The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20031115.tiff Planning Gepartme. GREELEY OFFICE March 3, 2003 MAR 1 2 2003 - r " :r Mr. David Long - J-. Weld County Commissioner Pro-Tem District 1 P. O. Box 758 Greeley, Co 80632 Re: Requesting your support opposing the Life Bridge Rezoning Request Dear Mr. Long, I am writing this letter to express my opinion and to provide you with a good argument for rejecting the proposed zoning change of LifeBridge Church. I reside at 2190 Meadow Lark Place in the Meadow Vale Farms Subdivision adjacent to the proposed site. In my lifetime, I have not been compelled to write to a government official until now. Further, I consider myself an open-minded individual devoid of a"Not in my back yard" attitude. In fact, when I first heard that the Life Bridge Church was planning to build on the land adjacent to our community I was rather delighted and thought that they would make great neighbors. However, I have since learned of the details and enormous nature of their planned development. I am very concerned. I feel that approving the proposed zoning change would be a great injustice to all the families that live in the developments adjacent to this land. My reasons for this belief are as follows: • Traffic nightmares, based on the traffic study, as Daily traffic increase could reach 28,000 car trips;this is comparable to the traffic that travels on 1-25 between Highway 7 and Highway 34. • Increased noise, air and light pollution far exceed that of a normal residential community because of traffic, proposed amphitheater and 5,000-to 6,000 space parking lots. • Loss of views beyond that of a normal residential neighborhood, several of the proposed buildings planned will reach from 60 to 200 feet tall. • Of great importance is safety to children, the result of increased traffic. • Loss of privacy due to tall buildings and large parking lots adjacent to existing residential communities • Unknown future use, indications are that LifeBridge will sell a large portion of land to help pay for the development. This land is directly west of Meadow Vale Farm. These points are not the imagined injustices of an easily influenced feeble-minded individual. Instead, these predictable effects will result if the proposed change comes to be. Thank you in advance for your understanding in this matter and for your influence in the rejection of this proposed zoning change. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me by phone at 720-296-5535. Charles A Hellmer EXHIBIT 2190 Meadow Lark Place /�� Longmont. CO 80504 2003-1115 March 3, 2003 Viola County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE Mr. Robert Masden MAR 1 2 2003 'Weld County Commissioner P., ..,. � c { (sF District3 i_K—p"a �" P. O. Box 758 Greeley, Co 80632 Fi;_ Re: Requesting your support against the development of Life Bridge Church on HWY 119 Dear Mr. Masden, I am writing this letter to express my opinion and to provide you with a good argument for rejecting the proposed zoning change of LifeBridge Church. I reside at 2190 Meadow Lark Place in the Meadow Vale Farm Subdivision adjacent to the proposed site. In my lifetime, I have not been compelled to write to a government official until now. Further, I consider myself an open-minded individual devoid of a "Not in my back yard° attitude. In fad, when first heard that the Life Bridge Church was planning to build on the land adjacent to our community I was rather delighted and thought that they would make great neighbors. However, I have since learned of the details and enormous nature of their planned development. I am very concerned. I feel that approving the proposed zoning change would be a great injustice to all the families that live in the developments adjacent to this land. My reasons for this belief are as follows: • Traffic nightmares, based on the traffic study, as daily traffic increase could reach 28,000 car trips; -- this is comparable to the traffic that travels on 1-25 between Highway 7 and Highway 34. • Of extreme importance is, safety to children, the result of increased traffic • Increased noise, air and light pollution far exceed that of a normal residential community because of traffic, proposed amphitheater and the 5,000 to 6,000—space parking lot. • Loss of views beyond that of a normal residential neighborhood, several of the proposed buildings planned will reach from 60 to 200 feet tall. Due to the proximity to Meadow Vale Farm, this will obliterate our views of the mountains, which is why we settled here. • Loss of privacy due to tall buildings and large parking lots adjacent to existing residential communities changes the ambiance of the farm community, which attracted us to this location. • Unknown future use, indications are that LifeBridge will sell a large portion of land to help pay for the development. This land is directly west of Meadow Vale Farm and in harms way of all we hold dear. These points are not the imagined injustices of an easily influenced feeble-minded individual. Instead, these predictable effects will result if the proposed change comes to be. Thank you in advance for your understanding in this matter and for your influence in the rejection of this proposed zoning change. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me by phone at 720-296-5535. r 2.11Leahtlik--- Teresa A Hellmer 2190 Meadow Lark Place Longmont, CO 80504 March 3, 2003 Weld County Planning Department ORE' FY OFFICE -- MAR 1 2 2003 Lois O'Neal �, ; 11278 Canyon Creek 1:_ E Longmont, Colorado 80504 Mr. David Long P.O. Box 758 Greeley, Colorado 80632 I am writing to protest the re-zoning of land in Weld County for the Lifebridge Church. The area of re-zoning is currently zoned for residential use. Lifebridge is asking for rezoning that would allow them to build a"multiplex" type project in a residential area. The fact that they are a church should have no bearing on this matter. If this request is approved Lifebridge plans to sell part of this property immediately for development to pay for their plans. The increase in traffic along WCR 3.5 would be enormous. This road would most certainly have to be widened to accommodate the volume of traffic generated from this development. Light and noise pollution from increased traffic and the outdoor amphitheater would be inappropriate for what is now a rural residential setting. I urge you to vote against this rezoning. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. • Sincerely, l(.79 e l-c-ate �'i,edc-�. Lois O'Neal EXHIBIT 'a/ Weld County Planning Pc ,ri ,,._.k GRP fl MAR 1 `d 2003 March 4,2003 Mr. David Long County Commissioners Office P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Dear David, It is out of great concern for our neighborhood that I write this letter to you. It is in our hopes that our voices are heard and that we can successfully get our concerns across to all. A very big decision can change so many of our lives and our security for our families. LifeBridge Development is going to effect our lives in a very negative way. The LifeBridge Development and its plans to move directly adjacent to our neighborhood threatens the welfare of our community, our peace but most of all the safety of our children. This community consists largely of new families. Each family that lives in our neighborhood has their own story and I am sure many will be the same. My family's story is simple and it matters. Like any young couple starting a family you ask yourself-where do we want to raise our children? That part was easy for us to answer because we knew we wanted a house in a great neighborhood, out of town a bit so our children could enjoy the country life but still be close to the city. We found a wonderful community. We moved to this neighborhood the day our son was born. Hard to imagine, but yes he came early and all the relatives went to moving for us. We felt safe here.No busy streets, a community of knowing your neighbors and a little bit of country life and very peaceful. We worked so hard to get here. All of these hopes and dreams for our family will be taken away if LifeBridge builds their development next to us. This not just a church. This will be the size of a college campus. I cannot imagine having 56,000 new cars every day coming in and out of our neighborhood. My community has plans to build a park and play area for our children directly off the street that LifeBridge wants to change to a main entrance to its city. This will also bring so much construction traffic for years to come. I am scared. I am worried. I don't want what we worked so hard for to all be taken away. Please listen to us. LifeBridge is not a church; it is a HUGE development. We moved here believing that the land next to us would one day be a residential development just like ours. THIS IS THE WRONG LOCATION FOR LIFEBRIDGE. We understand that Lifebridge is a church,however it is also a 6000 seat amphitheater, a 6000 auditorium, a college,an outreach center a youth center and parking lots bigger than the Twin Peaks Mall. Please help LifeBridge find a better-suited location for them. They do not belong in a rural area! They need to be in a place where the traffic and business are welcome. A place where business already exists not a place of families and children and quiet country roads. Thank you for taking the time to read my story and hear my concerns. I am not alone. We have to put our trust in you to make the right decisions for families living in weld county. Please help us. Sincerely, L'Oetitt'j m EXFIIBIT I'LL; County P!- .,.,. t G----- 0 i-E March 5, 2003 MAR 1 2 2003 1 c Mr. David Long P.O. Box 758 Greeley CO 80632 Dear Commissioner Long, It is again with deep concern that I am writing. We live near the proposed land development area of Lifebridge Christian Church and are extremely concerned of the possible re-zoning of the land off Highway 119. The majority of homeowners in the Meadowvale Farms and Elms at Meadowvale located here in East Longmont, specifically Weld County, because of the country feeling with larger lots and mountain views. Most of us in these 2 developments as well as Longview have young children and felt this was the best place for us to raise them. We are near the city, but closer to dirt roads, farm fields and cows - not something most people coming from a big city are used to. We are question the development of such a large complex so close to established neighborhoods. LBCC should have talked to property owners that would be affected before it got to this point. It would be great if it were a church, but with all the projects LBCC wants to build, it doesn't seem like a church at all. This will affect our children and families, safety, streets, and already taxed police, fire fighters, sheriff and water systems. We lived in Oklahoma for a while where the churches are big, but still didn't have the things LBCC proposes. They also built away from existing neighborhoods, yet they grew their membership numbers rapidly. People respected their intentions and they in turn were able to meet their missions"to bring people to God." I am concerned that the city of Longmont as well as Boulder County has already turned down LBCC's plans for such a mega project and I hope Weld County would do the same. They outbid the city on the land to use as open space and parks. This would have been more beneficial to all. It will effect the beautiful mountain views when entering into Longmont and take focus away from the mountain that gave the city its name. I am for progress, but not at the expense of others. There is land for sale off WCR 7 on both the East and West sides (310 acres on each side of the road complete with water rights, to be exact) that LBCC could easily build their complex there and not impact neighbors. They would also have clear views of the mountains as well as easy access from I-25 and Highway 66. Thanks you for listening. Sincerely, fil (.614 'I'rt,f4 7�� Greg a Kim Kittilson and family EXHIBIT I /a3 Virginia E. Guderjahn 14537 Sandra Jean's Way Longmont, CO 80504 email - gingerotr@att.net Home Phone 303-684-9403 March 10, 2003 Weld County Planning Department Ms. Kim Ogle GnrEl FY OFFICE Weld County Department of Planning Services MAR 1 2 2003 Weld County Administrative Offices 1555 North 17th Avenue Ft!) gQ, p p Greeley, CO 80631 Y V l Dear Ms. Ogle I am writing this letter in support of the proposed LifeBridge Christian Church and Community Center on the LifeBridge property near Longmont. My family and I have not selected our church home here in Longmont, however we have attended several church activities and services over the four years since we moved to Colorado. We have taken advantage of holiday services & programs, the Children's Library, Kidspun Holidays and a variety of other activities. I have had other community members recommend the parent-child activities and outings as well once my children are old enough to participate. I have also attended funeral services for individuals who were not members of LifeBridge but needed a large enough facility to house the services. I feel that the activities that LifeBridge provides for children and families have added a wonderful opportunity for the families, like myself, who do not attend church on a regular basis but still want to participate in some wholesome Christian activities. In addition, my son has attended Sonshine Daycare and Preschool for the past 2 1/2 years. Prior to our move to Colorado, my children attended a Christian daycare in Montana since birth. We tried a public daycare in the Longmont community due to needs for transportation for my oldest to and from kindergarten. However, this was not a good match for our needs. We stayed there for one year but were thrilled to find Cathy and the staff of Sonshine housed at LifeBridge. They have provided loving and supportive care in a Christian environment which I feel has been an excellent growing opportunity for our son. He is now in kindergarten and only attends part-time this year. He continues to blossom with their love and support and thoroughly enjoys his days at "preschool". I was saddened to have to tell Cathy what we all knew - we will not be returning next fall as Aaron will be in first grade. As with any change there will be those who oppose it, but I hope that you will weigh the"negative impact" in proportion to the positive, wholesome and spiritual opportunities that will be provided to a large portion of this community. I think that the LifeBridge Christian Church has and will continue to fill a void in the needs of families and especially children and will only make more of a positive difference in the lives that they touch in the proposed facility. 5i cerely, g EXHIBIT <ir E Guirgi is E. der a.n Pa nt and Longmont Community Member I /a/ Co;:!ay Piano:mg Department CT-0-VIFY OFFICE MAR 1 2 2003 11713 Victor Dr. nt i^ ` Longmont,CO 80504 ; ' February 19,2003 Commissioner David Long Weld County Board of Commissioners P.O.Box 758 Greeley,CO 80632 Dear Mr. Long: I am writing to express my sincere concern over the proposal for re-zoning presented by the Lifebridge Church for their property at Hwy.119 and County Road 3 '/z. The development plan submitted by Lifebridge in no way conforms to the Weld County requirement for congruent development and residential zoning. My objections to the plan are: 1. Traffic. I have driven by the current Lifebridge building on Hwy. 66 right after Sunday services. Traffic was jammed in both directions,and they required a police officer directing traffic. In addition, a police officer was killed while performing such a service for them at Christmas time a couple years ago. The roads around the proposed development site are even less capable of carrying this kind of traffic load. 2. Noise and Light Pollution. Unincorporated Weld County is a quiet,peaceful place to live. Indeed,its rural character is the very reason that many of us choose to live here. A"24/7"use complex would change this area into another suburb,like so many others. Also, the 6000-seat outdoor amphitheater is large enough to hold rock concerts,and there is no way to stop that from happening once the facility is built. Putting the equivalent of Fiddler's Green in the middle of a residential area is absurd. 3. Environmental and Aesthetic Impact. Weld County has no emissions test requirement for vehicles. The traffic level from the proposed development would create smog. A parking lot that size would almost certainly generate polluted run-off into the area's surface water. Migrating waterfowl and other wildlife use these bodies of water. In addition,there is no community in this area,except urban Denver,that contains buildings more than five stories tall. The fifteen-story structures proposed by Lifebridge would dwarf everything else in the area,including the natural beauty. 4. Cost. Lifebridge,as a non-profit organization,does not pay taxes. However,I do. Lifebridge won't be paying for extra police,fire,and rescue personnel,I will. Lifebridge won't be paying for road improvements and maintenance,I will. Indeed,every resident of Weld County will. Development in this area is inevitable. In theory, a church makes a wonderful neighbor. However,a church is a three-story building,used heavily on Sunday by 1000-2000 people. A church loans its facilities to members for special occasions,not to renters for daily use. A church is a place for spiritual reflection, not a"24/7"center of commercial enterprise. Lifebridge has not proposed a church;they have proposed a strip-mall/entertainment complex. And I object. Sincerely, Gretchen Pratt EXHIBIT /a5 Yield Co_ B•eeled Auer MAR 1 2 2003 1167i Mowteow&erd Circle l.outev owt, CO 80.504 • Hip r Phowe:303-�}2-2816 EI%& LL: K,SAL ER1@proAguO wet Dear County Commissioner David Long, RFC This letter is in regards and with much concern for the neighbor- hoods that are going to endure the proposed Mega Church on the land just North of Highway 119 and East of CR 3 1/2 . Many of my concerns deal with the fact that our quiet residential area will be turned into an area with towering buildings, taller than any building in and around the city of Greeley, (ruining the views of Longs Peak and Mt. Meeker which is the reason many of us bought homes in this area) a multitude of traffic problems with the thousands of people pre- dicted to be coming in and out of this complex on a daily basis, let alone the huge amount of traffic on the weekends . The Weld County Master Plan calls for this area to be used as residential . When we bought our house, we believed that the land to the West of us would be used as residential . Weld County considers a church a reasonable addition to a residential area; however, what LifeBridge is building can hardly be considered a church. Mind you we have no qualms about living next to a Church, in fact we rather like the idea of a Church in the neighborhood, BUT not a Church the size that LifeBridge is proposing! Currently LifeBridge Church at its location on highway 66 in Long- mont has a police officer on duty directing traffic during regular worship hours, I'm sure you wouldn' t appreciate that in your back yard any more than we would. As you know the city of Longmont has long been opposed to this de- velopment, and they have conveyed their concerns to Weld County. Un- fortunately, this development falls outside of the intergovernmental agreement with Weld and Longmont. Longmont is concerned about the entrance into the city being snarled in traffic, and the views of Longs Peak to be impeded by huge skyscraper architecture. The area that Lifebridge is building on was stated to be residential in the Multi-Use Development District plan. The loop hole is that residential allows churches . However a huge complex like the one planned is not the church the zoning regulations spoke to. My plea is that you put yourself in our place and imagine what it would be like to have a Church this size in your back yard. Thank you for your time and consideration. Becky Auer EXHIBIT jagg i Planning Denart�ment GREEI4 0 ciDe To: Mr. Kim Ogle Weld CountyMAR 1 2 2003 From: Ee Wah Koh ECE, \ItP Re: LifeBridge Church Re-zoning Application I am writing to you as a very concern resident living within 500 yards of the proposed development by LifeBridge Christian Church. My husband and I, along with our two young children live in the Meadowvale Farms development adjacent to the site which LBCC has proposed to build its campus. As a regular church attendee myself I was initially quite please that a church was going to build next to us. I was however taken a back when it was revealed that this was going to be far more then your neighborhood church in terms of the extent and size of the development. At this point, I see the scale of their proposal being incompatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood in view of LBCC height,traffic, noise and possibly lighting requests. I am also worried for the safety of my children for I am sure that given the higher number of human traffic coming through(not all of which will be church related), there will be more opportunities for crime to occur. We chose to live out in this semi-rural neighborhood for it's peace and quiet, green belt open spaces and yes the view. In view of LBCC plans, all these will be taken away from us given our proximity to their development. I beg you to consider LBCC request for re- zoning with care and caution. Regards Ee Wah Koh 303 485 7128 markeewa@peakpeak.com peakpeak.com cc. Mr. Glenn Vaad Mr. David Long M J Geile Mr. William Jerke Mr. Robert Masden r EXHIBIT (I /o?? Waid County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE Janet Russell MAR 1 2 7003 Richard Salm °f: ' 11713 Montgomery Circle �_: -- Longmont, Co. 80504 March 9, 2003 To: Weld County Planning Commissioners Re: Lifebridge PUD application for re-zoning, case# PZ-1004 We are writing this letter with the intent that the following comments will go on record with the above- mentioned application. We live in the Elms at Meadowvale subdivision, just East of the Lifebridge Christian Church (LBCC) property. We purchased our home in May of 2001 . At that time, we were told that the land to the West would be developed as residential. Moreover, inspection of the Weld County MUD master-plan confirmed that this property would be developed as "Low intensity Neighborhood Center" to the South and "residential/agricultural, mixed intensity" to the North. We trust that this document will carry considerable weight when reviewing this application for development in this area. We are aware of the PUD zoning application and have reviewed its contents. We understand the application includes a request for senior living center to the South. We have no concerns with this aspect of the application. However, We strongly object to the LBCC PUD zoning change for LBCC and feel that their plans are incompatible with current neighboring land uses primarily because of the entitlements they are seeking for the campus portion of the property. The following outlines our concerns : Heights The LBCC request calls for buildings up to 120ft in height with architectural elements up to 150ft in height. Currently, there is no precedence for buildings of this height anywhere in Weld County. To claim that buildings of this height would be compatible with residential neighborhoods with maximum heights of 30 ft is absurd. If LBCC were allowed to build such structures, they would become the major visual focal point for not only our neighborhood, but also all of Southwestern Weld County. We EXHIBIT cannot see where such structures would be necessary for worship activities . Furthermore, the MUD states that this land be developed as residential/agricultural, mixed intensity. It stretches the imagination to consider that a campus with 1 . 5 million square feet of structures with heights up to 120ft could be construed as agricultural/residential. To find buildings of such magnitude, one must travel to Denver and look at the Pepsi Center, which is 100 feet tall and has a square footage of 675, 000. Even in an urban setting, the Pepsi Center is a major focal point. If such a structure was built, it would not only blot out the Western sky for us, but our entire community. Such a structure would represent unreasonable visual pollution to the degree that we would not be able to turn our heads without seeing this behemoth of a building towering over us . This would not be compatible, but oppressive. We once lived in Rock Creek near Level 3 Communications and the height of that building was not anywhere near what LBCC is asking for. We know firsthand what the visual impact was; it was enormous. We would not, however, object to maximum heights of 45ft which would be compatible with surrounding land uses . Traffic: The traffic study has indicated that at full build out, traffic at Hwy 119 and WCR 3 '-2 could reach LOS F unless Hwy 119 is expanded to 6 lanes . This is more traffic than is currently present at the intersection of Hover and Nelson Roads (LOS D to E) . It is clear that the existing road infrastructure is inadequate to carry such traffic loads . We are very concerned about traffic surging through our subdivision. The traffic study stated that there could be as many as 28, 000 car trips per day generated by the LBCC PUD. Bruce Grinnell of LBCC has said that there could be wait times from 15 to 20 minutes to get out from 3 1 onto 119. It is human nature for people to find the fastest route and this means people will drive on our residential streets. This is unacceptable to us, as it will greatly increase the safety risk for the residents of the Elms . Steps must be taken to ensure traffic does not flow through the Elms at Meadowvale or greatly reduce the amount of traffic generated by this development . In addition, the MUD has shown this area to be residential . We urge the planning commission to limit LBCC' s lot coverage to 50% to be compatible with the neighboring residential areas. This could help mitigate the volume of traffic generated in the first place. Pearl Howlett Connectivity We are aware the Drew S . at Public works has insisted upon connectivity between developments and has designated that Pearl Howlett connect to the LBCC PUD. Initial sketches have shown Pearl Howlett connecting to the LBCC campus parking lot. This would turn Pearl Howlett into a major thoroughfare for traffic hoping to avoid delays at 3 . Our children will be crossing Pearl Howlett to get to a proposed park. We will be crossing it to get our mail. Allowing Pearl Howlett to connect to the LBCC campus would be an egregious assault on our safety and quality of life. This must not happen. I understand the need for connectivity in principle, but connecting a quiet residential neighborhood like the Elms to the LBCC PUD entitlement equivalent to twice the size of Twin Peaks Mall is clearly incompatible and makes no sense. LBCC, to their credit, has listened to this concern has agreed remove this connection. We urge the planning commission to support this change. Light Pollution: We have concerns regarding possible light pollution. We have seen sketch plans that show parking for as many as 6000 cars ! We are very concerned about the impact the lighting in such a parking lot can cause. I addition, the LBCC PUD application requests entitlement for buildings of up to 120ft tall. If such buildings were to be built, lights from windows within the building could also create enormous light pollution. This was the case in Rock Creek by Level 3 . One of the reasons we moved to Weld County and the Elms in particular is that we can see the night sky and stars within it. We urge the planning commission to require adequate mitigation of such light pollution. Noise Pollution: LBCC has agreed to create berms surrounding the PUD area to help reduce road noise. We applaud this change, however, we have serious concerns about the 1500 seat outdoor amphitheater being requested. We want LBCC to be restricted to the residential standard of noise limits to ensure that we will not have to listen to their activities . Moreover, we want to see structural enhancements such as berms that will contain such noise to residential levels . Disregard for Zoning and Neighbors LBCC has a history of zoning violations with Boulder County. We have records of such violations as operating a daycare center without a permit; grading and putting in a road without a permit; putting up a large outside lighted display without a permit or proper wiring; non-control of noxious weeds, and parking of large run-down trailers without permits. In a conversation with Graham Billingsly, Boulder County Planner, he characterized Boulder County' s dealings with LBCC with respect to the codes, as "difficult" . Moreover, we are aware of several current neighbors that have lodged multiple complaints about such things as drunken loud parties occurring late at night, kids riding motorcycles on the illegal dirt road behind the current church creating noise and dust for the neighbors. We also know that LBCC allowed the Longmont SWAT team to train on their property, but failed to notify the neighbors of such activities . Naturally, some of the neighbors were alarmed and frightened to see armed men walking around behind their homes . To be clear, we would not oppose offering any SWAT team a place to practice, but not notifying neighbors of such activities demonstrates a general inconsideration and disregard on LBCC' s behalf. Bruce Grinnell himself stated to us and other homeowners in the Elms that we can only judge them for what they have done in the past . Based on that record, we can only expect more of the same from them; inconsideration for us, their neighbors, and code violations for the County. Summary In Closing, Weld County Planning has a legally binding responsibility to ensure that any new development is compatible with surrounding land uses. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines compatible as "capable of existing together in harmony". The land entitlements requested by LBCC do not meet these criteria. Furthermore, LBCC has a poor record of being "in harmony" with their neighbors or County codes for that matter. We do not trust that they will voluntarily operate within the restrictions set forth in the zoning and therefore request that the zoning change be denied. If the planning commission decides to approve it, then we urge the commission to err on the side of being conservative and severely limit the entitlements LBCC is seeking. Respectfully yours, --11L-j(j?" 1 A- (Th. Richard D. Salm D. Russell &Id County De -r; nent GREELEY OFFICE Mr.David Long MAR 1 2 Z003 Weld County commissioner P.O.Box 758 1 .2 L j e. 1 Greeley,CO 80632 RE CH I February 19,2003 Dear Mr.Long, I am a resident of the Elms at Meadow Vale community in Weld County,just outside Longmont,CO. It has recently come to my attention that Lifebridge Christian Church plans to build a very large complex of buildings,including an amphitheater right next to our residential neighborhood. Currently,the land next to our neighborhood that was recently purchased by the church is zoned for agricultural use.The church has petitioned the county commissioners to rezone the land so that they can build a large church complex.This church complex is to include an amphitheater the size of Fiddler's green in Denver with buildings as high as 200 feet that would block most residents'view of the mountains along the Front Range. Along with this complex,they plan on building a parking lot twice the size of Twin Peaks Mall in Longmont. The Weld County Master Plan calls for the area to be eventually rezoned residential,and it is not uncommon for churches to be built in residential areas.These churches are normally one or two building affairs and open on a Saturday or Sunday for worship. Lifebridge would also like the same privilege to build a church in a zoned residential area,and most residents in the area have no complaints about a church being built here.The difference is that the church that Lifebridge would like to build,would be open 24 hours a day and include commercial developments such as an amphitheater,a college,an outreach center,a youth center and much more.Lifebridge church is trying to take advantage of the fact that they want to build a church on zoned residential land,however the church they would like to build is much larger in scope than any church currently built in Colorado,and would violate the county zoning codes by including commercial structures. The Lifebridge church has purchased the land in Weld county tax-free citing that they are church and a non-profit organization. Considerable county resources however will be required to upkeep roads in the area due to increased traffic that could approach over 50,000 cars per day according to a required study by the Department of Transportation. Many roads will need to be paved in the area. Police and sheriff patrols will need to be increased to deal with this increased traffic,as well as a potential increase in crime in the area.As a parent of two small children,I am especially concerned for the safety of my children on the residential streets in our neighborhood.The church plan also includes opening Pearl Howlett street that runs through our neighborhood into the church complex.This street runs by our mail center,and a future neighborhood park.This will undoubtedly risk the safety of all residents who live in the area. We had originally moved to the Elms at Meadow Vale subdivision,which borders the Barbour Ponds State Park because we were attracted to the serene,rural lifestyle that can be found here. We live right across the street from a dairy farm and have a beautiful view of a large nesting area for great blue herons right outside the park.These herons make regular trips back and forth to the Union reservoir to the west of our home. The impact of a large mega-church to these birds and other waterfowl that inhabit this area will be devastating.I am also an amateur astronomer,and will undoubtedly be impacted by the increased light pollution in our area. The three residential communities that lie next to the land purchased by Lifebridge represent over $200 million dollars of tax paid properties by hard working people that want a quiet lifestyle to raise families, and to retire.County commissioner Glen Vaad who represents us in Weld county is an elder in the Lifebridge church and has recused himself from the rezoning vote. I find it very disconcerting that a commissioner who lives in our area ran for office at the same time that the Lifebridge church was attempting to buy the land. I am also very concerned about his influence on other Weld county EXHIBIT commissioners concerning the upcoming vote on rezoning the land,and allowing the church to build a mega complex right next to our neigborhood. It has also come to my attention that some members of the church have been buying land next to the land proposed for the church complex.If the land is rezoned to allow commercial development in the area,these persons stand to make large profits by reselling their land to commercial entities. Other portions of land purchased by the church have been slated to be sold in the future to finance the construction of the church. This land could also fall into the hands of commercial developers and would go against the original Weld county master plan for residential developments only. As a concerned resident of the Elms at Meadow Vale area,I am asking you please do not vote to allow the Lifebridge mega church complex to be built in our area.This would break the law and go against the original desires of county planners to allow only residential development in our area. The Lifebridge mega church complex is in no way a residential development. Sincerely, %.2.X7 Dr. Erik Wahlin 11714 Beasly Road Longmont,CO 80504 —Rest bet aft 0373 -36.c p lour�f4i�. l�oc�4> Weld County Planning Department Boy-OY SOUTHWEST BUILDING Rod Schmidt MAR 1 1 21111 —From: Rod Schmidt RECEIVED .ent: Monday, March 10, 2003 12:04 PM V To: Weld Cty - Glenn Vaad; Weld Cty- David Long; Weld Cty - MJ Geile; Weld Cty- William Jerke; Weld Cty - Robert Masden; Weld Cty - Kim Ogle,;;,; Co u'6, P',arning Dc:7artncrt Cc: Weld Cty- Vicky Sprague; Weld Cty - Kim Ogle Subject: LifeBridge PUD Application Good Morning, • * ` , • By way of introduction, I have been a resident of Meadowvale Farms in excess of 5 years, am currently working within the opposition group that was originally formed to oppose LifeBridge Community Church's application to Weld County for a change from the current MUD zoning to PUD zoning, and I am also serving as a conduit/mediator between the opposition group and Bruce Grinnell and Reggie Golden of LBCC. First, I would like to make my position clear with all of the members of the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I do not oppose development of the property adjacent to Meadowvale Farms and the Elms!! While I purchased the lot to build a custom home on 6 years ago, to build my families "refuge" in the country, I did so understanding development would eventually come to Southwest Weld county, and as such, accepted the inherent risks associated with future development potential. Over the course of the past 3 weeks, a resident of the Elms and myself initiated conversation with MSSR's Golden and Grinnell, in an effort to establish a platform in which to more formally communicate issues of our development to LifeBridge, as well as open the doors for further dialogue that could potentially generate concessions on both sides. Our ultimate intent within the smaller group is to position our developments (including Longview) to come to the zoning hearing on March 18th with all issues successfully addressed by LifeBridge, and NO OPPOSITION en masse to the development (this would not preclude individual opposition however). I'm pleased to say LifeBridge has shown a willingness to work with us, has already made some concessions relative to our initial meeting, and has taken issues not initially addressed under further advisement, with the intent of communicating back to our group sometime this week. One issue remains a "sticking point". and unfortunately is the "Hot Button"that keeps the two sides very far apart in terms of working out a solution. That issue as you are probably aware, is heights within the Bulk requirements of the PUD. Ladies and Gentlemen, as a land owner in Weld county, as well as a homeowner in Meadowvale, I can see no justification for ANY commercial building exceeding 60' high in rural Weld County!! While I have already expressed my willingness to work with the church in establishing the ability for a variance over 60' (I would still like to see the variance applicable on a MAXIMUM of 15% of total building footprints, and up to a maximum of 90' on the variance), I can see no justification for establishing maximum heights in the bulk requirements of 120'!! I do believe on the other hand, my proposal of a 90' maximum on 15% of total building footprint is a solution that COULD be supported by a majority of the community, and would allow LifeBridge the flexibility in designing their theater in phase 1 with a flyover!! I would encourage all of you to consider the same solution as well. Secondly, there is HUGE resistance to access via Pearl Howlett Road. It's my assessment that LifeBridge would just as soon not have this access as well. I would plead with you to make every attempt to avoid the interconnectivity between the developments at this time. A combination of safety concerns, and additional traffic flowing from a commercial "Type" environment through a residential neighborhood does not seem compatible. IF the county planners come back with a recommendation to incorporate this access between our communities, my personnal feelings are the meeting could erupt. This assessment comes from observing the passion members of the Elms have relative to this issue. One last final thought- i do NOT blame LifeBridge in total for what I would consider to be an over-aggressive positioning taken relative to heights. By staff members in Weld County's planning department's own admission, they encouraged LifeBridge to ask for the maximum heights within the bulk requirements of the PUD. My own personnel belief is that asking for something SLIGHTLY in excess of actual requirements would have still given LifeBridge flexibility in building design, would have been more responsible advice from your planning staff, and COULD (although I could probably be contested on this statement) have alleviated some of the anguish our communities and LifeBridge have endured the past few months. Feel free to contact me if you have any further questions at the number below. EXHIBIT 1 1 /30 Rork Rod Schmidt Acosta Sales& Marketing - Director of Client Services 3045 S Parker Road Denver, Co. 80014 303-923-6076 (Denver office) 303-774-7913 (home office) 909-720-8827 (cell) 2 Local Page 3 of 6 LifeBridge opponents voice concerns at meeting By Kevin Darst The Daily Times-Call LONGMONT -Leaders of a neighborhood group fighting a proposed 313-acre church complex east of Longmont said Tuesday that they had been"disenfranchised" by the recusal of a Weld County official from the matter. That amounts to taxation without representation,the basis for the 1776 Boston Tea Party,said Pete Ones. Ories lives in the Elms at Meadowvale subdivision,which would border LifeBridge Christian Church's Project LifeBridge on the east. "It creates a very serious problem of democratic accountability," Cries told about 120 people at a neighborhood meeting Tuesday night. Weld County Commissioner Glenn Vaad, a 10-year elder at LifeBridge, said last fall that he would refrain from voting on LifeBridge's change-of-zone application if it came to the commission. Vaad repeated the vow in a letter to his four fellow commissioners in January. But that leaves District 2,which includes neighbors of the proposed church complex,without a voice at the county's highest level, Ories said. The proposed church community -which includes plans for retail,commercial and residential space, as well as an amphitheater-would span 313 acres southeast of Union Reservoir between Colo. Highway 119 and Weld County Road 26 and take 50 years to complete. LifeBridge applied for a change of zone from agricultural to planned unit development. The application is schSto be heard at the Weld County planning commission' March meeting. County commissioners would make the final decision on the application. Residents near the proposed complex say it would not be compatible with existing development,a requirement of Weld County's mixed-use development and planned unit development standards. "It's a megaplex of buildings that just doesn't fit with what we have," said Michelle Floriolli,who lives in the Longview subdivision to the west of the proposed church. They also worry about increased traffic through their EXHIBIT residential neighborhoods. /3/ http://www.longmontfyi.com/local.htm 2/19/2003 Local Page 4 of 6 "We'd prefer just residential traffic," said Rich Salm,who lives in the Elms subdivision. LifeBridge,currently located on Colo.Highway 66,west of U.S. Highway 287,traces its roots in Longmont to 1889,when members gathered in an old town hall, according to the church's Web site. Long known as First Christian Church,it changed its name to LifeBridge Christian Church in 1999. Gries and others urged those in the crowd,who came primarily from three subdivisions surrounding the proposed church complex,to sign a petition,write letters to the Weld County commissioners and attend the planning commission's March hearing. The planning commission will make a recommendation on the project before sending it to the county commissioners for a final decision. "We don't know why (Weld County government)would want to be hasty with something of this impact," Gries said. Kevin Darst can be reached at 303-776-2244,Ext.405,or by e-mail at kdarst@times-call.com. Back to the top /— Shooting suspect's pals have rap sheets By Travis Henry The Dai)yTimes-Call LONGMO The suspect in last week's murder of a gas attendant hang with a rough crowd that has a penchant for guns and crime, according to police and records. David Samuel Rodriguez,21, also shot himself in the hand in July while showing ofta handgun to some of those friends, according to police records. Although no arrest in the murder of 86-year-old Charles Wilson has been made,police are focusing most of their attention on Rodriguez and many of his associates. Only Rodriguez has been publicly namedas a suspect. "We are still talking to people and following up on leads," Cmdr. Craig Earhart said Tuesday. "I thin\k,we are making progress. Each day brings more leads we need to follow up on." Wilson was found dead in an attendant's booth at erless Tyre Co., 1380 S. Main St.,early Thursday morning. olice believe he was shot and killed sometime between 9 pan\and ^ midnight the night before. \ Rodriguez was arrested by police on unrelated assault charges \ http://www.longmontfyi.com/local.htm 2/19/2003 Weld County Planning Department 1 STEVE AND LEIANNE KOCH GrFI-GY nr"ICE 1959 BLUE MOUNTAIN ROAD LONGMONT. CO 80504 MAR 1 `9,, 2003 i If =Tim March 6, 2003 Dear Weld County Commissioners: I am writing on behalf on my family. We moved to the Farms at Meadow Vale last September. My husband and I have worked very hard to afford this area-it being one of the very few"country type" landscapes in the Longmont area. We moved here from the city of Longmont. We used to live on the west side where the traffic has become horrendous. We moved here to enjoy the stars at night, the lack of traffic and the serenity of the landscape. We paid a considerable amount of money(for us) to acquire one acre of property with a house that we can spend the rest of our lives in. My husband and I feel that our money was well spent. I was aware of a church that was to be built in the area. A church can be a wonderful addition to a neighborhood community. I had no idea of the scope of the LifeBridge plan until the past couple of months when the information has come out about it. My husband and I would have never moved into this area had we been aware of size of this project. We would probably still be living in the city-but saving for a move to Berthoud or Hygiene. The whole purpose of our move to Meadow Vale was to enjoy the country type landscape and to escape the constant traffic, noise and light pollution of the city. We are writing to you today to please consider where we live and how the surrounding land should be zoned. This area is not appropriate for the type of development that LifeBridge church is asking for. It should not be zoned for commercial development. We would much rather have homes in the fields next to us than a commercial retail center- not to mention the college campus, amphitheater, medical center, massive parking lot (with all the lights), and the tall structures that the church is proposing. This area was not intended to be a high traffic, high density area and what LifeBridge is proposing is just that. This area was originally planned for residential zoning. There is plenty of commercial property south of Hwy 119 that is already zoned commercial-why couldn't that be used instead. What this church/corporation is planning, (and let's be honest it's really about a corporation using the"church" as a cover), should really be built in a wide open area with highway access -that can be built around in the years to follow, not in a restricted area between three housing developments and a single lane road. Following are just a few of our concerns: Who will handle the traffic complaints and accidents? At phase 1, projected traffic will increase by 2,515 car trips a day, and by full build out up to 28,132 trips a day. These are EXHIBIT (I /sot the church estimates and I'm sure they are conservative. How many accidents could that possibly translate into on a daily basis? The law enforcement agency is already understaffed. Who will pay for the extra police force required once the church, homes, college campus and auditorium go in-not to mention the police requirement during the construction faze. Where will the water come from? Can the county supply enough water for 3,000 people in a church service who might have to use the toilet facilities, or 1,500+ concert -goers at the proposed auditorium. How about the 15,000+ people expected for church at full build out? That doesn't even include the water requirements of senior housing, the childcare center, the adult education center, the 1 acre site homes and the water necessary to irrigate the landscaping that the church says it will put in. And that is t phase 1 of the project. Who will pay for the highway construction that will be needed to handle 2,515+ car trips a day? The 28,132 trips at full build out? Who will pay to expand Road 31/2 to 4 even 6 lanes. What about Highway 119? Is that highway adequate to carry the amount of traffic that this complex will create? Will the church and it's constituents be willing to help foot the bill for the expansion of 119, or will that be left to the taxpayers? What kind of roads will be necessary to accommodate that kind of traffic? Can you imagine the air and noise pollution that this will create? What about the building heights the church is requesting or the square footage necessary to accommodate a small community of 15000+ people. Buildings with heights up to 120 feet have been requested. The heights of these buildings do not comply with the Weld County codes requiring building heights to be in proportion to the surrounding areas. These extremely tall structures would be nestled in between one-story homes to the West and two-story homes to the East. The church campus buildings are expected to have 1.5 million square feet at full build out. Who's idea was it to try to locate this mega-complex in between 3 housing developments? Could they not find somewhere else to go? This is no place for that kind of traffic-even in their so called "50 year build out plan" We all know this will be built out much sooner than 50 years and then where will they go when they run out of room here? What about the impact to Union reservoir? How will the wildlife be affected there by all the future traffic. Will a new road be built to keep the pollution and traffic as far away as possible from the reservoir. We have bald eagles now living in the trees around the reservoir. . Has an environmental study been done to determine the potential damage to the reservoir and surrounding wildlife-or how to limit the effects of this mega-complex in the area - or does anyone even care about that? How come our commissioner(Glenn Vaad) is a elder of the church and now has recused himself and therefore we have no one to fight for our rights as Weld County property owners and taxpayers? Will you listen? We have seen the structure that LifeBridge now calls home. It's all concrete and parking lot-with no landscaping whatsoever. We have waited in the traffic jams that just their patronage creates on Sunday mornings in Longmont. We do not want something even larger and more obtrusive built in this quiet area that has become our home. We chose this area to get away from the commotion. Commercial zoning will allow more than a church to be built, and they have plans for a whole lot more than a church. They have plans for a large community with more than 15,000 people on Sundays alone. That's equivalent to a major sporting event at the Pepsi Center. Is Weld County prepared for the issues that will arise with that kind of growth in just one small area? This church complex should be built somewhere else! We cannot accept the vehicle traffic that this mega-complex will create. We did not move out here to hear the constant drone of traffic on Sunday mornings, or to get stuck in traffic. We can just drive into Longmont if we ever miss it- and we don't! We realize the area will be eventually developed-but it must be done so in a way that will tie in with the existing communities out here. It must be done with consideration to those that already live here as well, and with respect to the environment around us. Sincerely, rfr7'T` ac c Steve and LeiAnne Koch Cc: Weld County Commissioners Ms. Monica Daniels-Mika Mr. Kim Ogle (Dept. of Planning Services) The Daily Times Call The Greeley Tribune r—• Weld County Planning Department CREELEY OFFICE County Commissioners MAR 1 2 2003 Mr. Glenn Vadd I , {C: V 5 Mr. David Long M.J. Geile it_l Mr. William Jerke Mr. Robert Masden P.O. Box 758 Greeley, Co. 80630 Dear Commissioners, My family has recently moved to the Elms @ Meadowvale in Longmont. We were unaware at the time that a huge commercial endeavor was being proposed a mere few hundred yards away from our home. That endeavor being the LifeBridge amphitheater, college, youth, outreach center, and oh yes, church. It is my understanding that the Weld County Master Plan calls for the area in question to be used as residential property. Now I fully understand and welcome the fact that a church can be a fine, community building addition to a residential neighborhood. I cannot accept the idea of a 10 to 20 story structure with parking to rival the likes of Invesco Field, and road traffic through our neighborhood in excess of 50,000 trips per day. We bought our home here so our children can enjoy the open space and somewhat peaceful lifestyle. We implore you to consider this re-zoning very carefully, and put yourselves in our position. This is not a "church" being proposed. This is big business playing the loophole tax game. If LifeBridge wants to build a real church with a single structure a couple of stories tall with traffic on Saturday & Sunday then we are all for it, but don't try to rezone our neighborhood for your hidden agenda. This commercial tax-free zoning would be an abomination of justice to the hundreds of families that live in this beautiful area and we hope and pray that the right decision will be made. Sincerely The Vazzano Family 11 EXHIBIT /33 Wald County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE MAR 1 2 2003 William S. Norris n re'r: a ' : 1872 Blue Mountain Road Longmont, CO 80504-6203 March 10, 2003 To: ALL Weld County Planning Commissioners Re: Life Bridge Christian Church application for re-zoning Case Number PZ-1004 I have addressed ALL Weld County Planning Commissioners as I lack a specific commissioner to whom to voice my concerns. As you know Commissioner VAAD has recused himself on this matter. I feel a commissioner at large is not necessarily my representative in this matter. I am addressing the Weld County planning Commission regarding the application of Life Bridge Christian Church (LBCC) for re-zoning. I live at 1872 Blue Mountain Road, which abuts the LBCC property on the east. I purchased my property located in the Meadow Vale Farm subdivision residential community because I like the location of the neighborhood, its semi-rural atmosphere, low ambient light levels, so we can enjoy the truly beautiful nights, and the quietness that generally surround a semi-rural area. I chose this location as my home, immediately after my retirement. I understood that development to my west was almost guaranteed and was in fact imminent. I believed the I-25 Mixed Use Development Area Structural Plan (I-25 MUD), which indicated the area involved was planned for residential use. Our single story ranch style house is orientated with a commanding view of the beautiful Colorado Rockies from Pikes Peak to Laramie Peak. Especially attractive from this area are breathtaking vistas of Longs Peak, Mount Meeker and the Indian Peaks area. I look forward to having a church located in or near our neighborhood. However, I am appalled at the scope of development proposed for this property. I'm not really sure what legally constitutes a church property. I do find outdoor amphitheaters, huge auditoriums, rental properties, large parking lots, development properties, commercial properties and sports complexes beyond my definition of a church. Now add the sanctuary with its immense proportions, heights, and capacities and it now becomes a mega venture with more business and profit motives than a simple church. It is my belief that if LBCC desires to build an entire community ranging from high end housing through, apartments, rentals, educational facilities, entertainment centers, medical offices, and sports complexes that they should build it in a more open space environment, instead of jamming all these functions together inside three separate pure residential communities. I thought that a church was permitted in a residential neighborhood because it was a EXHIBIT 1 �3y neighborhood church. To allow a church/business complex this large and diverse into the center of pre-zoned, pre-approved, and pre-built residential neighborhoods is a travesty for ALL concerned and shows zero compatibility. These uses are not compatible within the boundaries of the three pre-existing residential communities of Meadow Vale Farm (to the east), The Elms at Meadow Vale (to the east), and Longview (to the west). Height The church will be built within an area almost completely surrounded by R-1 residential area. Proposed building heights far exceed residential standards and any existing local building. The nearest building of near comparable size is Denver, Colorado's Pepsi Center. It has a capacity of approximately 20,000 patrons yet it is only 100 feet high. The proposed church building is 20% higher, without architectural extensions, and has about a 16% bigger footprint. Although the height of the building does not have a major impact on MY view, it does have a major impact on many of my neighbors. It also can be reasonably assumed to have a detrimental impact on my (and my neighbors) property values due to its non- conforming nature and the likelihood of producing excess traffic, light, noise, and crime. Traffic According to the last proposal I saw, LBCC proposes a street BEHIND my house, putting a street in front and back. This destroys the residence in a semi-rural environment feeling. Although, Life Bridge has not proposed using Blue Mountain Road to exit the development, I fear residents will find it easy to take a shortcut across a short stretch of open space ground to gain access to Blue Mountain Road and County Road 5 1/2 rather than take the longer route to County road 3 'h or County road 26.This is especially true in higher traffic periods. A non-crossable barrier must be installed to prevent access to Blue Mountain Road from the LBCC property. Lighting Lighting must be tightly controlled or ambient light from buildings, parking lots, streets, vehicles, and amphitheaters will significantly alter the semi-rural atmosphere. It would destroy the ability to observe the wonders of God's creations in the night sky, such as the Milky Way, galaxies, meteors, comets, shooting stars, constellations, and the Auroras Borealis. Noise The amphitheater will generate considerable noise from performers, the crowd, and traffic exiting from events. The Commissioners must assure that adequate noise controls 2 are in place to prevent excess noise from entering the adjoining residential areas. This should be based on residential noise standards rather than commercial. This will prevent excess noise from significantly altering the semi-rural atmosphere of the residential communities. Crime This development will create more transient traffic than local traffic. People attending church functions, educational facilities, sporting events, entertainment events, and other draws created by neighborhood businesses, generate the traffic. Increased transit traffic inevitably creates higher crime. Zoning approval LBCC has been somewhat cooperative in their quest for a place to build a new church but height remains the principal unresolved issue. I do not believe a skyscraper completely surrounded by nearby residential communities is appropriate. We must get the main building height down in the range of 45-50 feet without significant architectural extensions. It would be acceptable to have a single, thin profile, extension, such as a cross, less than 20 feet above the tallest point of the main building. Summary LBCC has made several adjustments in response to the surrounding subdivisions issues, in order to ease some concerns of the residents. These communications are contained in correspondence to Kim Ogle from Tetra Tech RMC. The first is a Memo from Barb Brunk, RE: LifeBridge PUD Clarifications; the other is a document, RE: Mitigation, both dated February 27, 2003. Zoning approval must capture agreements, clarifications, and mitigations as limitations or restrictions as conditions of the approval. These limitations and restrictions must be specified as permanent rather than temporary, as suggested by a specific phase or term. I trust the commissioners will ensure the zoning they ultimately approve is truly residentially compatible from all aspects such as height, mass, density, traffic, light, noise and crime. Respectfully Yours, William aorris Cc: Kim Ogle, Weld County Planner 3 Wald County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE MAR 1 2 2003 Joyce E. Norris �,, . 1872 Blue Mountain Road RE i " Y`' ' , Longmont, CO 80504-6203 303-772-0840 March 10, 2003 To: ALL Weld County Planning Commissioners Re: Life Bridge Christian Church application for re-zoning Case Number PZ-1004 I have addressed ALL Weld County Planning Commissioners as I lack a specific commissioner to whom to voice my concerns. As you know Commissioner VAAD has recused himself on this matter. I feel a commissioner at large is not necessarily my representative in this matter. I am addressing the Weld County planning Commission regarding the application of Life Bridge Christian Church (LBCC) for re-zoning. I live at 1872 Blue Mountain Road, which abuts the LBCC property on the east. My husband and I purchased our property located in the Meadow Vale Farm subdivision residential community because we liked the location of the neighborhood; its semi-rural atmosphere, low ambient light levels, and tranquility. We enjoy the truly beautiful nights, and the quietness that generally surround a semi-rural area. We chose this location as our home, immediately after my husband retired in 2000. I understood that development to our west was almost guaranteed and was in fact imminent. I believed the I-25 Mixed Use Development Area Structural Plan(I-25 MUD), indicated the area involved was planned for residential use. Our single story ranch style home is situated with a commanding view of the beautiful Colorado Rockies from Pikes Peak to Laramie Peak. Especially attractive from this area are breathtaking vistas of Longs Peak, Mount Meeker and the Indian Peaks area. I personally believe a church should be a good neighbor; but not become the neighborhood. I am appalled at the scope of development proposed for this property. I'm not really sure what legally constitutes a church property, but I do find outdoor amphitheaters, huge auditoriums, rental properties, large parking lots, development properties, commercial properties and sports complexes beyond my definition of a church. Now add the sanctuary with its immense proportions, heights, and capacities and it now becomes a mega venture with more business and profit motives than a simple church. It is my belief that if LBCC desires to build an entire community ranging from high end housing through, apartments, rentals, educational facilities, entertainment centers, medical offices, and sports complexes that they should build it in a more open space environment, instead of jamming all these functions together inside three separate 1 pure residential communities. I thought that a church was permitted in a residential neighborhood because it was a neighborhood church. To allow a church/business complex this large and diverse into the center of pre-zoned, pre-approved, and pre-built residential neighborhoods is a travesty for ALL concerned and shows zero compatibility. These uses are not compatible within the boundaries of the three pre-existing residential communities of Meadow Vale Farm (to the east), The Elms at Meadow Vale (to the east), and Longview(to the west). Height The church will be built within an area almost completely surrounded by R-1 residential housing. Proposed building heights far exceed residential standards and any existing local building. The nearest building of near comparable size is Denver's Pepsi Center. It has a capacity of approximately 20,000 patrons yet it is only 100 feet high. The proposed church building is 20% higher, without architectural extensions. Although the height of the building does not have a major impact on MY view, it does have a major impact on many of my neighbors. It also can be reasonably assumed to have a detrimental impact on my (and my neighbors) property values due to its non- conforming nature and the likelihood of producing excess traffic, light, noise, and crime. Traffic According to the last proposal I saw, LBCC proposes a street BEHIND my house, putting a street in front and back. This destroys the semi-rural environment feeling. Although, Life Bridge has not proposed using Blue Mountain Road to exit the development, I fear LBCC residents and members will find it easy to take a shortcut across a short stretch of open space ground to gain access to Blue Mountain Road and County Road 5 'h rather than take the longer route to County road 3 '/z or County road 26. This is especially true in higher traffic periods. A non-crossable barrier must be installed to prevent access to Blue Mountain Road from the LBCC property. Accordingly, I am very concerned about the impact to Weld County residents who will be asked to partially foot the bill for expanded traffic lanes and paving that will be required to handle the volume of expected traffic in and out of this mega church complex. Lighting Lighting must be tightly controlled or ambient light from buildings, parking lots, streets, vehicles, and amphitheaters will significantly alter the semi-rural atmosphere. It would destroy the beauty of God's creations in the night sky, such as the Milky Way, galaxies, meteors, comets, shooting stars, constellations, and the Auroras Borealis. 2 Noise The amphitheater will generate considerable noise from performers, crowds, and traffic entering and exiting events. The Commissioners must assure that adequate noise controls are in place to prevent excess noise from entering the adjoining residential areas. This should be based on residential noise standards rather than commercial. This will prevent excess noise from significantly altering the semi-rural atmosphere of our residents Crime This development will create more transient traffic than local traffic. People attending church functions, educational facilities, sporting events, entertainment events, and other draws created by neighborhood businesses, generate the traffic. Increased transit traffic inevitably creates higher crime. Once again, how will this affect all Weld County taxpayers for additional law enforcement? Zoning approval LBCC has been somewhat cooperative in their quest for a place to build a new church but height remains a huge unresolved issue. I do not believe a skyscraper completely surrounded by nearby residential communities is appropriate. We must get the main building height down in the range of 45-50 feet without significant architectural extensions. It would be acceptable to have a single, thin profile, extension, such as a cross, less than 20 feet above the tallest point of the main building. Summary Zoning approval must capture agreements, clarifications, and mitigations as limitations or restrictions as conditions of the approval. These limitations and restrictions must be specified as permanent rather than temporary, as suggested by a specific phase or term. I trust all commissioners will ensure the zoning you approve as truly compatible with the existing residential properties. These are our homes, not just houses; purchased with a love of our current environment. 1 don't believe any of us imagined we would be faced with a mega-plex in our back yards. Respectfully Yours, Joyce E. Norris Cc: Kim Ogle, Weld County Planner 3 Weld Cou Plng Department GREEntyLEYanni 0FFICE MAR 1 2 2003 :;', ! 9 March 4, 2003 R F l ; David Long Weld County Commissioner P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Dear Commisioner, We live in Meadow Vale Farms. On March 18 there will be a rezoning meeting for a parcel of land, owned by Lifebridge Christian Church, located to the west of our neighborhood. We are concerned about the following items in respect to the rezoning application: 1) Water. Does the City of Longmont and/or Weld County have sufficient water to support this development? 2) Crime. Will there be an increase in the number of officers patrolling this area? If so, when? 3) Access to the site. We are strongly opposed to connecting any streets in the existing neighborhoods to the proposed development. 4) Traffic. Will the surrounding roads, specifically Hwy 119, be able to handle the amount of traffic that will be generated by this development? 5) Heights of structures. We are opposed to buildings taller than two commercial stories. 6) Noise. We are concerned about the volume of noise that would be generated by a large amphitheater. We respectfully request that the rezoning of the Lifebridge property be only approved upon conditions; with the conditions being discussed between the church and the surrounding neighborhoods. Thank you for your consideration on this matter. Sincerely, John . d 'arrie Shellenb _er 2243 dow Vale Rd Longmont, Co 80504 EXHIBIT 1 /35 IN u 00uniy r ; [: . ,:Of 111�-t��A J X0.3 MAR 1 2 2003 Cam' / � i �L� 'l `y' �t t c2. GEC u2 Z c c � 7 t=om le 7 /72,:t17—ALL, ��, t-4rt /1411 ! 4 2"---ems h t.Q(L- C� t yt e—A- r/ 10...2— iv Al itta— X; —E�J 4 Z/L G it z t �' l.C.a t �� n�✓ , (/, , err L_ EXHIBIT I /36 '.; ha m;n.K Department CRFELFY OFFICE MAR 1 2 2003 March 9h, 2003 Dear Commissioner Long, "� ` So I am writing this letter becausei lte prwp©s0 change in land use being asked for by the Lifebridge Church- land at the intersection of Road 119 and Road 31/2. To begin, I have no objections to this land being used by the church. My concern is in how they plan to develop this land. As it stands now this land is agricultural. It is one of the reasons we purchased land in this area of Weld County and not someplace else. A portion of my concern is based on what I have seen and have been told by the Lifebridge Church representatives. These concerns definitely revolve around the height of buildings, density of housing, Oligarchy Ditch care and maintenance, water usage, traffic involved in a 24 hour facility like they are portraying this to be, noise, high amount of light pollution, the expected crime that will come, blending in with the surrounding land use, etc. I am positive you have had an earful of these concerns, so I will not reiterate. I will continue... The other side of my concern is in what they have intentionally not been telling us. From the two meetings they have held for our development (Feb 3rd and March 3rd) I noticed that they did not have the same representatives, and that they would not back up what each other said. When I asked about any topic the response was a flat, "I was not there, I do not know what was said", therefore leaving no ability to clarify an issue. To be more specific, on Feb 3rd Mr. Bruce Grinell was very careful to always mention that the buildings of the church would be 2 stories high. This does not sound so bad, until (after being pressed) he finally admitted that 2 stories is 60 feet! Need I mention that none of our 2-story homes are anywhere near 60 feet tall? Now on our March 3rd presentation they are showing 3-story buildings in the drawings. This was presented as a final plan. No one could answer why a 3-story building was drawn and why we had a 2- story impression. Another point to mention is that he made it very clear that the church buildings were to be 2 stories high with 90 foot fly spaces for stage set changes. Yes, a bit hard to imagine. He repeatedly said that this would be the highest part of the church, and only if they had the money down the line. This building would be toward the inside of the property. When we mentioned to him that we had heard about 200 foot structures he said he had no idea where this information could be coming from and that he was not going to try to go around and correct every persons incorrect ideas. Well, come to find out, the church requested 200 foot heights in their paper work to Weld County. How could he have not known where this question was originating from? I will also add that on March 3m they were very proud to tell us that they had lowered the asking height from 200 feet to 150 feet. If they are only looking at a 90 foot tall building why are they asking for 150 feet? There must be more they are not mentioning. EXHH3ff /3 7 So, a large concern is in the Lifebridge Church people representing themselves in a TRUE light. It is a huge concern of mine that they are trying to tell us what we want to hear and then turn around and slap us in the face with the HONEST TRUTH after they have manipulated us into believing they `care' about the neighbors around them. If they tell us they are planning a senior center and single story homes, etc on the south piece of property and then they sell that property off, where do we stand? Can the new owners build anything they like up to 150 feet tall and the church just respond with"it was just a plan" and we are left in their wake thinking "it was a church, we believed them, how could they lie to us?" If as a homeowner who has gone to a few meetings and has been able to decide that this organization is not being completely honest, I imagine the entire government of Weld County must be able to see it too. Please realize that they do not seem to be planning on following through with their plan(I have heard they will sell off pieces) and that many families are going to be more than just a bit angry or annoyed with them as neighbors. I personally believe that the Lifebridge Church should find a new location like Stapleton/DIA did. Build in an area where people will want to build around you, not where you need to manipulate the system to fit in. I am keeping this brief, as I do not want you to lose interest in what I have to say. There are many more points that should be made, but I think these are a good start. I hope that you can see this from the homeowners point of view. There are many more issues to iron out before this church is given the go ahead. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, I Barb Stember 2232 Meadow Vale Road 80504 MAR 1 2 2003 i March 9, 2003 R G - ' 2232 Meadow Vale Road Longmont CO 80504 Dear Commissioner Long, 1 I am writing you about the proposed r�� of the Area near CR119 and WCR 3 1/2 in the MUD area in the southwest corner of the couhtSc Since Cot nnission Vaad has, rightfully, recused himself from the discussion on this subject people in this area are without direct representation. I am appealing to you to act as if this were going on in your district because it something similar may come to pass in your district someday. The general development plan the commissioners have laid out call for new development to be compatible with the existing development. The tallest structure around here are private homes that reach, at most, to thirty feet. When Life Bridge Church gave their presentation to us, Bruce Grinnell was asked how tall the buildings would be. He said parts of the buildings would be as tall as 90 feet to allow for"flyspace". After that meeting we heard, and it was confirmed, the church's application actually asked for parts of the buildings to be as high as 200 feet. Apparently, this 200 feet referred to "architectural elements", not the actual building. Mr. Grinnell committed a"lie of omission." When asked how tall the buildings would be, he should have been honest and not left out this important detail just because he knew would upset people in the audience. His lie has done his cause more harm than if had been honest. Since he has been caught in this lie, I wonder what other lies are buried in the hundreds of pages of documents that have been submitted. For example, part of the plot is to be re-zoned as commercial. The church has no interest in operating commercial activities on site. Their sole reason appears to be to raise the value of the property so it can be sold to finance the rest of their development. Once, the property is sold, what assurances are there that the development will proceed as they have outlined. For example, they currently show a 125 foot setback from existing property lines. Why would the next property owner honor this commitment when they could shoe horn in more houses by going back to the minimum property setback? I am also greatly concerned about the huge surges in traffic that will occur on Sundays. This is unfair to the people who moved here when it was quiet. They did not expect to have to deal with this. There will be several hours every Sunday when the existing residents won't even bother to try to leave their houses as they know they will get stuck in the entering or exiting traffic. I believe the church should have an opportunity to develop somewhere but they should not be allowed to develop somewhere that would have a surprise impact on people. They should develop and let people build houses nearby. Those people can have no objection to the height of the buildings or the traffic surges since the church will have been there first. Also, do not misunderstand that I think the area in question should not be developed. I expect it to be developed. It should have housing similar in size, density and lot coverage to those already in the area. It is true the traffic will get worse but it will not be enormous surges as people will leave at a variety of times to go to work, school or shopping. Sincerely, Michael J. Stember Cci:nly Planning Department -EL FY OFFICE 1 2 2003 From: "Bill Gollher" <bgolliher@mindspring.com> "-' To: <gvaad@co.weld.co.us>, <dlong@co.weld.co.us>, <geile@co.weld.co.us>, <rmasden@co.weld.co.us> Date: 3/9/03 4:22PM Subject: Rezoning for Mega Church LifeBridge Members of the Weld County Board of Commissioners and Press: Appreciating the demands on your time, I hope you will take a few moments to read my attached letter regarding my concerns for the upcoming rezoning hearing for The LifeBridge Church. I hope upon reading my letter that a realization will occur-- - just because LifeBridge refers to themselves as a church, doesn't mean their plan has anything to do about being a church. There proposed development and plan reflects more of a "mini-city"or business entity, not a church and is simply not suitable for an area presently zoned residential. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Ellen Eiler-Golliher 11700 Montgomery Circle Longmont, CO 80504 303-776-7688 bgolliher@mindspring.com n i.� CC: <opinion@times-call.com>, <letters@greeleytrib.corn>, <letters@RockyMountainNews.com>, <letters@denverpost.com> CD L EXHIBIT � Upp March 9, 2003 Dear Weld County Commissioner Board, I have been a resident of Colorado since 1974. I love this state. I have been witness to change, development and growth of the Metro Denver area along the Front Range. My step-father was a member of the Aurora City Council from 1975 to 1979 and member of the Denver Regional Council of Governments and engineer for Martin Marietta. I mention that fact, as we had many discussions about proper planning and the impact it on neighborhoods, traffic and resources. He took his position about making decisions he made in the present and how they would affect the future quite seriously. I appreciate the fact that this great state and the surrounding communities could not stay stagnant since 1974. I have witnessed responsible and not responsible growth. I feel those examples should act as a barometer today. We know too much today to make bad planning decisions. However, I think political and tax concerns override commonsense at times. "Smart growth" is a term that is bantered about these days. I often wonder what that exactly means. Does that mean smart from the view of taxes being generated? Does that mean maximizing the quality of life for the members of the community by providing a proper mix/blend/balance of amenities, services, space, etc.? To be sure "smart growth" has many interpretations and means many things to many people. My personal interpretation of"smart growth"does not include a mega-size, high-use development adjoining a residential community that is estimated to produce 56,000 car trips per day. Of that traffic, 1/3 is estimated to run through the Elms development in which I live - a residential community with growing families with children. That is simply unacceptable for a residential area. Smart growth also does not include a 6,000 seat outdoor amphitheater the size of Fiddler's Green being built,plus an additional 2,500-3,500 seat auditorium,plus a Youth Center, a University and Recreation Center. Negotiation on any of these issues should not even be an issue. They are simply inappropriate for the area. I am referring to The LifeBridge Church's request for rezoning. The Weld County Multi- Use-Development plan specifies the proposed site as residential. A church is usually considered a good neighbor. However, LifeBridges' intentions as I understand them, are not the church that most of us are accustomed. It appears the LifeBridge goal is to be a 24 hour, 7 day a week facility. I am accustomed to large churches and their goal of providing to the community, having attended the Denver First Church of The Nazerene in Denver for a large portion of my life. I believe Denver First Church is one of 3 of the largest churches in Metro Denver. HOWEVER, they are not a MEGA Church, attempting to have buildings 5 times the average height of buildings in most of the cities and counties along the Front Range, nor do they operate like a multi-use entertainment center under the guise of being a church. LifeBridge wants to be a mini-city, for their members. Interestingly, it is my understanding that a large majority of LifeBridge members reside in Boulder County, not Weld County. The LifeBridge plan may be good for them and their desire to grow and have a large congregation,but it is not good for the community at large or the neighborhoods that would be impacted quite negatively. Ultimately, this is not a church this is a business. Simply put, that is not appropriate for the area. Safety, noise pollution, light pollution, the impact on the environment, the impact on the quality of life, is simply silly to even consider approval for rezoning. I urge you to follow the example of the City of Longmont and reject the LifeBridge proposal. Boulder County also turned down LifeBridge for expansion. LifeBridge has demonstrated that they are not good neighbors, by repeatedly ignoring building codes and have unpaid fines at their present location on highway 66. Again, simply allowing a rezoning based on the entity being a church and that there is "space"makes no sense. Weld County is a large, large county. There will be many projects and proposals to come in the years ahead. I urge you to keep in mind the ramifications of decisions made today and the impact they have on the future. I recently was reminded that IBM built in Boulder County in the early 1960's. I am amazed that they and the planners of Boulder County had the foresight and vision then— when there was nothing around not to build a monster complex/campus that soared into the sky. There would have appeared to be endless space at that time. To see the future, and decide to have the open space we have today, that so many of us benefit is simply amazing. I don't think we even fully realize how we benefit from that vision. Can you imagine the traffic, noise, congestion, impact on our resources, our quality of life? Can you imagine all the houses, and businesses that would be there today, if restraint and vision were not used almost 40 years ago? I strongly urge a vote of NO on the rezoning request for LifeBridge Church. They have plenty of space at their present location, but due to the vision and restraint shown by the City of Longmont and County of Boulder, in not allowing LifeBridge to build-out to a "mini-city"they continue in their efforts to find someone to have their wishes become true. Thank you for your time and consideration. Please vote NO to the rezoning LifeBridge request. Sincerely, Ellen Eiler-Golliher 11700 Montgomery Circle Longmont, CO 80504 303-776-7688 bgolliher@mindspring.com Wald County Ham ling bc;;artr.,:;nt GREELEY OFFICE MAR 1 2 2003 From: "W.B. Sullivan" <wbsullivan@earthlink.net> To: <gvaad@co.weld.co.us>, <dlong@co.weld.co.us>, <mgeile@weld.M.LIS>,- <rmasden@co.weld.co.us> Date: 3/10/03 9:12PM Subject: Lifebridge Mega-church Application Gentlemen, Attached please find my letter urging you to refuse any application by Lifebridge to build the proposed mega-church complex anywhere in Weld County but specifically in the area of Meadowvale or surrounding communities. I trust you will seriously consider my comments as they reflect the wishes of the majority of my neighbors. i Regards, Wes Sullivan n r EXHIBIT 1 /39 „ Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE To the Weld County Board of Commissioners 10 March 2003 j , ,,, I2 ,a 9: VV MAR 1 2 2003Mr. Vaad 1 Mr. Long, rn_I "1r-calk/FP 1 1L 1 L__v Mr. Geile Mr. Jerke Mr. Masden I request your support in refusing the application of the Lifebridge maga-church for any construction in the Weld county area, or specifically, in the vicinity of the Medowvale community and its surrounding homes. The proposed development will have a destructive effect on the homes and families forced to live near the complex. The activity associated with the mega-church and its associated facilities with bring intolerable levels of traffic, noise, air, and light pollution and surely drive down home value. As a plan, is a reflection of the predatory corporate character of the organization and its complete disregard for the surrounding communities. In fact, the design of the Lifebridge complex suggest the members are in search of a community of their own, shielded from taxation under religious provisions of the tax code yet able to profit by renting facilities to assorted businesses. This is not a good deal for anyone except Lifebridge and its corporate interests and should be summarily rejected on its merits. Currently, local developers and real estate agents are aiding Lifebridge by refusing to advise potential home buyers of the pending destruction of their neighborhood. I recommend you ask them if they think public knowledge of the construction of such a complex would be a good marketing strategy for prospective buyers. Whether this deception can be made a cause of action for later law suits remains to be seen but it is a clear violation of conscience and the spirit of full disclosure. I am encouraging members of my community to contact the state real estate commission and local agencies concerning their potential liability in this deception. I also ask you to reject any notion that the complaint by the citizens of Meadowvale or Weld County has anything to do with religion. Lifebridge is operating as a corporate entity with the same predatory instincts as any other business who believes its needs supersede those of the communities they will disrupt. This has nothing to do with religion and Lifebridge should not be allowed to shield itself from criticism on that basis. I further urge you to prohibit the construction, ownership, or lease of any facility in the Meadowvale area by Lifebridge. It is my firm belief that the approval of any facility— however small—will allow Lifebridge to proceed with their plans at a more measured pace as they find compliant board members or await the inattention of the surrounding community. I believe that each commissioner on the board sought an opportunity to serve Weld County in order to do good for the citizens who elected them. I view such public service as a trust that holds elected representatives to a particularly high standard in considering the welfare of the community. While I do not expect Mr. Vaad to put the interests of his church fully aside, I do believe his offer to recuse himself does not fully address the needs of his district for adequate representation and the appearance of impropriety in his relationships with other board members cannot be dismissed. I ask that each commissioner fully consider the effects on the citizens of Meadowvale and the surrounding communities in making a final decision. Considered on its merits, there is no standard by which the board may reasonably argue the construction of this complex serves either the interest of the surrounding communities or the county. It is a predatory enterprise by a corporate entity whose desire to fulfill its plans for expansion are exceeded only by its arrogant refusal to consider the welfare of the families whose lives will be disrupted if not endangered. I urge you to reject any proposal that permits Lifebridge to destroy the quality of life Meadowvale residents have come to expect and to join with Boulder county in wishing them well somewhere else! Respectfully, a t Wesley B. ullivan Meadowvale Resident Hello