocky Mountain Resource and Consultants' monitoring plan, initial results and mitigation plan to Mr. Rex A. Burns, professional Engineer with the Tarimer county Departinent of Public Works and Mr. Hal D. Simpson, Professional Engineer and Deputy State Engineer with the Colorado Division of Water Resources. THey have reviewed the report and found it to be an adequate approach to monitoring and solving the potential ground water problems (see attached letters). Despite these conclusions and regardless of the cause, Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. is committed to do the following: 1. Before and during the mining operations on the site, it will continue to maintain and monitor the test borings. 2. Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. will annually clean and burn the Taylor and Gill Ditch along the northerly boundary of the site • as well as along the northerly boundary of the properties immediately adjacent to the east across Taft Hill Road. �J • • 3. If the level of the ground water in these test locations or in the two shallow wells or the adjacent pond goes down for any reason whatsoever, other than ordinary time -of -year or run-off conditions, Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. will deliver its surface water rights in the Taylor and Gill ditch to the adjacent owners without charge. 4. Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. will make the data obtained from the test borings available to the County and the adjacent property owners upon request. • 0 • • C� 2. SHOW HOW CRUSHER OPERATION CAN OCCUR ON THE SITE WITHOUT HAVING A Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. has revised a mining and reclamation plan that has addressed every concern that has been posed during the two meetings conducted between Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. and the neighbors to the east of the proposed 58-acre parcel. The plan includes the building of an earthen berm adjacent to Taft Hill Road on the reserved set back. Part of the berm will be constricted to a height equal to Taft Hill Road and planted with 600 trees and shrubs. The western portion of the berm will be elevated five (5) feet above the road and seeded with drought • resistent grasses, such as crested wheatgrass. Please refer to Table VII-B. This will occur in the Spring of 1989, some five (5) years before mining begins on the extreme western portion of the site, a quarter of a mile from the residences along Taft HIll Road. This will insure substantial maturing of landscaping long before the last ton of gravel is removed closest to the residences (some 10 to 15 years from now). The berms and planting of shrubs and trees will help mitigate the visual impact, noise, and blowing dust that is ccumonly associated with gravel mining. crushing equipment and stockpiles will be placed in the bottom of the pit which will follow the face of mining and allow the twenty -foot face of gravel to act as an additional buffer between the operation and the residences. Please refer again to operation profile Table VII-B. This will also minimize the impacts of the sight and sound of crushing equipment, as well as blowing dust • frcm stockpiles. • A noise consultant, Engineering Dynamics, has been retained to analyze the noise impact of the described method of operation. The report is enclosed and, in summary, the crushing operation can occur on site without incurring excessive decibel measurements. The limitations are: 1. Crusher to be located no closer than 490 feet fram the buildings on the east of Taft Hill Road. 2. Screening equipment no closer than 537 feet. 3. Berms must be constructed. 4. Crusher must be located on the bottom of the pit. Sffi2LIIdG I S DIME T' Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. will ccmunit itself to the above limitations. 0 • C • 3. PROVIDE A MORE DETAIL PLAN FOR NII1=ZING THE FUG=IVE DUST FROM Plans for minimizing fugitive dust from the operation have been addressed in the preceding Section K. More specifically, Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. has effectively applied CSS1H emulsified asphalt diluted 10:1 with water to gravel surfaces for dust suppression. As these roads become frequently used and regraded, it is necessary to reapply the emulsion. over time the material penetrates deeper and the frequency of application becomes minimal. This process will be used on the existing access road from Taft Hill Road westerly, but cannot be used on the pit floor due to environmental concerns. The water truck will spray the haul road route through the bottom of the pit going to the 58-acre • parcel. Please refer to exhibit C-3A. Larimer County planning staff nas asked that the environmental concerns of CSS1H emulsified asphalt be addressed. Specifically, could there be a chance of the emulsion washing into the nearby pond and river system? In all probability the answer is "No". Emulsified asphalt diluted 10:1 with water will require a maximum of one (1) hour curing time. once it has penetrated the surface and has set-up, it will not wash away. the only chance of this happening at all is during the one -hour cure time; therefore, CSS1H emulsified asphalt will not be applied if there is a threat of an approaching storm. SI'IImiw., S cgnya r 1. Use emulsified asphalt on existing access road. 2. Use water truck on haul route within the pit operations. • 3. Emulsified asphalt will not be applied when the treat of an immediate storm exists. • 0 • 4 . PLAN FOR MITIGATING THE VISUAL I MPACIS FROM THE = PD NIriG BEGINS . Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. has designed a landscaping plan adjacent to Taft Hill Road that will function not only as a visual screen but will also serve as a sound barrier and wind break. Please refer to the preceding Section L. Construction of an earthen berm, planting 600 trees and shrubs, and seeding the immediate area with native grasses will ccmrence in the Spring of 1989, some five (5) years before mining is expected to proceed on the western portion of the 58- acre parcel. Gushing equipment and future stockpiles will be placed twenty (20) feet below the surface on the pit floor, thereby reducing the visual impacts of the operation to a minimum. Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. has devised an overall plan that will effectively 0 deal with all of the concerns associated with the current operation as well as the future 58-acre parcel. 5-5 •• W, I 1 M 6 L 1� 1. Construction of earthen berms. 2. Planting of 600 trees and shrubs. 3. Seeding berm area with native grasses. 4. Placing crushing equipment and stockpiles on the pit floor. 0 Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. cannot mine the area 10 acres at a time. A11 crushing equipment is portable and is moved to as many as twenty (20) different locations during the construction season. Crushing at the 58-acre site typically may happen twice a year; therefore, a quantity of 100,000 to 150,000 tons of material is produced at a time. A crushing spread and stockpile area will take ten acres of surface area. Six acres are needed for a working face of gravel and ten acres are needed to strip the area just ahead of the operation in preparation for the next set up. Utilizing concurrent reclamation methods will keep the area needed to be reclaimed to approximately five acres. This sums up to a total of 31 acres of affected land which is the approximate acreage of each phase of the mining plan. This is consistent with the requirements for similar operations. C �+• 064WIMbUID Sterling Sand & Gravel Co. will mine and reclaim the 58-acre parcel by practicing the concurrent reclamation methods as discussed in Section F. 0 • • • • 0 • L I '•� tt ■ • t •'1'J►•J�t i • M �► '.• L 1 '/'� t■iiM • '1'J/• •' 11424 16:8 •• V on ••• • t With regards to the 58-acre parcel, the set back from the east property line will be seventy-five (75) feet from the centerline of Taft Hill Road. The set back from the north property line will be forty (40) feet. The set back from the west property line will be twenty-five (25) feet. The set back from the south property line will be zero (0) feet. Also, the set back of gravel mining from any existing, permanent building will be two hundred (200) feet. With regard to the properties currently permitted for mining on the east side of Taft Hill Road, the set back of gravel mining from any existing, permanent building will also be two hundred (200) feet. RINDIVIIIHIL •• t L 1D No gravel mining will occur within two hundred (200) feet of any existing, permanent building. • E • N° 001575 LARIMER COUNTY ENCROACHMENT PERMIT q p.rmltsl.. It hereby granted to perform the following work wl thin the rlght-of-woy or CountyRoadNo. / also known •S /"• 1.��/ / Foisting bad Sur/ec•t LSa oescrlotion of /ro)ectt -I 1 Loc.tl — Addre.. (p ofl1far / 'q 1/-ea lal on \ -,,Joel Seh.dul.: aagln: /�fa.a.f(t /fje4 End: m[am Attached: ❑yes Kh, /I.m Required. ❑yea f4ro A Arad Clm care "" osr*l Sled In ...ordanca with "Utilities end Ae sass Instalistlons on County bad Rights -of -way" Re wr/sclno Reaul red: Inches ..ph —it. Inches boa, Inch.. swbb.ee la]�Ifa'] kwal, tY comer,,: �Subgr.d■ end Fill Comp.ctl on Clu.se Convactlon AASXT0 T99 For Soils A6 and A7 AASNTO T180 For Soils At Thru A5 QAsphelt Compaction ❑Line and grade control by a I canted wrveyor (V.ri Ill cat l on and a summary of work performed by the licensed Surveyor Is to be submitted to the County Englnur by the Ilc.ns.d surveyor upon completion). 0th.rr R,sea: CampActlon tots shetl be taken until It can be shown that tM .4"1' d densities have been met at lust once In • the first one hundred Ilnai Iut and at lust one. for every twohundred lines) hoe U•rsaf tar. GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. Applicant $Mil ►a responsible for establishing safety messurss sufficient to protect the traveling public from any and all hares during utility construction, Improvement, location or relocation. 2. Facilities shall be placed In a location mutually agreed upon by Applicant and Larlmer County end In accordance with d.eolls and specifications Sham on the construction plans. 3. Avvllcant shall Inform Lartmer County of construction mathodS, equlpeant and operational procedures that will be utilised and obtain the County's concurrence. A. Applicant shalt advise Lorimar County 48 hours In advance of the date work will be started and shall notify Lorimar County a minlaess of 12 hours In advance If this date Is changed. 5. ADpllcont shall be responsible for any repairs necessary as a result of such Installation. The meintsnanc. r.sponal- bility of work ,pairs shall be an obligation Of the Applicant for one year after final acceptance of the work by the County. 6. Ctearing of trees, bushes and other vegetation shall be h•I4 to the minimum required for construction and safety. 7. Applicant shell return right-of-way to Its original condition as near as practicable and shall remora all It. rub►I.h and debris following completion of construction And before final Inspection by the County and Appllcsnt. If flee) In- npectlon dat•rwines addltlonel corr.ctlw measares nacaessry, such corrective measure .hall be Initiated with 30 days and completed by Apollcant within a reasonable Interval of time considering the circumstances. 8. Applicant shall hold Lorimar County harmless from any and all Claims which may arise from the construction and maln- t.nancs of Applicant's facilities covered by this permit. 9 In the event any changes sr. mad. to this roadway In the future that would necessitate rammpvet or relocation of this Installation, Appllcsnt will do to promptly at Its own expense upon written request from larlmor County, Colorado. Lsrlwr County. Colorado, will not be responsible for any damage that may result to sa'd Installation I the twrm.l walnte,anca or the highway or to the Installation placed Inside County right-of-woY limit.. I /.(jI'////) Feet SCMJuI.t / n.Jor tn,t.tl•tlonn F}'tISSo.00 Oslo.00 / p0 Rl nor InStallat ores[ U"o.o0 or Oslo. 00 or 0510.00 or I�. 5.00 ONO fee ' -otal Fee • Oa[a ADD rovadt — i eef Applicant - A Address, or The Cowes [Y nq n Phone in mcupting Mls permit tM undenlgnd, ropr. esntlnq th Appllc.. t. v rllles that 1, he, read end undoes ands all Of t,r rormgo!nq provl slops; that lie noS s'therl ty to sign for • bin tM Pllcmnt red tMt by rlr[wa of ills slgnatura Mr A,.Iic.nt It bound by •11 the conditions cat fo,th h.r.ln. o MEMORANDUM 0 0 a o N To: Dallas 1..Jilliams_., Sterling Companies o Rick Ensdorff, Fort Collins Traffic Engineer U � � o CD From: Matt Delich z w Date: September 9, 1965 0 Subject: Traffic analysis of the Sterling Companies LLI operational changes z w Q z The Sterling Companies_. has proposed operational changes zregarding their sand, gravel, asphalt, and cement 0 operation located on North- Taft Hi 1 1 Road just south of the CacheLa Poudre River in Fort Collins, Colorado. This memorandum describes the expected changes in traffic generated and the expected operation of the proposed access point(s). Cur-r-en t 1 y the Ster 1 i ng Companies conducts_. sand and gravel distribution from the main facility located on the east side of Taft Hill Road just south of the Cache • La Poudre River. An asphalt batch plant is located on the west side of Taft Hill Road across from the main facility. A cement premix plant (using sand and gravel from the main far_ i 1 i t>) is located on the east side of downtovJn Fort Collins. At the present time, asphalt trucks_. access (in and out) the west side batch plant from Taft Hill Road. Historically, >90 percent of the trucks. travel fr-orn/to the south. The sand/gravel trucks z access the main facility (on the east side of Taft Hill cc Road) from/to the south on their trips to the cement Zpremix, plant. w c� w The Sterling Companies has put forth two operation J scenarios for which the City of Fort Col 1 i ns has a_ > traffic operational analysis. These are: requested x o 1. Movement of the asphalt batch plant to the east side U of Taft Hill Road with access via the existing J w a access to the main facility. Along with the asphalt o a batch plant, it is proposed that a. cement premix a plant will be located on this site also. . �- In the event of a large contract for asphalt, the • batch plant would be moved to a site known as the aSeawor-th Pi t located on the west side of Taft Hi 11 Road just north of the Cache La Poudre River. Under F- this scenario, the cement premix plant would remain on the main facility site. • Under Scenario 1, it is expected that six tanker trucks of asphalt will be arriving and 90 tandem axel dump trucks will be departing per weekday. This rate i expected to be constant between 7:00 A.M. and 4:30 P.M. This gives a total of 96 trucks in and ?6 trucks out during a typical weekday. While the operation totals 9.5 hours, it is expected that due to start-up in the morning and shut -down in the afternoon, the actual operation will last 8.5 hours. This averages 11 trucks in and 11 trucks out per hour. For trip generation purposes, it is expected that the 25 employees at the main facility drive private vehicles, and the main facility receives. 5 visitors per hour. The visitor estimate is felt to be very conservative (high). Under Scenario 2, the truck traffic at the main facility would be reduced by 15 trucks in and 15 trucks out per day, which would utilize the Seaworth Pit. Also added to the Seaworth Pit traffic were vehicles for 15 employees estimated to operate this facility. Visitors are not expected to visit the Seaworth Pit. Existing (1933) traffic counts on Taft Hill Road north of Vine Street are shown in Table 1. Using this information and the Fort Collins Traffic Flow Map, daily • and hourly traffic was estimated on Taft Hill Road near the Sterling Companies site for 1905, 1986, and 2005. Operational analysis was performed for the morning peek hour (7:30-8:30 A.M.) and mid -afternoon peak (2:30-3:30 P.M.). These were selected since truck activity would be at a. high level and the street traffic would also be at a high level. The typical afternoon peak (4:30-5:30 P.M.) was not analyzed since the truck traffic would be shut down by this time. Figure 1 shows the 1936 traffic projections of the Scenario 1 Sterling proposal for the analyzed time periods. Figure 2 shows the expected level of service related to the traffic in Figure 1. The a.na.l ysi s technique used for this and all subsequent analyses. is the unsignalized intersection analysis as described in the proposed chapters to the 1935 Highway Capacity Manual: Table 2 shows a description of level of service from the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual. Since a high number of large trucks will make up over half the entering and exiting traffic, the generated trucks were factored to reflect passenger car equivalents. Figure 3 shows the 2005 traffic projections of the Scenario 1 Sterling proposal for the analyzed time periods. Figure 4 shows the expected level of service related to the • traffic in Figure 3. The operation expected under Scenario 1 under both time periods is in the acceptable catergories. • Figure 5 shows the 14'S6 traffic projections of the Scenario 2 Sterling proposal for the analyzed time periods. Figure 6 shov.,s the expected level of service related to the traffic in Figure 5. Figure 7 shows the '.2005 traffic projections of the Scenario 2 :ter 1 i ng proposal for the analyzed time periods. Figure S shot -.is the expected level of =_.ervice related to the traffic in Figure 7. The operation expected under Scenario 2 under both time periods is in the acceptable catergorie Conclusions The following conclusions are drawn from the traffic analysis of the Sterling Companies' proposals regarding relocation of various facilities: - Since the truck activity is primarily just changing access location, there will be no significant increase in truck traffic on Taft Hill Road caused by the proposals- - Operation of the access points under• both Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 will be in the acceptable categories• in both the short (1956) and long (2005) range future. - Gue to the slow acceleration characteristics of the truck traffic and the sight distance restrictions caused by the horizontal and vertical alignment of Taft Hi 1 1 Road at the bridge over the Cache La. Poudre River, "Trucks Entering the Highway" signs and =_.peed restrictions (30 mph) should be considered. • U O O LL N } O li Q W Z Q 3 O x O • = p - O FLi O } = W � J J W c Q O G. Q C) 3 O O S (D ~ O O li W f- i � O Q Z a w Q } O a: Q } FAlia o o W V z ° o < ° { n jil W o o f= C.) } (D E o U W Y p w J Y CA K W z W C) 0- w w 0 3 N ¢ a IZ I z z O U va o — •W 7 I, : t `I H W U p U < 01 N IA V InIn 0 0 0 ,n C9 0 0 V V O tD - N O N CD V O I �- .- V N O -C7 N NNN NN MOM N^-� Q U co W H O co Q LLI 3 • V H ° a HIL O � U a A c O H a H Q O m^� r x Z CY Vth Cad) N--In In In O ' NCO NNN NN N Ei 0 F- U F— H } Q z N t to F- V V 61 N W N Q W z p MnO N-- Cl) z D W N F m W U Q 3 0 z Q � � H W U D D O } 1- U J Y W W = Q F- O z W O U W NMVt -N -V �- O-N N N N N N • O 00000000 - �- r --- � J 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 F CL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U Y ONC) V U)uor 0a-o-- Nc) if) 0r� �NN cy N OF p = O O O O 0 0 0 0 0-- 0 0 • STERLING SITE AM/PI- 196(b SCENARIO I TRAFV-IC PROJECTION FIGIRE l SITE AM/PM • 198(o SCENARIO I TRAFFIC OPERATION FIGURE 2 0 • • • • ?ABLE 2 TABLE 10-3. LEVEL -OF -SERVICE CRITERIA FOR UNSIGNAL IZED INTERSECTIONS RESERVE CAPACITY (PCPH) LEVEL OF SERVICE EXPECTED DELAY TO MINOR STREET TRAFFIC 2 a00 A Little or no May 300-399 B Short traffic delays 200-299 C Average traffic delays 100-199 D Long traffic delays 0— 99 E Very long traffic delays • F • When demand .plume ex—C13 the capacity of the lane. "treme delays will be encountered with queuing wh,ch may cause se -ere congestion affecting other tro(Tie mo•emenu in the irtursoction. This condition usually —mrts improvement to the Intersection. • • • STCRLI;`!r, SITE AM/PM e005 SCENARIO I TRAFFIC PROJECTION • AM/PM • FIGURE 3 2005 SCENARIO I TRAFFIC OPERATION Ftc.uRt 4 • \� 0 • f l T NOMIIy�L--� 1 � N til C7 �-- 3f ,c— (4 /3 14 J 3 _J Ln 10 _ N i- Tr) IL 0 STERLING SITE AM/PM 198ro SCENARIO Z TRAFFIC PROJECTION • -- S EAWORTH PIT • I FIGURE STERLINa SITE AM/PM 198(o SCENARIO Z TRAFFIC OPERATION FIGURE & N O S EAWCRTH PIT NOMINAL v try N ti Ln --- 3/3 1 14�l4 STERLIKG SITE I J n. i. N r 13 N AM/PM E+. 2005 SCENARIO 2 TRI\FFIC PROJECTION FICsl1RE 7 SEATO RT N PI-r is STERLINCG SITE AM/PM ZOOS SCENARIO Z TRAFFIC OPERATION FicL)RE 6 • • • Mr. Mike Refer Sterling Sand and Gravel Co. P. 0. Box 2187 Fort Collins, CO 80522 Mr. Mike Refer: r�ineering May 9, 1988 aynCmic.S This report describes the noise emissions and methods of control associated with the Sterling Companies Home Office Mine, Section F, Phases III and IV. Section F is adjacent to and west of Taft Hill Road and just north of the Poudre River. The sequence of mining in Section F is Phases I, II, III and IV. Phases I and II are being completed and Phases III and IV will be mined starting at the west side of Phase IV and mining the pit face eastwards towards Taft Hill Road. This mining method is necessary so that the pit face serves as an acoustic barrier between the mining equipment and the properties located on the east side of Taft Hill Road. The noise sources that will be in operation during Phases III and IV and their acoustic power levels are: Equipment Acoustic Power Level -dB 1. Scraper 117 2. D8K Dozer 117 3. 980B/C Front End Loaders 117 4. Crusher 113.5 5. L-J Screen 115 6. Conveyors 99 7. Diesel Electric Generator 118 As the mining progresses from Phase III to Phase IV the face of the pit will move closer and closer to Taft Hill Road and so will the noise sources. Experience has shown that the greatest noise impact is produced by front end loaders because front end loaders work on the pit floor along the face of the mine which usually is the closest noise source to adjacent property. On the other hand, most of the other noise sources in the mine are stationary and can be acoustically shielded by stockpiles or berms. The Home Office Mine and the adjacent residential area is located • d,,.oeve,4y 21 charleville rd. 3925 south kalamath street englewood, colorado 80110_ rathmines " -'� (303) 761-4367dublin 6, Ireland '°m-' • Mr. Mike Refer Noise Emission Office Mine Page 2 and Methods of Control - Sterling Companies Home in Larimer County where the State of Colorado Noise Law is ap- plicable. Those portions of the law that are related to the Home Office Mine are replicated in the following table. 25-12-103. Maximum permissible noise levels. (1) Every ac- tivity to which this article is applicable shall be con- ducted in a manner so that any noise produced is not objec- tionable due to intermittence, beat frequency, or shrill- ness. Sound levels of noise radiating from a property line at a distance of twenty-five feet or more therefrom in excess of the dB(A) established for the following time periods and zones shall constitute prima facie evidence that such noise is a public nuisance: Zone 7:OOam to next 7.00pm 7:OOpm to next 7.00am Residential 55 dB(A) 50 dB(A) Commercial 60 dB(A) 55 dB(A) • Light Industrial 70 dB(A) 65 dB(A) Industrial 80 dB(A) 75 dB(A) (2) In the hours between 7:OOam and the next 7:OOpm, the noise levels permitted in subsection (1) of this section may be increased by ten dB(A) for a period of not to exceed fif- teen minutes in any one -hour period. • (3) Periodic, impulsive, or shrill noises shall be con- sidered a public nuisance when such noises are at a sound level of five dB(A) less than those listed in subsection (1) of this section. (5) Construction projects shall be subject to the maximum permissible noise levels specified for industrial zones for the period within which construction is to be completed pur- suant to any applicable construction permit issued by proper authority or, if no time limitation is imposed, for a reasonable period of time for completion of project. Table I - Excerpts from Colorado Noise Law 25-12 During the development or construction phase of Phases III aAd IV the applicable noise limits are those specified for Industrial engineering dynaT�cs • u • fir. Mike Refer Noise Emissions and Methods of Control - Sterling Home Office Mine Page 3 Zones. The noise sources of significance during the construction phase will be the scraper and D8K Dozer and these items of equip- ment produce the following noise levels at 50 feet from the machine. Scraper 85 dB(A) at 50 feet. D8K Dozer 85 dB(A) at 50 feet. This equipment will always be more than 50 feet from the adjacent property line and therefore will be in conformance with the noise limits for the construction phase when the overburden is being removed and acoustic berms are being constructed. During the mining phase the greatest noise impact from the sta- tionary equipment will occur when the equipment is located closest to the adjacent eastern property. The mining plan has been laid out so that the stationary noise sources would be lo- cated no closer than the following distances from the area which is to the east of the mine. 0 Distance Crusher 490 ft LJ-Screen 537 ft Diesel Electric Generator 537 ft Conveyors variable but not closer than 250 ft. • By placing the equipment on the pit floor so that the sources of noise from each piece of equipment are as low as possible the following noise levels will be produced at the property. Max. Distance Max Distance from No Berm 8 ft. Berm equipment to berm-ft. Crusher 59 dB 51 dB 45 L-J Screen 60 dB 52 dB 45 Diesel Electric Generator 58 dB 54.5 dB 45 Conveyor 48 dB -- dB It can be seen that it was found necessary to apply noise abate- ment measures in the form of berms to be placed between the sta- tionary process equipment and the property to the east. engineering dynamics • Mr. Mike Refer Noise Emissions and Methods of Control - Sterling Companies Home Office Mine Page 4 The berms can take the form of stockpiles and should not be fur- ther than 45 feet from the crusher, screens or generator and should exceed the height of the equipment in each case by 8'. The mobile equipment used in the mine will also require a berm in order to provide noise control while at the same time allowing the mine be worked to its design boundary. As mentioned pre- viously the mine will be worked from west to east to avail of noise barrier effects afforded by the face of the cut. The noise levels from the excavating equipment however will still exceed 60 dB(A) at the eastern property unless a 5 feet high berm is con- structed at the gravel pit eastern boundary. Maximum sound pres- sure levels generated by the front end loaders, dozers and scraper can then be expected to be of the order of 57 - 59 dB(A). Without a berm levels at the eastern property could be expected to reach 61 - 63 dB(A) in magnitude. The Ldn = 60 dB(A) noise contours resulting from worst case gravel pit operation are shown in Figure I. With the noise con- trol measures in place as described earlier the noise will not impact the eastern property at a level which exceeds that allowed • by state law. Outside the contour the sound levels will not exceed 60 dB(A) at any time during the mining phase. For sig- nificant periods of time the contour will actually encompass less area than that shown by Figure 1. This is because the mining equipment in general will not operate at maximum power levels for much of the time and because the area impacted will vary as the excavating equipment moves around the mine. In conclusion, the Sterling Companies Home Office Mine, Section F, Phases III and IV will comply with legal noise limits as laid down by the Colorado State Statutes. If you have any questions regarding this information, please con- tact me at our Englewood office. Sincerely, ENGINEERING DYNAMICS, INC. Alan J. Fakkell, Engineer Approved By: Howard N. McGregor, P.E. engineering dyncrnics • a 60 dB(A) CO • 60 dB(AyZ C o tj 60 dB(A) N' 60 dB(A) CONTOUR FIGURE 1 engineering dyr-cmcs 0 • • • Analysis of Vicinity Impacts as a result of Gravel I lining, concerning the Seaworth Mine Expansion for Sterling Sand and Gravel Co. Fort Collins, Co. Prepared for Mr. Mike Refer General Manager Sterling Sand and Gravel Co. 1800 North Taft Hill Road P.O. Box 2187 Fort Collins, CO. 80522 Prepared by Ross B, Milliken, RM Milliken Real Estate Appraisals 412 South Howes, Suite C, Fort Collins, CO. 80521-2802 . 412 South Howes • Suite C Fort Collins. Colorado 80521-2802 '303, 4112-8992 • r) r) 1 Ross B. Milliken Real Estate Appraiser, R M Mr Mike Refer 5-19-88 General Manager Sterling Sand and Gravel Co. 1800 North Taft Hill Road P.O. Box 2187 For, Collins, Colorado 80522 Re: Se —,worth Mine Expansion. Dear Mr. Refer • This letter, and the accompanying report, is the sumn:ar,r of the research your company requested. I was requested to research the data avail able on gravel mining operations, that ha%re originated or expanded, and test that data for a? ;% indica,,Lon o determinable diminution of value, or enhancement of 'value, to any surrounding or near by residential properties. This analysis was to be limited to only determining an �':F indication of diminution or enhancement. The exact rneasur er ent of these effects, if they appear to have occureu, is be y vr1:a ti ,2 request and scope of this report. Please regard this repert and the analvs1s discussed in it as a limited assignment only. The following report and the e-_hibits included were asseTnble =. during the weeks of May 9th thru May 20th, l P-_ J• of the data found and the logic applied to its analysis is also included. Eased upon this information, i amp of the opinion an%a ha,.re concluded that there is not an indication that `?f the surrounding property values will occur as- :a re uit ::f the Sea%Jrorth Mine e_.pansion. Best i? zgaru/s 0 Ross B, r..illil.en RiL`i • � 0 10 TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page page 1 Letter of Conclusion page 2 Table of Contents page 3 Purpose of this report page 4 Description of the approach and the analysis page 4 Description of the Neighborhood surrounding the Seaworth Pit Expansion page 5 Commentary on the Timnath Ind site page 8 Commentary on the 35th & "0" St Pit page 10 Commentary on the Best Way Paving Pit page 11 Commentary on the E. 16th Ave Pit page 13 Commentary on the "Deep Pit" page 14 Summary and Conclusion page 17 Statement of Contingent and Limiting Conditions page 18 Qualifications of Ross B. Milliken RM page 21 Roses B. &DYLAen RA1f 3 . Purpose of this report The purpose of this report is to provide you with a .:':umrnar,r of the data gathered and my approach to anal1'7 ir:o that da,.a. This data was gathered in an attempr, to determine the effect a gravel mining operation may have on the surrounding residential values when an operation starts up as new or expands. The intent of this research was to determine if an origination or e.-pansion of an operation causes any diminution or enhancement of the surrounding residential values. Description of the approach and the analysis To find data from gravel mining operations that either started up new or expanded, and approached residential areas, I contacted the county planning offices for Larimer, Weld and Boulder Counties. I asked their staff, that dealt with the county mining operations, if they were aware of any miring operations that met the criteria of starting or expanding and thus approaching residential areas. Larimer County provided only information on an area that resembled a gravel mine but was actually a private industrial site, and an area that was permitted • but not being mined yet. Weld County provided information on three mining operations that met the criteria and Boulder County provided information on one mine. I physically inspected each mining area, attempted to interview area home owners, and obtained residential sales information from the adjacent residential areas that would roughly bracket the time frame of the mining expansions for each operation. I then correlated the results of the interviews and the sales information. My reasoning was that the recorded sales prices should generally follow the overall market trends for the different era's. If they did not, and appeared lower than the general market, then that could be an indication that a local adverse economic impact was occuring. If the values appeared better than the corresponding general market then a local impact may be a benefit. It would be reasonable to assume that the local impact may be the area gravel mine. Please remember that this data was gathered in a general manner and can only be analyzed in the same manner. After the following description of the Seaworth Mine expansion neighborhood, I will describe each operation analyzed and the results of the my research of the surrounding residential • values. I have not included in this report a copy of your proposed Operation Standards which you provided me, and will be a part of • your application to the county. I considered including it as it very adequately described Sterling's program for minimizer: g any impact this mine may have on the surrounding properties These plan.. are important as they are one of the then ,.s I c,-2rnpa red to the other mines analyzed. Each mine has it's Operation Standards, few of which appeared to be as strong and diligent .as your proposed standards. This information, as provided to me, occupies 27+ pages, and I do not feel it's inclusion would be a logical addition to this brief report. I do recommend, however, that this information be provided to anyone reviewing this report, as the information in it, is intregal to the analysis of the data obtained for this report. Description of the neighborhood surrounding the Seaworth Mine Expansion. While I am assuming that the parties involved in this project, and the parties that will be considering this report are adequately familar with the Seaworth Pit and Sterling Sand and Gravel and Fort Collins, it is appropriate that some description of the neighborhood be included in this report. However, this information • will be held to a minimum. The subject mine expansion is located on the north west edge of the City of Fort Collins, off of North Taft Avenue, an the north side of the Cache La Poudre River. This is a 58 acre site that fronts on North Taft Ave approximately in its' 2000 block. The Lind use to the north is agriculturial farm ground, Highway 287 and a mixture of homes on sites and agricultural land. The area to the west is river bottom land with the exception of the established Seaworth homestead. The land to the south is also river bottom land that has had some degree of gravel mining, The neighborhood to the east is the area that contains the homes in the closest proximity to the subject site. This area is made up of a variety of quality homes on acreage sites, most of which also have frontage on North Taft Hill Road in the 2000 block. Please note the following photographs of the area, the attached aerial photograph and location map. U �SS6 Ross B. 11DYIzken RM S * k Y, •ti' i "c ap •; 5 n e i a . T JL i F' a� ro b 0 • • .� 'nr :r -,he ;;�11�e�.si lore :;� w_1�:, :�k�r::pc,.. .� .ar rri,1rir g. iroo�Irl$ _a;} from the appr{_�.:-.mat.e ce ni-er o? th �`r^�?;1se�a Z' '1_r:r�, area showin the residences on the east side o i.af+ Hill Road. .Foss £. 1 p31hken RAY RES£RYOIA 8 • C D E F " CITY OF Qom` E O` < FORT COLLINS 54 NANp • _ W N COLO. N� C a BURNS ST } r o uSic 0 2000 4000 n W S48RE OR ''� SCALE IN FEET uRIFLE w nn'+r.• n P N F\'cw �sETTL. Seaworth Mine Expansion L POUDRE t Q . °M,'Q area (proposed) DR o a u O C AMVII N 0c G a Or.K 0 1` O ZO ORCM`P DR H t0 x N 1. z CTC N O JR HI _ VERA > M C TX v = S-7 Q D NA < C DR cgOSS W c MEADOW LN LN 2 S( Q J T � n S•p F R.R.DR = GINGHAM HILL RO B i ccarwoRE LAKE W _ yi Cy r0 yF v R BYO AgAPAHOE �Ty Cq STERLING CO. SHILO F DR e,k,, i� POUDRE LAK MICHAUO LN SO 3°? 4�m° ` �q�e rOti. L W. WILLOX LN • ° 9� N D U LE �~ Z ` pt� '4� � Z STATION CT t^ r�F qR GRAVEL PITS F y 0 4-i q 4oRI S 7 R i 3WI NGu O z0 3 3i I y = NIC a • I 3 ni WA K 0 N DA o OR ¢ E NORTNRIDGE �g W PINTAIL CT ACKERMAN CT _ z DRm R W RIVENOELL EL CREST DEAN Q'f. � OR LAK 7y W p ¢ O MARIO ST ¢¢J > LIBERTY¢_ OR STERLING LANCER JAW J TREVOR ST, LN DR AIAII[0✓1u iT N < < ~J LSEMPLE i2• 3w POM ONA Z : 3 VINE DR. I I 4 - $ALAZAR W p W =¢ Q = ELM ST O ¢ ELM'^' PL N N _ a o N CT� ;- ¢ }Qlj J Z W Z CHRISTIAN (PRIVATE} o ' r m o z • W° SY AMOK ¢ Z : J W W AIRPORT ° O J 1 J >'CHERgY •Q W a BE _ • Q 3 CHERRY N a- z�Yr'i W W 2 ST ¢¢ CSU CHERRY $T LN r CHERRYiu 35T= '� uW=11n z m z r 4. IELANO AVE ST C E RY • r SN W J w !a i 0= �r ' __- '^'T`"'•x' N'A cOLUu C ^ M1APLE< < FIR$T $t J z • OZN _ ! TE u n. Z W BrNE r rz O = N ° N m ua Z = W BE m ~= Y< r JUNIPER • ¢ O F O AVE = z 3 I�..i • lir TEa „aGi.AV�= > m 3 rt 3 C r 46 , LA PORTS zli- a i e w o z H i �RiiNcaL ;I Z S Z �.OR W 2 RI 30 Y r W- J aw i i z o GRAND- U. P ¢ J a a Z Y��W ¢ r O VIEMCE0 Z u�• > v z c o • v� 3 Z `r W. OAK STa ' u3z 'N. OAK CC7 i W W. =OIIY �fp�O i S ¢ i 6 PK W.t ' AKIN AVE J v , W PV_ 6. 0 L I VE FOOTHILLS CAMPUS sI OLNE OLIVE CT CITY P�RK �a �* o 0ou E „ q W W. NAGNOUA< ,�l< o�- ST WOOOFO Cry GOLF COURSE �KY i o MAGN01 S z c = N jMAGN L c/TrPK > O W r- < _- - PCT,d MULBE RY • BECR O^ J ¢ WOOO Y CT ¢ = aNO2 �. DMA 41. C MYR$T LE c0LLf0 V gT 1.7 X W GREE NREE a W. LAUREL- AV qAM►ART RD RGq, �LIpF TIMBER vai iL v-* �' '° < CRES MORE BIRCM U ExPERI- ¢ if' �19 r q o Q P WAGNERAm r •i MENTAL RES. �o o° NI C7 ¢ 1. ri CAMPUS MBEAVEAp" a ¢ O OR MAR O �z BROAO r SAYSTON L. OR�y " 'a :::: ':::Z 4' ♦�E uL.. CT J ¢ W CTW zo oa i VIEW PL m r ♦ r .... <......... ..Q At 4 � 5< N 0o Y s o eS" NO.RTK::D.R::— AR h RG W. PLUM ►LUN S E7 �, $TCEDARVOOD ¢ W MCALL:STER Q :::::::::::::"W KOR PLAZA ELIZABETH 1- T CUCRTO N� ¢ �$�¢ u 0 C� • • �`wrang 23c,u 6h l r'. : 1 in 'C'_ • 1` i t 1 " ,N Zi it_L i K '. ai; ::111 :.'•a. The following is my description and discussion of my findings frorn the different mines researched. All information concerning t-he actual sales data of the residential sales rrlen ` _ _ d, pry ^e interviewed etc, is in my file and is available upon re, a .«.st. Please note the location map following these descriptions which shows The locations of the various mines. ijr7 Ros s B. ADYI Aim R.?I-f .17 • • Timnath Industrial Site • y^ 'r m �'Or of;. a par! _el o i�nn'd 'hat , : _ -` - _ 'nt to t.h^ �.._a_<<A .- _ == 'vT�Y'� in th;E f',_ d plan G1 t%2 C '=f< .� �C _:='_"= -_ ep-1 ion of a home on the ridge to the n r tT _1 : = i;JW.nE. pnc I c ustrates both. As you can see there is some excavation occuring which resembles a gravel operation. This is not a gravel operation. The owner has excavated the west side of the site into a pond and green belt area using the recovered material to create a drive up to the residence. He has also used the material to raise the east side of this river bottom site so that it is in a flood fringe area. This change in flood effect allows him to use the east side of the site for commercial and industrial storage. The owner is in heavy cons+ruction and plans to use the east side as a storage yard for his equipment and materials. The county originally turned down his request for an industrial zoning on this site, so he applied with the town council of Timnath for annexation and rezoning, which wa- appro,�,red . i interviewed the site owner and two owners of ad accent residences. An owner to the north indicated teat if tl-Ie isde-�.ri elopment was fni he,; as ] � d proposed he did not feel .here ",voi a l be any detriment to his property value. hr :�ner o��T�� a ` more e Tpensive home in a closer proxinlitT�• and 1^�2 =+ ted that SSG Ross B. Milliken RM 2 cl 1 84 'so CA III RAWm I DE PARK 0 RESERVOIR POWER PLANT so 82 c I 9 I,,OpDEAD-" PARR so T ICON T. BUTTE CREEK B CK 6084 R S. `YE ) �• 1 I 37JQ� RA BIT CR 7 wAVERL Y W. 287 76 ------ SOAR% 6 AN CREEK 4 EX LfLGU Q R , LIVERMORE �q 'w. 15 74 74 7 CZ A L72 72 17 2111 ORE '70 �-LIVERMORE LIVERMORE MTN OW L x 5j 7,44 L 7 40. RAW CLAR 68 GO rN T9 N. LAN Suppu DLAI 66 RI MTW 7 613*1. Alat RES. 5 - I . SEA M4*,V fit_ RESERVOIR •64 596 LUNG A 14 LA 62 62 CACHE I HIGH- m LAN OuDRE PARK GO n 6 x rE PL.CE CUR77S LAKE RI RI L. IL 16 IL 56 27 ING 56 TON. TERRI twits • (___<T. ETRI)IY F 297 aw 54 13 87 ANK 2 9 N� cc C14- 19 CLA A, pL 01- 11.1 50 'T I AfOR OUCx SOL t 4A so HORN M CAN MRI N 287 8,341 FIE 21 "le 5 3 27 9E zi 0 -LACK *w; COLLINS_T 14 TO jCT 0 257 Timnath Industrial Site 9 A 01t w T7N ... .'4.. Timnath, Colorado LAXEJ FOAL, 27 HORSi CREEK ."_ORSE- 5 R TOOT TT T..1 40 MTN-... 23 OmEGA T10- 10 ATM 25 - 2 7, [-A t L=_11F GuLCH 7 _. 4' U T36 u 0 0 S E v E L ry r, 40 3 co-4- N2 RM STORM, MASON- VIL 4" TO jCT �cx• c. 97 LAKENEL 3 A1r ESSO 6 L 27 30 OOdK H 30 .87 c' JTuSp 13 FT. COLLINS 29 ' LOVELAND PALLISADE AIRPORT r°r/)Pi " 6i.. n =1 ` �ptpN / O'q fSx 19 9 043 9YY A 29 2 C343 '4 ;.14E) E) DRAKE 27 25 RIVER z L74 2424 mT NAR-W I SHEEP ROW� 8,450 70 JCT \1 DRAKE IPA .916 rNomps 29 23 ux 5 4REA r 1,_� AA11 r olo� HONE &ITM LANC '71 20) 19 'im5NT 5 r toN CLr_ 0�5 C\ 9E 0 7 A SUGAPLCAF UT1j. -71 • because the area will be used for commercial and industrial storage, it has destroyed his river/meadow view and will be a detriment to his property. Please be reminded that a true gravel operation would be reclaimed into a pond and greenbelt area and not left as an industrial use. The residential sales data from the area is very limited but indicates that the more basic homes in the immediate area retail in the low 70,000's. A March 1987 sale of a property 4 lot: north of this site was for $72,000, In Feburary of 1988, a ;property One lot away from the site appears to have sold for $74,000, These two sales both occured after this area was under excavation and after reviewing the neighborhood, these values appear reasonable. I am of the opinion that this data indicates the possibility of diminution of value to the contigious properties due to the proposed continual use of the site as a storage yard. The data indicates no apparent diminution of value to the properties that are not contigious. This is the weakest comparable as it is not a commercial gravel operation, does not have anything similar to a Standards of Operation, and will have a continual active private use. • 35th and "O" Street Mine This mine is located in the northwest corner of Greeley at the intersection of 35th Ave and 0 Street. It is buffered from the actual intersection by an area of custom quality homes called Riverview. The following photo shows both the mining area and the adjacent homes. This gravel mine was reportedly approved in June of 1975 and contained 54.67 acres. Of this area 29.67+- acres was to remain in farm land, and 25+- acres was to be mined leaving a 6 acre pond, a 10 acre pond and a 9 acre pond with green belts. The Operation Standards for this mine are very generic. They called for 10 foot setbacks, a wet mine operation, operating hours from Gam to lOpm and a total mining period of 10 years. The adjacent neighborhood, Riverview, was platted in 1977 and started selling in 1981, fully absorbing before June 1986. As you can note this area started after the mine was approved. This is an executive area with the homes retailing between $175,000 and $314,000 with the most recent sale being a mine side sale for $190,000. The mine is not currently being worked as it was leased to a construction firm that is in backruptcy. The sales • information from this area is inadequate to establish a trend. However, the last two sales occured in 1986 and 1988 for $314,000 and $190,000. This is during a time of a sluggish market in Greeley SSG Ross B MiZhYren RAY 14-7 35th and "0" Street Mine • Greeley, Colorado l L UP-27 2 14 • . �� 'UGe � !r I I / Riverview Subdivision / 691 A;0- �Sterlin9 Sand & Gravel North 35th mine .. .r � /►ter 0 0 le 0 7 -2 7 rn a-nd the no -me O-A,-r- l the gravel mine h a no t caused any d,rL-.-nu-l'-n of ka �:t7hen rties. 7-Eisne---enpradeI U-1c pl-ope1l, --�-elltari-ies of the n, a he possizilll n e..ample of t.1 .rr"',eace note the following photograph and letter. l 1 1 1� 4. IRS - View from the west edge of the mine showing the home,-; In Riverview. SSG Ro-.;s B AMLken RAY 0 Best Way Paving Mine • This grave! mine is loc .'.ed on th r r1 ^.� T✓q r i• __ �, r,• t. _'r_ _ ii _ a 1 -. i; � eL::�.'� �_11 the Lla ;.�aav a �_'�avG a n and west are all resl _{ten .1 Ga: uses, :enced and difficult to observe. The followin-, .he outh boundary fence with a tower of the as-phall planT. visible in the backg=-ouns--'. The Operation Standards for this area appear a% erage to good. As you can note from the photographs, the area is fenced with a 6 to 8' wood fence, with some berming etc. I interviewed two residents of the Johnson Subdivision to the west and they reported Best Way was very diligent in keeping the dust and noise down. The expansion of this area was approved in October of 1978 and excavation has just reached the properties in Johnson Subdivision this year. This subdivision started selling in approximately 1975. I obtained sales data on 24 of the area's 40 lots and it was readily apparent that the homes in the area that. command the highest values are the homes that back to the mining area. Of the 12 lots in this block, 3.of them have sold since 1080 with sales prices ranging between $100,000 and S,125,000. One acant lot appears to have sold for $25,0: v in 19 T:rese prices v appear to generally fallow the Greeley real estate and do riot g?ve an indication of any diminution. SSG Rcss B. 1i11111 ken RM 1 MOWN • • .he ir! y*,ile r-�.-! i 7 i -� r 3 i r t l.-. � 7 r T t ,a t t,, _✓� r, `� t 1 i at i rl�. en,,u y ed tr'i�. pr vai. -� �� lr �r!ce also dYeU he?i_, ad sT,:�Te'.E t Wav ad_,uate:lon roi ed the an,JL ncise e. .al=ti= v', , � i ; - +� ; -! +_, tit - i'-�-' r 'rq ; r' r •7 v� t i ` . 7^ A « + 1.-n - - j -, v, -t r r r.-: • i-:.9 y,, -. i♦t_i._.'1 �:�... �. aa� ..aC �i �. tla♦ +ti%•_. �:ln:.; �al'G _-i. r, a'��i_1♦ _. •,•ll1 _..it av u7 "he rnlne would reoortrd?r be reci.air led i~.-t: a i14 acre Burr-:;unding horde sites, Both owners reportedly' ;purchased their homes after the mine -was operating and its' operation was not a c-gatiire factor in their decision to burr. The pnoT_graph shows +he first two !:;tnes in the subdivision that bach tc, the mine. This photo gives an indication of the Quality of the area. The following zoning map from this area of Greele"%, provides an indication of the mines proximity to the neighboring sub :=,,,isions and the city itself. This mine is in a more urban setting than the Seaworth Mine and the adjacent residential values do not suggest an,.,7 diminution of value as a result of the mining operations. SSG Ross E. A-11Y1.1k n R AI 13 • East 16th Ave Mine • • This mine is located on the east fringe of Greeley alo3 �g 16th A`Tenue, in a mi of � area of homes on sires and homes on tracts. This area is popular with people desiring fringe :area hod Dlb,-1 farms and horse acreages. This area is similar to the area neighboring the Seaworth mine on the east. The real estate sales information frorn this area is very limited, and due to the mix of types of properties, difficult to analyze. This mine directly wraps around 13 small residential properties. I obtained sales data from the 6 properties that are between the mine and E. 16th. These sales all occured between 1980 and 1987 and ranged frorn $50,000 to $72,000 with the last three sales occuring in 1983, 1984 and 1987 for $71,500, $72,000 and $64,500 respectively. This data is not adequate to establish any trends. This mine was reportedly operated in the 1950's but was not operated in the last 15 to 20 year, The current owners reportedly gained approval to operate in late 1984 and operate under very generic operation standards. This is a 251 acre mine that is currently not operating due to the economy. The following photograph shows the area of East 16th that includes the homes researched. The second photo shows the entrance to the mine. �� .��. i..> i,7 Ross B. A[11111i en RIL 1 14 ** .�` East 16th Avenue Mine : Greeley, Colorado • OD N S� \ \ r ■� Vn • cy �� o ! _ ■ 1 p oil Lj rp ��. o tc) w wo- cn East 16th Avenue Vn New VORIZONS Ross Milliken 38662 WCR 29 Eaton, CO 80615 Dear Ross: • • May 13, 1988 3527 W. 12th St., Suite A Greeley, Colorado 80634 Phone (303) 351-0922 In answer to your questions regarding the gravel pit adjacent to Riverview subdivision north of Greeley, Colorado where we lived for eight years, I would make the following comments: 1. Riverview subdivision is a small upscale subdivision with home values ranging from $160,000 to $300,000. 2. This subdivision is a choice place to live. There are no more lots available. 3. The gravel pit is directly adjacent to the west side of the property. 4. The opinion of the homeowners in this subdivision was that the gravel pit was a positive because of the lake that was being • created would add to the aesthetic value of the property because of enhanced view and the attraction of wildlife. 5. I cannot recall any negative comments from any resident at our Homeowner Association meetings. We all were anxiously awaiting the time when excavation would be far enough advanced so that the landscaping would further add to the aesthetic value. 6. There was also a much larger gravel operation directly across the Poudre river to the south of Riverview subdivision that also added to surroundings of the subdivision. This had advanced to a stage of a very large lake with a lot of birds and wildlife. Boating rights were available also. I hope this will help you in explaining to your clients that there are positive aspects to the mining of gravel in the vicinity of residential development. It does take a little time for these things to come to completion but we felt it was worth it. Sincerely, , /' d�� -7 Z-" , IL_- Hank Scheel Sales Associate 0 • I interviewed one of the mine owners who reported to me • that they recieved quite a bit of opposition when they started operation in 1984. They met with the adjacent homeowners and attempted to compromise on dust and noise control, greenbelts. etc. Apparently they now have a trespassing probl�rn with their neighbors enjoying the area, fishing in the lakes and using the mine as a riding and "3 wheel" recreation area. Although this area is perhaps the most similar to the Seaworth mine area due to its surrounding uses, it unfortunatly only provides minimal data. It is difficult to establish any indication of diminution or enhancement 'from this data. The Deep Pit This is the last mine that was investigated and perhaps the best example of a mine in an urban setting. This mine is operated by Flatirons Paving on the southeast edge of Boulder, CO. This mine, refered to as the "Deep Pit" by Boulder County Planning, was the expansion of an existing mine in 1902. When it expanded, it approached a residential development calle HyView, which sit:: on a • ridge to the west of the mine, seperated from the mine b-,,, a green belt area. Please note the following phctographs. ,,SSG Ross B. M1211ke n Rll-1 15 No Text • 0 • =: w of the current mining and crusting opera':on frcirn the east side of the HyView Subdivision. 0 View of the homes on the east side of the Hsi View Subdivision, photo taken from the same position as the photo above. SSG Ross B. Mllllken RAY 16 • �J • Tn:v is a Vje�',J,J lco?_1n.g nol th``ast' 11 orn }.he ?-me e Is the original mire which has now been reclairne,d. ',_,rou earl gee there is a condominium) de' elopment vrhich p,Cean_ to en.jo1:7 the amenity of the lake. • The Boulder County Planning department reports that when this expansion was applied for there was extreme opposition frorn the neighboring residential areas. Flatirons then originated and maintains very strong operations standards. It goes so far as requiring all equipment and trucks used in the mine to be painted sand tan to blend with the area, the access road to be berrned the height of a loaded tandem truck, sand piles to be placed to provide noise buffering, etc,. Reportedly they also got permission from OSHA to remove the backup alarms from their equipment and replace them with flashing lights. The planning department reports that after a few months of operation they stopped recieving complaints and have not recieved any since. I obtained the general sales data from the homes in blocks 1&2 of HyView Subdivision, This is the row of homes that back to the mine area. I obtained 12 sales from 1979 thru 1983 which encompasses the time the mine expanded, The 1979 sales averaged $69,950. The 1980 sales averaged $78,900, the 1981 sales averaged • $78,750, the 1982 sales averaged $86,966 and the 19 sales averaged $90,166. This data appears to follo-w the general trend of the economy through that period. This data shows a 22 r incnParce in the SSG Ross B. 11AMken Rho 17 0 • � 0 19 �1 rOHfr . � Boulder Co ie Deep Pit I* East 16th Mine - 'aisr+vflie•a'F rf•s+F•Ny r � ✓t.4t ..,,v .�_.,y.. _per•' r.Lwra . wneM "WP M- .rh••��. tS.. .. 't•`. At General location map --ram...: ... • • • average neighborhood prices of homes backing to the mine area in a 4 year period. This equals a 5.6% annual appreciation rate during a rather slow economic period. This data strongly suggest that this gravel mine has not caused any diminution to the neighborhood residential values. • C Summary As per your request I have researched and analyzed, in a general manner, data from 4 gravel mines and one industrial site, in an effort to observe if these uses appeared to have any diminution or enhancement effect on neighboring residential values. The 35th and "0" Street mine, the Best Way Paving mine and the Deep Pit all provided good data with equally good data available from adjacent residential areas. After compiling and analyzing this data, along with interviewing both home and mine owners, I am of the opinon that if the Seaworth mine is operated as you have indicated it will be in your preliminary operations standards, it will not have a diminutive effect on the neighboring residential values. ,SSG Ross B IYlllllken RAY III 0 • ASSUMPTIONS, CONTINGENCIES AND LIMITING CONDITIONS OF THE REPORT. The study and the Conclusion which precede, are expressly subject to the following assumptions, contingencies and limiting conditions together with any special limiting conditions specifically discussed in the report which are incorporated herein by reference. 1. Any legal information, which has been furnished, is assumed to be correct and the writer assumes no responsibility for matters legal in nature. 2. No responsibility is assumed as to the correctness of the property lines. Maps, sketches and similar items included in the report are for use as visual aids only and should not be construed as surveys or engineering reports. 3. The information contained in the report has been obtained from what the appraiser believes are reliable sources; however, the appraiser cannot guarantee or be responsible for the accuracy of this information. The appraiser cannot be responsible for any error reported by city officials or staff. In the instance of the market data information relied upon in the appraisal report, sources utilized are believed reliable; however for varying reasons, • it was impossible to completely inspect the properties considered, and it was necessary to rely upon information furnished by others, therefore, the appraiser cannot guarantee or be responsible for the accuracy of the information. 4. It was not possible to personally observe conditions beneath the soil, therefore, no representations are made as to these matters and unless specifically considered in the report. 6. Possession of this report does not carry with it the right of publication without the previous written consent of the appraiser. Additionally, neither the identification of the appraiser nor any of the material contained in this report may be included in any prospectus, newspaper publicity or advertising or as a part of any printed material, or used in offerings or representations in connection with the sale of securities of participating interest to the public. 7. The appraiser is not required to give testimony or to appear in court by reason of this report inasmuch as no prior • arrangements have been made in writing. SSG Ross B. AhlliAen Rhl 19 • QUALIFICATIONS ROSS B. MILLIKEN, RM INDEPENDENT REAL ESTATE APPRAISER EDUCATION Bachelor of Science in Agricultural Industries Management Colorado State University, 1978 Professional & Technical Courses: Colorado State University Real Estate Principles Farm and Ranch Appraisals Business Statistics American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers Procedures and Principles, 1981 Residential Valuations, 1982 Standards of Professional Practice, 1982 Valuation Procedures, 1987 Report writing seminar, ASFMRA, 1986 R-41c seminar, AIREA, 1987 Eminent Domain seminar ASFMRA, 1988 MEMBERSHIPS Residential Member, American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers Certified under Continuing Education Program. Affiliate member Fort Collins Board of Realtors. Affiliate member Loveland Board of Realtors. Licenced Real Estate Salesman, State of Colorado. EXPERIENCE August, 1980 - October. 1981 - Residential Appraiser for Home Federal Savings and Loan Association of the Rockies, Fort Collins, Colorado. October, 1981 to present - Independent Fee Appraiser, Fort Collins, Colorado REPRESENTATIVE CLIENTS Home Federal Savings & Loan, Federal Housing Authority, Ticor Mortgage Insurance, Hewlett Packard Credit Union, Security Pacific Mortgage, Fleet Funding, Associates in Finance, Columbia Savings, Weld Financial Services, Kodak Credit Union, First Colorado Lending, First Boulder Mortgage, United Bank of Fort Collins, Otero Savings, Chemical Bank, Colorado State University, City of Thornton, City of Fort Collins Light and Power Admn, Larimer County Dept of Public Works, misc Attorneys and Accountants. Qualified as an expert witness in Larimer County District Court. SSG Ross R. Milliken RAY 21 to 8. Neither all nor part of the contents of this report. shall be used for any purpose by any but the addressee without the previous written consent of the appraiser nor shall it be conveyed by any, including the addressee, to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales or other media without the express written consent and approval of the author, particularly as to any valuation conclusions, the identity of the appraiser or any reference to any professional society or institute or any initialled designations conferred upon the appraiser. 9. The delivery of this report to the addressee fulfills the writers assignment and in the event conferences or expert testimony are desired a separate agreement shall be made as to time and compensation. 10. na 11. na 12. na 13. na • 14. It should be understood that this report is an Opinion based upon the data available to the appraiser, subject to the appraisers interpretation of that data, and not a guarantee or warranty of value. • 15. The limit of liability shall be no more than the payment received for the appraisal services herein rendered. Appraiser ----------------------------------- Appraiser Date --------------------------- Date SSG Ross B. 17r z liken RM 0