HomeMy WebLinkAbout640001.tiffC_l0.2
C '
•JJ
coo`
784
FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION GRANTING
ZONING OF THE SEELEY LAKE AREA:
Recorded at 1 __o'clock _� DEC
Rec. No, "=— ,i2Mary Ann Feuerstein, Recorder
/-
107q
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, did
on the 17th day of August, 1964, at 2:00 o'clock P. M., in their office at the Weld
County Court House conduct a public hearing in regard to the recommendation of the
Weld County Planning Commission to zone an unincorporated area Northwest of Greeley,
known as The Seeley Lake Area, pursuant to notice duly published as required by law,
more particularly described as follows, to -wit:
Sections: 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 34, 35 and 36
Township 6 North, Range 66 West of the 6th P. M.;
The unzoned portions of Sections 19, 30 and 32 in Township 6 North
Range 65 West of the 6th P. M.;
Section 31 in Township 6 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P. M.;
Section 6 in Township 5 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P. M.;
The unzoned portion of Section 5, Township 5 North, Range 65 West
of the 6th P. M., and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, is
of the opinion that zoning of the described area will promote the health, safety,
morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the present and future inhabit-
ants of said area and of the County of Weld, and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, having
heard the testimony and evidence adduced upon said hearing and having considered and
carefully weighed the same, and being fully advised in the premises.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of County Commissioners of
Weld County, Colorado, does and they do hereby confirm, ratify and adopt the recom-
mendation of the Weld County Planning Commission to zone the above described area
known as the Seeley Lake Area in accordance with the proposed zoning map, incorporated
herein and made a part hereof, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of said resolution, including
map therein referred to, shall be filed as provided by law in the office of the County
Clerk and Recorder of Weld County.
The above and foregoing resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded,
adopted by the following vote:
DATED; AUGUST 19, 1964
AYES:
c -C i
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMM J IONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO vv
640001
/ PLO/b?
NOTICE
PURSUANT TO THE ZONING LAWS OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, THE WELD COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND AND CERTIFY TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, THE ZONING OF THE NORTHWEST GREELEY AREA, KNOWN AS THE
SEELEY LAKE AREA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
Sections: 21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,34,35 and 36, Township 6 North,
Range 66 West of the 6th P. M.
The Unzoned portions of Sections 19,30 and 32 in Township 6 North,
Range 65 West of the 6th P. M.
Section 31 in Township 6 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P. M.
Section 6 in Township 5 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P. M.
The unzoned portion of Section 5, Township 5 North, Range 65 West
of the 6th P. M.
All in Weld County, Colorado
THE HEARING WILL BE HELD IN THE OFFICE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY COURTHOUSE, GREELEY, COLORADO, MONDAY, AUGUST 17, 1964 AT
2:00 O'CLOCK P. M.
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
BY: ANN SPOMER
COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER
GREELEY BOOSTER
JULY 17 and AUGUST 7, 1964
GREELEY DAILY TRIBUNE
AUGUST `7, 1964
NOTICE OF HEPRING FOR SEELEY LAKE AREA
AS PUBLISHED IN THE GREELEY TRIBUNE
AUGUST 7, 1964
irrridai AUc. 7, 11964 GIMLET tfIBUNE Parc-DPI
.. itlT TO Tnr ...,..OF
LAWS OFO THE STALE OF
TY PLANNING E WCOMMIRSSSII�ON
RECOMMEND
p�R�RtD O• IC�COUNT4
OP TMFCN0R*WIdST GREE-
LEY
AAREA,, KNOWNEREAAS TDES
CRZ D E
AS FOLTQW4,
S$e9�btN es: SI, S fl 24, 56, 26,
townehip'6 North, Range aand e
WWest of. Grath P. M.
The Unnoned portions of See -
tieing 19, 30 and 32 1n Town-
ship 6 North. pangs 65 West
..of the 6th P.dM•
Section Si I Township 6
Iorth, Range 66 West of the
h P. M.
Section 6 in Township 6
gf6g,00i�rth Range Qportion
West . of the
The Wizened Tomnehip 5 oNorth,
Sec-
tion 6,
a 66 Weep of the 6th
P.M..
'AlLL OF COUNTY COMMIS-
MELo
D IN ERINGFI' OFFICE THE
ELD ' COUNTY
C {I COLORADO, T12 OUSE. GREELEY,
I6 AT2:00 O CLOCK P.M.
HOARD OF
7. CO 3 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
By: ANN SP MO ERCOLORADO
County Clerk and Recorder
The Greeley Daily Tribune
� prat 7,. 1044
DATED: JULY 15, 1964
of
and
•be
andor {
teed of
A>ds'e�par-
ellows;
, Lff,' ±4,''�.,
34. 35 ands as
'.`Nardi; Vallge
66 of the 6th RIM.
The unzoned portions of Sec-
tions 191-64 afld. 33 in Town-
ship-dPfortfg:" tianjtx 65 West
of the 6th P.M.
Section 31 in Township 6
North, Range 65 West of the
6th P.M.
Section G in Township -5
North, Range 65 West of the -
of the 6th P.M..
All in Weld County, Colorado,.
exoluslve of any Incorporated towns
in the above: legal. description.
THEREFORE, in the interestofthe public health, safety and.. wel-
fare, it is ordered that for a period
of six months from the date hereof
and effective throughout the above
described unincorporated territory
of Weld County, Colorado:
(a) No building or structure
used orto be used for any
business, Industrial or con.
martial purpoqssee located with-
in the, unincorporated terri- ..
tory, . as described, above,
. shall be erected, constructed,
reconstructed or altered, and
(b) The use of any land locat-
ed
ed in the atn'eorpaffated tor.
not b a9 ggdescribed
d -t boe
shall
business, industrial ar .corn-
merclel purpoge:'
Tbis border shall be published on
Friday, February 14, 1664' in. The
Greeley Booster.'
%fade and entered this lit], day
of February:. 1964. ...
Attest, ANNAledea
County Cleraid lcorder
And Clerk To Tke Board
CERTIFICATION OF COPY
Flcrence Cutler , Recording Secretary of Weld County Plan -
ping Commission, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing Resolution is
a true copy of Resolution of Planning Commission of Weld County, Colorado, adop-
ted on July 6, 1964 , and recorded in Book No. VI , Page No.
, of the proceedings of said Planning Commission.
Dated this ._7th_., day of July , 1964
Recording Secretary, Weld County Planning Commission
WELD CO, COMMISSIONERS
OAEELEV, COLO.
RECEIVED
JUL 1 3 1964
6171
AM. I.M,
llaoploalale454
BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Moved by that the following resolution
be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning Commission:
Be it Resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the
following described area, exclusive of any incorporated towns,
be recommended favorably to the Board of County Commissioners
for a six months land freeze, to-witY
Sections 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 34, 35 and 36 in
Township 6 North, Range 66 West cf the 6th P. M.
The unzoned parts of Sections 19, 30 and 32 in Township 6 North,
Range 65 West of the 6th P. M.
Section 31 in Township 6 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P. M.
Section 6 in Township 5 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P. M.
The unzoned parts of Secticn 5, Township 5 North, Range 65 West
of the 6th P. M.
All in Weld County, Colorado.
Motion seconded by /-f, /1. Y1
Vote:
For Passage:
p
Against Passage:
The Chairman declared the motion passed and ordered that a certified
copy cf this Resolution be forwarded with the file of this case to the
Board of County Commissioners for further proceedings.
i:5Sc.L Tl h LF h:c.,.1.w 9A_:T: .c .HE
7 '3,6=T 3,1,12.7,13:72-2
ved ' ,;:hr W !;s: n that the f,?lnvai'g res; lu_1en he ihtne3ueeT
__ it .... ,'.lvei hy the P Weld
. _.] ., t r). ..1 0::Ljssien that ..: 7 11 j ..e_,eG
prtperty in the Seeley r - area (_._hvest Greeley) per be zoned as attached rap tid no •.ce with the zu_elogre-s _u. _ns -f the 'geld County r1annitaj �uas-
Sectinns 21, 22, 2JT 21, 25, 25, 27, 23, 22, 34, 35 and hi.p 6 north,
Range 66 W st cl the i'* P.
The nzr ne3 phrt:_ . s ,-f c_.:a 30 aa, 3< _'a T. v..,s,1�Y
Priest --5 the 6th r. ii.;
Sncti, .. "'_ in .u:unship ;c 65 W.s.. _f the 6th P. ...;
Sc _ .: n T wnship .. >r' ..a 55 `Iles., f the 6th P. ,...;
..:e craned p:: -ti .. ..2L �"� �inshld 5 ,..__h, [iul9C 65West 4.5 the 6th
ended favorably the 3_ard of Cc -cy Ccnrmisslccs fha the fozz... , rea-
,s:
The pe..ple in this are; pet_ti(ued .or a Stud of Lrnl
S;
--rli.. Neu were held 1 the Mid Lc-._ /f this area,
The penple -..f this ne area, per attached zonin nap; were nr_a , ,cusly .t: a,ree-
.f_r zcning as shown the map.
The was seconded by A. A. :Inn.
'V1_fr;
P3 SUSe: ... Tin.;
PrIce ,.(.Gbins
I_.s_ Passage: nixie
The Chairman declared the .w_ -.,_re passed and r tdered that a certified cop, L1 this Acs-
clutihn he forwarded with the file cf this case tc the Beard cf aunty d ssirners
for further prcceedir.cs.
THE COLORADO AND SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY
Buffington
Route
J. W. Terrill
Vice President
Board of County Commissioners
Weld County
Weld County Court House
Greeley, Colorado
Gentlemen:
500 Johnson Building
Seventeenth and Glenarm Streets
Denver 2, Colorado
August 12, 1964
072
Pursuant to the notice published in the Greeley Daily Tribune of August 7,
1964, The Colorado and Southern Railway Company hereby requests the Board of
County Commissioners to reconsider the recommendation of the Weld County Plan-
ning Commission with regard to the proposed zoning of certain property owned
by the Railway Company located in Section 6, Township 5 North, Range 65 West
of the 6+kt P.M., said property being shown on the print which is attached hereto.
The Planning Commission has recommended that this and adjacent property be zoned
as agricultural, while the Railway Company feels that the logical and necessary
zoning for this property should be manufacturing and industrial.
In support of its request, the Railway Company respectfully submits the follow-
ing information:
1. The property involved is approximately 7.51 acres in area, and is lo-
cated adjacent to the Railway Company's right-of-way where it can easily be
served by railroad trackage.
2. This property is also adjacent to the City of Greeley, and the prop-
erty located within the City limits and immediately to the east of the subject
property (also owned by the Railway Company) is zoned by the City of Greeley
as M-3, a manufacturing and industrial zone.
3. The subject property, along with the property located within Greeley
and as outlined in red is presently under lease by the Railway Company to Mr.
Albert Holmes, and is being used for agricultural purposes. However, such use
is considered by the Railway Company to be temporary in character, and the
Railway Company has in the past, and does now, consider this property especially
-1-
Board of County Commissioners
Greeley, Colorado
-2- August 12, 1964
valuable for industrial development.
Your thoughtful consideration of this change would be greatly appreciated.
Very truly yours,
L E
R-2.
Is
`
TWO-FAMILY DWELLING
M-3
_
MANUFACTURING -AND
INDUSTRIAL
O L. L N , AN DS
TF,N . F'� t, 5 V'J:
R-4
G_REELE.Y,Coso_
SCALE 0=400'
7-28- C.
C t:,'S R. 0.W.
GREELEY CITY LIMITS
ZONING, INSIDE GF2EELEY
AS OF I- 18-(03
'Ti
.!!L. OUTSIDE of CITY LIMITS-PIOPOSED AGRICULTURAL ZONING BY CD. COMMISSIOtJERS,
LEASE 4438
^F::;5,6 C.cu PROM ETY To FjE E'EyUFSTED-1.1At+JFAt- TURtNG e
INDUSTRI AL ZONING . r 2OM. CO, COMML5',koklE.R5
August 14, 1964
County Planning Commission
Board of County Commissioners
Court House
Greeley, Colorado
Gentlemen:
The undersigned are the owners of Lots One, Two and Three,
First Filing of Morris Subdivision, Lots One, Two and Three, Second
Filing of Morris Subdivision and of the unplatted area lying immedi-
ately West of the said Second Filing of Morris Subdivision to NO* 3
Waste Way. We are advised that the County Planning ('.nmmission is
about to zone this area into a residential area.
Due to the advantageous location of the property with ref-
erence to streets and avenues, we have had some inquiry as to whether
or not we would sell Lots,One, Two and Three, First Filing Morris
Subdivision and Lot One, Second Filing Morris Subdivision for a bus-
iness use. At this time we are not at liberty to divulge the name
of the person making the inquiry. The business will concern itself
with milk and milk processing we are told.
The location of the lots was desirable to the persons making
the inquiry because of its location with reference to the farm lands
lying to the west of the area and the access' of highways to the City
of Greeley.
We have built two homes in the area but due to the fact that
the land faces a gravel pit, the kind of home which can be constructed
upon the lands and sold to prospective purchasers is very limited.
On the other hand due to the proximity of the lands to the farms to
the west and to the City of Greeley, the lots at the intersection Of
23rd Avenue and C Street Northwest have a value for commercial or
light commercial manufacturing purposes; We would also point out
that the railroad tracks which lie immediately to the south of this
land give added support to the fact that this land can best be
utilized by its owners and by the people of the County of Weld as
business, commercial or light commercial manufacturing purposes.
We respectfully request that Lots One, Two and Three, First
Filing Morris Subdivision and Lot One, Second Filing Morris Subdivision
be zoned for business or light manufacturing.
Very truly yours,
lapned4,e 7776-7A-0
i rc'n the office of
3ARC OF COUNTY CUMMISSIOWERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
Enclosed is a
held December
Since you own
send you this
of zone.
Greeley, Colorado
December 3 , 19 64
copy of a notice of a Commissioners Hearing to be
16, 1964 at 2:00 P. M.
land adjacent to this property we are required to
notice of a hearing for a request for a change
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
r�-41
ANN SPOMER
COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER AND CLERK TO THE BOARD
By: W. Adams
Deputy County Clerk
NOTICE
PURSUANT TO THE ZONING LAWS OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, THE WELD
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS AND CERTIFIES T�TO THE BOARD
O OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, „„ E N,CALIEFiIAL
REQUEST =N CHANGE OF ZONE FROM "A" AGRICULTURAL TO
IN THE SEELEY LAKE AREA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
West half (W*) of Lot 4, being in the NEiNWt of
Section 5, Township 5 North, Rance 65 West of the
6th P. M., Weld County, Colorado.
A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD IN THE OFFICE OF THE BOARD OFCOUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, WELD COUNTY COURT HOUSE, GREELEY, COLORADO,
WEDNESDAY,. DECEMBER 6, 1964 AT z:psi P. M. O'CLOCK.
DATED THIS 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1964.
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
BY: ANN SPOMER
COUNTY CLERK AND RBCORDER AND
CLERK TO THE BOARD
Greeley Booster
Publish Nov 13 4, Dec_it
Mr. Shultz:
I believe at this time, we shall come to order and proceed with the hearing.
This hearing today is held pursuant to the zoning laws of the State of Colorado,
the Weld County Planning Commission recommend and certify to the Board of County
Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, the zoning of the Northwest Greeley Area,
known as the Seeley Lake Area, described as follows:
Sections 21,22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 34, 35 & 36,
Township 6 North, Range 66 West of the 6th P. M.
The unzoned portions of Sections 19, 30 & 32 in Township 6 North,
Range 65 West of the 6th P. M.
Section 31 in Township 6 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P. M.
Section 6 in Township 5 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P. M.
The unzoned portion of Section 5, Township 5 North, Range 65 West
of the 6th P. M.; all in Weld County, Colorado.
The hearing to be held in the office of the Board of County Commissioners of
Weld County Courthouse, Greeley, Colorado, Monday, August 17, 1964, at 2:00
o'clock P. M.
This notice was publishedin the Greeley Booster on July 17 and August 7, 1964
and in the Greeley Daily Tribune on August 7, 1964.
The Weld County Planning Commission recommended to the Board of County Commissioners
that this area I just describedbe zoned as it is shown on the map: recommending
favorably to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons:
The people in this area petitioned for a Study of Zoning,
Public hearings were held for the study of Zoning of this area,
The people of this zone area, per attached zoning map, were unanimously
in agreement for zoning as shown on the map.
At this time, today, we are holding a Commissioners hearing which as far as the
Commissioners are concerned will be the final hearing. You people here today have
the privilege of either approving or diapproving the zoning. I believe I will
open the discussion for those people that are in favor of zoning. If you have
anything to say why you think the area should be zoned and the advantages to the
area to be zoned we would appreciate it if you would give your name and say what
you feel you should for the good of the area.
Anybody care to say anything?
Mr. Chairman:
I am Charles Pulliam, I think it has been broadcasted and statements made, and
everybody is familiar with the map as we have planned it and I don't know if
there is anyone here that would have any comment on it more than what has already
been said. I think that most of us are in favor of acceptinythe zoning as is
as the map shows now.
Mr. Shultz:
Thank you. That is what we want - an expression from you people as you are in
favor of zoning as it is set up.
Anyone else have anything to say?
Mr. Chairman:
I am Rodger Houtchens, I represent Mr. 8 Mrs. R. E. Morris who own property at the
intersection of 23rd Avenue and C St. It lies between C St. Northwest and the C 8
S Railroad and east of No. Three Wasteway. The Mortis' have for sometime been
trying to develop this property to its highest and best use. They have constructed
one house which is immediately west of the No. Three Waste Ditch, which was sold
some time ago, I think last year. They have also built a house to the East of the
No. Three Waste Ditch in which they reside. You have beforV X 'fetter and a map
in which they ask that the areas Lot 1, 2, and 3 that front on 23rd Avenue and they
are back about 200 feeton C St Northwest, be zoned that it would be possible to put in
an establishment that would cater to agricultural processing type business. They
have recently had inquiry and I don't want to leave the impression that they have
had an offer at the present time but they have recently had inquiry as to whether
or not it would be possible for the interested parties to put in a business which
would be associated with farming actually it would a milk processing business
or milk trucking business. I can't say for sure I have not talked to the people
that was interested. This particular location would lend itself well to that type
of business. The property immediately across the street, proposed to be Zoned A,
is - Oh I guess it is residential - it would be a single typex family dwelling type
property. Immediately across, as you are well aware, is a gravel pit. stiIie is
also a manufacturing business which did at one time and I assume could/ operate a
reclaimed oil type of operation. So the area is not unknown that there is already
a variety of commercial businesses. I believe Mr. Pulliam has an egg business
at his farm. (Ntr. Pulliam: You mean I did)It would appear to me that the request
of the Morris' is not out of character of the neighborhood. This has not been
considered by the Planning Commission and is a new request that comes before you
fee gentlemen at this time. For some reason or other we were asleep at the switch
and found too late that the hearing was going on to make the request. But as I
say, I don't believe it is out of character to allow a commercial type of
establishment. Mr. Palmquist tells me that in our letter, we asked for "B" and
possibly we shouldble baave asked for a "C" district at this point in this area.
We ask your favog consideration on this, although this is presented to you the
first time at this meeting.
Mr. Shultz:
Seems to me, Roger, that a considerable amount of time has been put in the
study and hearings for the zoning. I'm at loss, at the present time, to say just
what we could do here today. The purpose of this hearing is to either approve or
disapprove the zoning as it was planned by the people of the area and the Planning
Commission.
Mr. Houtchens:
I apologize for the tardiness of this request. Believe me it is not my fault. The
first time I heard about this was last Thursday afternoon. But, the Morris' are
concerned about it. I think their contention has merit and I think it should be
considered. This area is an area that might lend itself to a variety of businesses.
2
You should not zone the areaout of character with the present usage in the area.
I'm not advocating that you not zone it. It is to everybody's advantage that you
zone this area. Also, to everybody's advantage to get a proper zone to the area.
And that is the basis for this request.
Mr. Shultz:
We will give it consideration. I'm not in the position to say what the action will
be at this time. Thank you, Roger.
Mr. Leffler:
I am Carl Leffler. I think since the planning has gone this far, what these people
can do, after this is zoned - they can petition -their neighbors to see if they can
be let in (by change of zone) I can't see anything out of the way with a milk
producing plant. I think this area should be zoned the way we recommended in the be
ginning and if they get their neighbors to agree to let them put one in then that
is all right with me but not change this at the present time.
Mr. Shultz:
Well, I agreewith you. It seems to me that we will be required to go ahead and
zone this as was the results of the study of the people in the area as they all
had an opportunityof voicing their opinion during the time the study was going on.
There has been a Planning Commission hearing and it seems to me we have to go easy
on this. I believe we will have to zone this as recommended and if these pasapstax
people want to re -zone, it will be up to them to ask for it.
Mr. Al Calkins:
I would like to have another study on a small parcel of land that I have. I requested
by letter - to remain in business as I am now in business in this area. I notice
that I am zoned out - and as resident 1 - I would like to have that a little more
thought on this.
Mr. Shultz:
Did you attend any of the meetings - the hearings?
Mr. Calkins:
I had been to one.
Mr. Palmquist:
Mr. Chairman, I'm Roland Palmquist - May I ask which parcel is yours? - and what is
your business?
Mr. Calkins:
I'm in the garage business.
Mr. Palmquist:
In this line, Mr. Chairman, the people in this area that worked on this thing - the
planning commission, after it was worked up, looked at it and there was more leg work
-4-
done to fit this into existing operation that stays as non -conforming - if it is in
the wrong zone. To expand that operation it is necessary then to get a change of
zone. If there is any explanation other than that, I'd be glad to do so.
(?)
Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that a man was in business when this thing started, he
would still be in business.
Mr. Shultz: He is.
Mr. Calkins:
This I understand. But it is my understanding that if I eliminate that business
for a short time, it would immediately turn back to residential as whereby I am
surrounded by industrial area which in - aewe all know - a gravel pit is a very
short life situation. If my area should emmvert to residential, the gravel pit
should revert the same way.
Mr. Palmquist:
Mr. Chairman, may I make one more statement - gravel mining comes under agricultural
the industrial is t. c lacccccirg suclas tt,e ..cz I Lnls area - they can mine any
place in the agricultural area for gravel.
Mr. Shultz:
We will give this matter consideration. However, it seems to me that it is a little
late at the present time to come in and wanting to make a change. Anyone else have
anything they would like to say.
Mr. Schumaker:
I am Mr. Schumaker, representing the Colorado and Southern Railway Company. The rail-
road owns land in this area, adjacent to the tracks, including ig acres directly west
of 17th Avenue. The area on the east, also owned the railroad, is within the
city limits and is zoned for manufacturing and industrial. It is our hope that
the Board will reconsider the recommendation of the Planning Commission and permit
this 7z acres to be zoned manufacturing and industrial. The area is shown on thismap.
There are reasons that are involved here that I might read:
1. The property invloved is approximately 7.51 acres in area, and is located
adjacent to the RR Company's right-of-way where it can easily be served by RR
trackage.
2.This property is also adjacent to the City of Greeley, and the property located
within the City limits and immediately to the east of the subject property (also
owned by the RR Company) is zoned by the City of Greeley as M-3, a manufacturing and
industrial zone.
3. The subject property, along with the property located within Greeley and as
outlined in red is presently under lease by the RR Company to Mr. Albert Holmes, and
is being used for agricultural purposes. However, such use is considered by the
Railroad Company to be temporary in character, and the RR Company has in the past,
and does now, consider this property especially valuable for industrial development.
Your thoughtful consideration of this change would be greatly appreciated.
Mr. Shultz:
Thank you, Mr. Schumaker:
Your reamarks will be taken under advisement and consideration given.
Anybody else have anything to say? We haven't heard anyone that opposes this
zoning. Is there any opposition to this zoning?
MXIXRKIX1X X
Mr. Chairman, I'm Oscar Cordner. This gentleman referred to the area as residential.
I understood that the area would be zoned as Agricultural A-1.
Mr. Shultz: I believe Mr. Palmquist can answer that.
Mr. Palmquist:
In running a field check - on the north side of C Street, there are a number of
residential properties, facing south toward C street. Agriculture toihe east and
to the South of C Street, west of 23rd ave. We realize that this oil reclaiming
plant is in there. The thing about it is, that when you are planning these things
to be careful about spot zoning - there are pros and cons on that - these things
were all taken back to the people in the territory and zoned by the people. A map
of this particular area involved was drawn up in color for everyone to see at our
hearing. We realize that there will be non -conforming in there - they are existing
but by the same token you don't want to take a spot one place and another spot
another place, however, on industrial or commercial or anything else the Planning
Commission can be petitioned for a study for re -Boning when we have something
concrete to take under consideration. This zoning was really done by the people
out there. I believe I am right - am I not - that you folks worked this up.
Mr. Shultz:
Anybody else have anything to say?
MIXXRKXXDO4 Mr. B. H. Cruce:
Mr. Chairman, I don't want to sit here and not say anything. I'm B H. Cruce -
L own 5 acres in this area andI'm here as an owner and not representing the City
of Greeley. I did talk to a number of people in the area and we object to the
first purposals and submitted a petition to the Planning Commission and they did
amend the map and those people that signed the petition are in favor of the "A"
zone as shown on the map, north of second street. I just thought that the
Commissioners would like to know that we did a little studying on our own out there
Mr. Shultz: Anybody else - like to say anything either for or against zoning?
If there is no further comments, I -
Mr. Oscar Olsen: I have a piece of land just North of Mr. Cruce - is that in
Agricultural? I'm in the egg business there - will that effect me in any way?
-6-
Mr. Shultz:
Yes, you are in Agricultural and if you are in the egg business now, you're in.
Thank you. If there is nothing further, we will call a close to this hearing.
The hearing is now closed. The Board of County Commissioners will take this matter
under advisement and make a decision in the very near future.
We thank you for coming - all of you.
Hello