The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About972297.tiffJuly 15, 1997 Kerri Keithley Current Planner Weld County Department of Planning Services 1400 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Ms. Keithley: I am writing to you about the request by the Spanish Assembly of God for a Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a public church in the A (Agricultural) Zone District. The lot is Lot A of RE -1850 located in part of the SE4 of Section 8, T2N, R67W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. The location is east of and adjacent to Weld County Road 15-1/2; approximately 1/4 north of Weld County Road 22. I live at 7400 Elm Street, which is adjacent to this property. I urge you turn down this request. I am very concerned that the infrastructure of the area, which supports agricultural and sparse residential use, will not support the church. Access is by a dirt road. I do not believe that the road can handle the amount of traffic that will be generated by an active church congregation. I also question whether the building of a church on this site fits in with Weld County's overall plan for development. The construction of public buildings helter-skelter throughout agricultural/rural zones seems counter to the direction I thought most developing counties were heading. I thought that clustering residential/shopping/educational/religious/cultural structures into a geographically compact community separated from other similar communities by large open spaces was the preferred approach -- in Weld County and in other forward -looking counties. Putting the Spanish Assembly of God Church in the middle of a pasture runs counter to that planning approach and I hope that you will not approve of it. Thank you for giving me the chance to express my opinion on this matter. // Sincerely, JUL 1 6 1997 972297 July 16, 1997 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1400 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Re: Spanish Assembly of God Case No. USR-1162 Dear Sir/Madam: JUL 2 5 1997 This letter is in response to the notice we received dated June 20, 1997 regarding the above -mentioned matter. I am OPPOSED to this development plan and special review permit for a public church in our community. I oppose and will fight this permit for this proposed church for the following reasons: 1. I do not know these people -- they do not live in our community and will not be adding anything to our community EXCEPT TRAFFIC ON OUR DIRT ROADS (Elm Street and Maple Street), NOISE, A LACK OF RESPECT FOR PEACEFUL LIVING, and A SPOILING OF OUR VIEW. 2. Why don't these people build their church in their own neighborhood? 3. We have probably less than 5 Spanish people in our whole community. These people need to build in their own environment and community. 4. I DO NOT WANT NOR NEED additional traffic from strangers on our dirt roads, Elm Street and Maple Street. 5. I DO NOT WANT NOR NEED construction in an open pasture to spoil our view. We have rights as property owners to protest the development of this unwanted structure and unwanted strangers. 6. I am very curious how did these people buy this 5 -acre tract of land when the acreage in this area cannot be subdivided below 35 acres???? I want and demand an explanation of this. AS A PROPERTY OWNER IN THIS COMMUNITY. I VEHEMENTLY PROTEST AND OPPOSE THIS SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT FOR A PUBLIC CHURCH. Gloria Liddic at, 7151 Elm, Longmont, Colorado 80504 (303) 833-4805 972297 July 16, 1997 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1400 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Re: Spanish Assembly of God Case No. USR-1162 Dear Sir/Madam: JUL 1 r 19E7 This letter is in response to the notice we received dated June 20, 1997 regarding the above -mentioned matter. My husband and I are OPPOSED to this development plan and special review permit for a public church in our community. We oppose and will fight this permit for this proposed church for the following reasons: 1. We do not know these people -- they do not live in our community and will not be adding anything to our community EXCEPT TRAFFIC ON OUR DIRT ROADS (Elm Street and Maple Street), NOISE, A LACK OF RESPECT FOR PEACEFUL LIVING, and A SPOILING OF OUR VIEW. 2. Why don't these people build their church in their own neighborhood? 3. We have probably less than 5 Spanish people in our whole community. These people need to build in their own environment and community. 4. We DO NOT WANT NOR NEED additional traffic from strangers on our dirt roads, Elm Street and Maple Street. 5. We DO NOT WANT NOR NEED construction in an open pasture to spoil our view. We have rights as property owners to protest the development of this unwanted structure and unwanted strangers. 6. We are very curious how did these people buy this 5 -acre tract of land when the acreage in this area cannot be subdivided below 35 acres???? We want and demand an explanation of this. AS PROPERTY OWNERS IN THIS COMMUNITY, WE VEHEMENTLY PROTEST AND OPPOSE THIS SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT FOR A PUBLIC CHURCH. Si erely, J and Jennifer Blease, 7407 Maple, Longmont, CO 80504 (303) 833-2040 972297 Dept. of Planning Services Admin Offices 1400 N. 17th Ave. Greeley, CO 80631 June 28, 1997 Elizabeth Kaido Elizabeth VandenBergh 7400 Elm St Longmont, CO 80504 AttentionKerri Keithley: Reguarding case number USR-1162; What is Weld County thinking?11? A public building on a private road? I'm not only flabbergasted, but agast!! This IS zoned agricultural, is it not? Hello! Don't we have zoning for a reason? Apparently not. This is not hundreds of feet from my pasture. This is on the other side of a dirt road. This is a horse neighborhood on DIRT roads. The traffic will be too much! Not to mention the eye sore of a building in the middle of an alfalfa field. I am VERY MUCH AGAINST THIS. I suppose because they are a church (andar a non- taxable, non-profit organaization) they can "get around" zoning laws the rest of us are expected to obey. This neighborhood is very much concerned about the way this shrinking agricultural area is being developed. You may remember the prison proposal. It's frightening to see how fast these farm lands are dissapearing. Maybe it would be a better (and cheaper) idea to build the church n town...where the people live. Instead of in a small horse community. Earnestly, Elizabeth VandenBergh /fa /VLa9l# ,,Au liCii:fi' r. aflfl i'g 972297 July 22, 1997 Kerri Keithley 1400 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Ms. Keithly, My name is Roland E. Bunn and I live directly south of WCR 15.5 and WCR 22. I would like to express my concern regarding the Special Use Permit for the building of the Spanish Assembly of God Church. Although I am not within 500 feet, I am close enough to be directly affected by this new development. I don't feel that a church is neither wanted or needed in that corner of completely agricultural land. I have spoken to the residents directly across from the planned site and they agree. A church is for the surrounding community and I have yet to be able to find anyone in this area who has even heard of the Spanish Assembly of God Church let alone attends and it's apparent that this church is not for this community but intends to bring it's population from outside the community. I am very concerned for the neighborhood. For the past several months we have had many new developments surrounding us for which we seem to have no influence. Especially with all the annexations by Firestone and Frederick and the unwanted commercial developments in this area. This new planned church is being handled in the same way. Anything seems to go in this part of Weld County whether the current residents want it or not. It should, at the very least, be obvious to you folks in the Planning Department that the roads down in this part of Weld County are already unsafe. No planning or dollars are being spent by either Weld County or the small towns in the area to upgrade infrastructure. Everyone just keeps building and,#the infrastructure continues to degrade. The site for this church is accessed by dirt roads only and in particular, WCR 15.5 is barely a wagon path. If this church were being planned by our community for attendance by our neighborhood, I might feel more inclined to be supportive, but in this case I find this totally unacceptable. Planning JUL 2 9 1997 Sincerely, Roland and Sharon Bunn 9915 Navajo Court Casa Grande Subdivision 972297 4EXHIBIT 1 7451 Elm Street Enchanted Hills Longmont, CO 80504 July 28, 1997 Kerri Keithley C/O Weld County Department of Planning Services 1400 North 17th. Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Kerri Keithly: We, as owners and residents of lot one Enchanted Hills, strongly oppose the plan to build the Spanish Assembly of God Church on Weld County Road 151/2. Our lot is within 500 feet of the proposed church. The most direct access to this five acre lot proposed for the church is down our gravel road, Elm Street. The dust and noise generated by a church with 170 members would make it unbearable for the current residents of Enchanted Hills. Also the abuse the road would take would make it impossible to keep it somewhat smooth and driveable. Currently the road is graded one day and bumpy the next. Also what you refer to as Weld County Road 151/2, I don't believe, is actually a County Road. It was never brought up to county standards and dedicated. It has never been maintained. There are no services to this proposed church lot. No water, gas, electricity, or sewer. I assume a septic system would have to be installed. A system capable of handling 170 plus members would have to be rather large and could contaminate the ground water and nearby wells that many residents have. I question whether there is even a legal right of way for the services to this lot. Also I don't believe this church would pay property taxes to pay for the extra burden to the county for additional road, fire, police, etc. services. This five acre lot should never have been allowed to be split from the original 80 acre plot two years ago. What ever happened to the 35 acre minimum for agricultural land to be built upon? I ask you to please not grant approval for this inappropriate location for a church. Sincerely, JUL 3 0 1997 4- CR Barry L. Hanke Rose E. Hanke 972297 EXHIBIT RUG 04 '97 03:39PM CAMP DRESSER & MCKEE P.1'2 August 4, 1997 Kerni Keithley Weld County Administrative Offices Department of Planning Services 1400 N. 17th Street Greeley, CO 80631 /RUC 0 5 1997 Re: Case# USA -1162, Spanish Assembly of God Church Location Dear Ms. Keithley, This letter has been written in response to the proposed location of the Spanish Assembly of God Church (Church) to be located in southern Weld County. We have a number of concerns that cause our opposition to the proposed location. Our concerns including traffic, noise, environmental and additional impacts are summarized below ■ Traffic Impacts: It is our understanding that the current church is predominantly located in the city of Longmont (10 miles west). And that the present congregation consists of 170 people. Although the county is requiring the church to pave Rd. 15 1/2, there are no harriers in place to prevent the church participants from travelling down the dirt roads of Elm Street and Maple Street on there way to the church. This amount of traffic will negatively impact the air quality in and around our neighbourhood as well as impact the safety of the roads (we frequently ride horses up and down the roads). • Noise Impacts: With church services scheduled for Wednesday, Saturday and twice Sunday, the noise coming from the church has a potential to ruin the tranquillity of our neighbourhood. ■ Impacts to the Environment It is our understanding that the proposed facility will be on a septic system (leach field). We don't believe and have not seen an engineers report that supports the assumption that this parcel of land can support the sewage that would be produced from the size of the current congregation. • Additional Impacts: Although there is a limited number of services regularly scheduled during the week, services including weddings, funerals, teen nights, bible study etc. will increase the traffic, noise and environmental impacts (listed above) in the neighbourhood substantially. o: \BURGsssen\naw,cer. u: 972297 G 08/04/97 15:43 TX/RX NO.8106 P.001 • RUG 04 '97 93:39PM CAMP DRESSER & MCKEE P.2i2 August 4, 1997 Keni Keithling Page # 2 Although we both believe that a good church serves as the cornerstone of a community, we believe the church should be located at the corner of the community it serves, not ten miles away. If however the location of the proposed church is in response to the planned growth currently occurring in the towns of Firestone, Frederick, and Dacona, we believe that these towns should realize the inherent inconveniences associated with the air, noise and environmental impacts that are sure to follow. Please consider our concerns before a decision is made. Unplanned growth impacts us all and to place a church at the end of a rural dirt road will negatively impact the neighbouring residents community. Sincerely, Todd and Lisa Burgesser 7301 Elm Street Longmont, CO 80504 Oe\9VEVESSEE\NneiON. LET 08/04/97 15:43 TX/RX NO.8106 972297 P.002 • FROM: Craig Owen 10170 WCR 15 1/2 Longmont CO, 80504 /11E, 0 4 1997 3 August, 1997 TO: Kerri Keithly Weld County Department of Planning Services 1400 N. 17th Avenue Greeley CO. 80631 Dear Kerri Keithly: This letter is in reference to proposed development of a 5 acre building lot located adjacent to my 75 acre farm. I learned of this development only recently, and quite by accident. 1 was on the northwest corner of my property, inspecting the trees in a 300 tree plum thicket that I planted last year. While there, I noticed two small sticks of wood protruding from the soil of the adjacent lot. Curious, I walked over for closer inspection and noticed a small sign lying at the base of the sticks in the weeds. Imagine my surprise to find that a hearing was scheduled Tuesday August 5th at 1:30 p.m. to discuss the construction of a church on the property. As a property owner adjacent to this proposed development, I have numerous questions about development of this piece of agricultural property for this purpose. First, why wasn't I notified of this issue, in writing, well in advance of the scheduled hearing.? I can assure you that my name is on the Weld County tax ledger at the above listed address. Secondly, can you provide me with clarification of the agricultural land use policy in Weld County? I was under the impression that a minimum of 80 acres of agricultural land was required for the construction of one single family residence. I was further under the impression that, at a maximum frequency of once every five years, an agricultural landowner may subdivide off up to a maximum of 35 acres for which the County would issue a "Special Exemption" permit for the construction of a maximum of one single family residence. I was under the impression that the Malcombs, the previous owners of the 80 acre farm from which this 5 acres was subdivided, followed this process to create this 5 acre single family residential building lot. If memory serves, this special exemption process was initiated sometime in 1995 on the 5 acre lot in question. If this is true, how is it that we have come to the point where we are now considering construction of anything but a single family farmhouse on this piece of property? Assuming that it is merely my ignorance of County planning and zoning procedures that gives rise to my confusion about this issue, I wish to offer a few key 972297 EXHIBIT I reasons why 1, as a tax -paying resident of this small, proud -to -be -unincorporated community, believe that any non -single family residential use of this farm property should be denied. MORE INFORMATION REQUIRED Information available to -date indicates that the Spanish Assembly of God Church is comprised of 170 members. In total, between nearby rural subdivisions Enchanted Hills and CasaGrande Estates, there is a total of perhaps 60 homes. Beyond that, only 75 acre (or greater) farms like mine and totally undeveloped farmland round out the community. At an average of 3 persons per home, the entire population of the 10 square mile area centered around the 5 acre rural lot in question totals roughly 225 persons, men, women, and children combined. This suggests that many or most of the Church's members are not residents of this community. I, for one, would like to have the names, or, most importantly, the addresses of the members of the Church in question enumerated and mailed to all of the residents of the surrounding community to help us better understand why the location proposed is deemed appropriate. My hunch is that it is an inappropriate location based soley on this information. INAPPROPRIATE LOCATION The 5 acre agricultural lot in question is literally sandwiched -in between a 28 home unincorporated rural subdivision with lot sizes between 5 and 10 acres apiece and two 75 acre farms. To place a large, and potentially growing, church in such a location is inconsistent with both density and usage considerations of planning and zoning practices. This is doubly true when one considers that few, if any of the surrounding residents are members of this Church. The nearby municipalities of Del Camino, Firestone, Frederick, and Dacono are in a rapid growth phase. This should afford numerous locations much more suitable to such a land use. However, this still leaves the question of where the Church's members predominately live. I may be typical of the residents of this community when I say that I am an outspoken advocate of remaining an unincorporated resident of Weld County for one primary reason; the breakneck growth policies of the surrounding municipalities is clearly evident. Competition between developers and the securing of additional taxpaying land users often appear to outweigh sound planning and zoning decision making processes. As surrounding residents, our wishes are often blatantly ignored and our testimony at city hearings on these matters weighted with a multiplier of zero. Many, including myself, have been quickly dismissed with a government official's comment of "You're not a tax paying resident of XYZ." Well, I am a tax paying resident of unincorporated Weld County, I would like to keep my farm a farm. I would not like to have a business -like land use such as a large church pryed in between my property, my neighbor's farm, and my rural minded neighbors to the west. I certainly hope that residents like me still have a voice in Weld County Government, as well as a way to express that voice. 972297 ACCESS My property is the lone address on "Weld County Road 15 1/2". Why is this? The answer is that WCR 15 1/2 does not exist. Most County maps, even those issued by the County itself, do not even show it as a dotted line. It has no street sign. It is totally unmaintained. It gets no road grading or snow removal attention. It is merely two wheel ruts between the fences of my two immediate neighbors to the west and my west windbreak tree planting. It has huge depressions in it that become 2' deep mud bogs when it rains. It becomes impassable with snow at certain times in the winter, and I do mean impassable. The school bus will not even use it to turn around on when it reaches the end of Maple or Elm streets in the winter. The postal deliverer will not, at times, deliver mail to my mailbox at the end of Maple Street. You see, even I, the lone "Weld County Road 15 1/2" addresee, do not use it for access. I merely cross it to get to my driveway from Maple Street. The address itself is one of convenience for the postal service, since my mailbox is located at my driveway entrance. If only I had a nickel for every time I failed to get a letter or a package citing "no such address". If some brave soul wanted to buy the 5 acre lot in question, build a farmhouse on it, and attempt to use "Road 15 1/2" for his access year round, more power to him. However, it is in my opinion, totally inappropriate to locate a business -like, high traffic institution such as a church at that location, forcing the use of "Road 15 1/2" as the sole means of access. And what about the increased traffic on Maple Street and Elm Street that would necessarily accompany such use of "Road 15 1/2?" I'll bet this is an issue that has my 28 neighbors to the west up in arms about safety and quality -of -life both. Let's look at their situation. By my calculations, Maple and Elm Streets serve 14 households each. Both streets are 1/2 mile long. If we assume each household generates two round trips out and back each day, and for calculations sake that all 14 houses are located on top of one another at the midpoint of the road, that works out to a figure of 1/2 mile per round trip times 2 roundtrips per day times 14 households equals 14 vehicle miles per day on both Maple and Elm streets. If one adds an additional single family farmhouse to the 5 acre building lot in question, using this same calculation and realizing that a roundtrip by a resident of the farmhouse necessitates travel along the entire length of either Maple Street or Elm street, we see an increase from 14 vehicle miles per day to 15 vehicle miles per day on both Maple and Elm streets assuming the residents alternate their use of Maple and Elm streets, (not an unrealistic assumption given the location of the lot in question.) From 14 to 15 vehicles miles per day is an increase of just over 7%. Not exactly what an established community backing up to two 75 acre farms had in mind, but not too bad. Now, let's rerun the calculations, not for a single family farmhouse, but for a 170 member church on Sunday. With the lack of information currently available, we'll have to make some assumptions. First, let's assume that half the Church's residents live north of WCR 24 and the other 1/2 live south of WCR 22. This way,the traffic would split equally among Maple Street and Elm Street. Secondly, Let's assume that the 170 members divide themselves up among, say 60 cars. Remember that this is based on today's count, and could well increase over time. A 5 acre lot leaves plenty of room for expansion. Next, 972297 realize that each of the 30 cars on Elm Street and the 30 cars on Maple Street must transit the entire length going in and coming out. So, instead of 15 vehicle miles per street per day in the case of a single family farmhouse (a 7 % increase in traffic) the residents served by Maple and Elm streets would instead be faced with 44 vehicle miles on Sunday, an increase of a whopping 214%. And, coming back to the point that few, if any of the church members live in homes served by Maple or Elm streets, what's to stop churchgoers that are running a "little late" for the service from speeding the last 3/4 rural mile or so into the church parking lot? What about the additional dust from the gravel laden surfaces of Maple and Elm streets as well as "Road 15 1/2" generated from these cars during the summer, especially one of the drought stricken variety we only recently got temporary relief from? If 1 were one of my western neighbors, I'd be more than just a little alarmed about the prospect of such a land use being approved in such a location. Good advice for Sundays might be to keep our children and ourselves off the streets instead of taking leisurely walks with our mates or riding horses as we do now. And, don't forget about battling the dust clouds by keeping our windows closed, at least on Sundays. Finally on the issue of access, let me address the question, "Why not just pave the roads?" To me, the answer is simple; residents wish to bear neither the expense or loss of enjoyment associated with having their immediate surroundings, and indeed their very backyards, turned from a low utilization, tree -lined wagon trail to high traffic volume city pavement, especially when the intended land use driving the change is of no benefit to most, if not all, of those residents. UTILITIES Concerning the topic of utilities to serve such an institution, I know for a fact that Central Weld County Water District mains that serve residents of Maple and Elm Streets are not adequate to serve an institution such as a 170 member church. In fact, when I built my farmhouse, I was forced to pay for extension of the six inch main along WCR 22 eastward to my property corner, in order to obtain adequate volume and pressure to serve my single family farmhouse. This main extension project and resultant lot corner meter location increased my water service installation costs by more than 60%. The 2 inch Maple and Elm Street mains were not engineered to serve any additional users, even of the single family farmhouse variety. On the topic of sewer service, it is my understanding that Maple and Elm street residents both, live in homes with individual septic systems. While this seems satisfactory for small scale single family residential dwellings, it seems in no way acceptable for a church with 170 current members. My farm, as well as my neighbor's farm, both produce alfalfa hay for livestock consumption. Alfalfa root depths of 17 feet or more are common. I am not sure that I would wish to live near or eat animals that have been fed alfalfa nurtured by large scale septic system effluent. 1 suggest that a more suitable location for such a land use might be one in which ready access to sanitary sewer and city water exists. Finally, by way of my continuing education, could you provide me with any written information, as well as names of organizations, departments, and personnel that could 972297 assist me in my quest to rapidly become familiar with any and all policies and procedures that might be used to effectively deny such non-agricultural uses of agricultural land in unincorporated Weld County when it is against the wishes of the surrounding community. As an important closing comment, please forgive any instances of unprofessionalism that may have crept into this letter. At this time, I am simultaneously ignorant, uniformed, rushed and passionate about this issue. After Tuesday's meeting, I am hopeful that only the passion will dominate. Sincerely, L Wr Craig en 972297 July 31, 1997 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1400 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Re: Spanish Assembly of God Case No. USR-1162 PETITION EXHIBIT I F_ This Petition is hereby signed by the following residents of Enchanted Hills, namely Maple Street and Elm Street, to protest and to state our opposition to the development plan and special review permit for a public church in our community. The people who will be building and attending this church do not live in our community, are unknown to our community, and contribute nothing to our community. We do not want the additional traffic on our dirt roads, the noise, and distraction that this Spanish Assembly of God Church will bring to our otherwise quiet residential area. We oppose the development plan and special review permit for the above -mentioned Spanish Assembly of God Church. NAME 45124_44.i,&a.g.4_ 2d4 *44 7.so UUU 753 7c 7 /t(a.ple 7z57 i S33-zzlZ 4- ScwSe4&. 7f 27nit4 JE- ADDRESS TELEPHONE -1Jt {7`AtiLdes-70 Net '2 907 li ayr.G_ 83.3- ao.,ia g33•1 -V55 x'33 L77a 833-31//7 noph ,7 QJ3 Jw7 l y l b ivna \ 1_ 833-3i3 I 705gz atee.,%C-t`, )33-367* 74.5 5,42,4 cA rae# wi4ilz 133 '36 74- 972297 Page 2 of Petition Against Spanish Assembly of God NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE aier 7vini%ple L j // 44, 2r7O k)od, _",(-.Nc‘cam 1131(a to, vie 83 2g �O 972297 Kenneth A. Voss 7251 Elm St, E.H. Longmont, CO 80504 303/833-0548 fax: 303/833-3333 August 1, 1997 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1400 N. 17th Ave. Greeley, CO 80631 Re: Case USR-1162 Dear Sirs: As a resident of the area called "Enchanted Hills," I became concerned after receiving notice of hearing concerning the application for a Special Review Permit by the Spanish Assembly of God church to develop a piece of land at the end of the street where I live. The land in question is at the end of a dirt road halfway between Weld County Roads 22 and 24 on the north and south, and halfway between Weld County Roads 15 and 17 on the east and west. If it were not for the few houses located to the west of the proposed site, the church would be completely isolated, located in the middle of a field. The few houses that do exist to the west are all on three to five acres, with no more than perhaps forty total in the square mile delineated by the roads mentioned above. The existing development itself is rather isolated, the nearest town being Firestone, and currently its population center is nearly four miles away, though the city has annexed land on the west side of Weld County Road 15. There are obvious questions and concerns of increased traffic patterns, road maintenance, and perhaps even traffic routing or rerouting during church hours. And, of course, there are many resident's and landowner's personal objections. However, more to the heart of my own concerns is the foresight of this development in the context of development of this area of Weld County over the long term. It is my understanding that the city governments of Firestone and Frederick, the two nearest towns, have indicated no interest in this development. Indeed, the recent annexation efforts of Firestone have stopped west of WCR 15 and south of WCR 20, a mile and half away, and this land, while currently in various stages of development, is still by and large open farmland. As the development of the I-25 corridor continues, it is clear that development of this land, almost four miles to the east of the highway, is inevitable and perhaps even necessary. It is my understanding that because of this, a comprehensive plan is needed and for many areas has already been formulated to facilitate efficient and intelligent use of the land. My concern is that EXHIBIT 9'722..9'7 Kenneth A. Voss page 2 building a church on this site is not an efficient or intelligent use of this land at this time. The effect of current development efforts in this area of Weld County is yet to be seen. Areas are currently divided into industrial, commercial, or residential zones as speculator's signs at the edges of fields variously indicate; but the land this far east of I-25 is still largely empty with a few, though growing, number of exceptions. Churches are notorious for their difficulties in sustaining financial viability, and require a population base from which to draw membership and support. Until actual development occurs, with houses, businesses and people in place in the proximity, a unique and rather inflexible usage facility such as a church (and in this category I would also include buildings such as schools, recreation centers, and so forth) seems at best superfluous, at worst shortsighted and incautious. The land is currently zoned agricultural assumedly because this zoning reflects the best use of the land. If the land is best used otherwise and an interest is indicated to do so, the zoning should to be changed accordingly. The needs of this area will likely change as quickly as the pace of development, and checkerboard zoning will result in mishmashed, unsuitable development and inefficient use of land. This has undesirable results in the long term, including devaluation or misevaluation, wasted resources, and thus lost opportunities for both landowners and developers. It is my hope that the Department of Planning Services will give this matter consideration in light of the wishes of the affected property owners and concerned residents, but also with an eye toward the future and prudent, long-term land use. Ken Voss Resident 972297 EXHIBIT r WE, THE UNDERSIGNED TAX PAYING CITIZENS OF ENCHANTED COUNTY, REQUEST THAT A SPECIAL REVIEW/SPECIAL USE ISSUED TO THE SPANISH ASSEMBLY OF GOD CHURCH - CASE C HAVE CONCERNS REGARDING TRAFFIC AND DUST, SAFETY JOGGERS AND HORSEBACK RIDERS, AND LOSS OF SERENITY OF DUE TO INCREASED TRAFFIC. ALSO, TH AGRICULTURAL/RESIDENTIAL AREA AND WE FEEL IT E AGRICULTURAL/RESIDENTIAL IN ITS USAGE. NAME NAME VJMspP 'ILLS I. N WELD ERMIT Ncl BE >R lib: WE FOR WALKERS, NE i HI;URHDOD IS AN iOULI;, REMAIN baste .,L/. tY\nRa.,, r\. w�� MSo14 .C.01, - )WA ADDRESS 7?0z. ( Lr' ST.� .E.B:R-1po.G kao.brt,,C0 $0.SDy• • PHONE 03- g33-3`tt1 NAME .C W! P� - . . . ...../7, NAME ,b)( -1 -s -w 7-Pl�7 e'.° {� /�� ADDRESS ,.J r� . �/ S ' - �crng .Ih-v'`�'./ C(9 .-cs.fe< PHONE .T3t3c233�• /•a)-0 NAME NAME ADDRESS PHONE k?" . r: 7g5 2 rr 44?7 7.� '4.......... NAME Vb-CAR." !�0SS j /CYa NAME �'-�-/ FLT ADDRESS PHONE L3635 f 33 --2_22-6,3 NAME NAME ADDRESS PHONE . s e- tot 77,1 (-0 ,R-CSZ97 gt33 .03rn8 972297' ADDRESS 714≤" &/ t l PHONE NAME NAME 403— f33 C3a foGetz_ 5 Otsc7t ADDRESS 7aa o k--1-Ad lUelg6rd PHONE C9C -(33 f3G a NAME . a.4 0.C/4 . X ..C /.O,D/G' o.nr NAME . SCAB,/4�er47G'/CD71.,! ADDRESS .7 577 PHONE 30,3- g33-4/105 -7Q o5 NAME NAME N �i� I<oYr5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J L) P V k om-I ADDRESS 7i2 GLM S PHONE 833- 09: I NAME NAME . ADDRESS PHONE 1/ ex! ./fipl. %tso,✓ fly of 7776 )01oso•✓ 7/S thc/n/ 033- � 9 3 s - NAME l_ mt),A YsiPOiw-1 C �� NAME ADDRESS 1lv1 EL.". Sr. PHONE e)%3-t1tS 972297 4y NAME ADDRESS PHONE NAME NAME NAME NAME ADDRESS PHONE 5enfro" /939/a.mod. . tarn. 4994 7 as/ E/4, S.* V NAME . NAME . ADDRESS PHONE NAME 133-30q/0 -7O,sd Fix-, S O3) 833-05 3 CCk c3otnJoo . l 70 So €awl X33 - 05`-l3 . ver�G.dgots ..2/Q/.a-/V ADDRESS . PHONE . . 3Q3./.0.33P--242,5- NAME NAME ADDRESS PHONE NAME NAME ADDRESS PHONE 1.&L //G/zc t l g/ -7 E-7i'Y7 S± .�, � G� e � . Ih/ c'e r -e r2 h7 303/ S33 -3569 A /t ccA 'c/0 7 c{ce L� shr-�f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . &33- 35� 972297 �� y NAME —1)61/- n r%c- \ S, ADDRESS .I ?1 �. Mar4Q. 'St PHONE g33 "313 1 NAME �% 4 c )71 -644t€4 -11e ADDRESS .7,3SD .-c%m S' E. N. _ , . . _ PHONE . .t.0 q ✓a o,07 . .8.33- Q9SS NAME Terry 4X3I*ti NAME E / , ADDRESS 735'0 �V�+, E, N, 303 e33--09cc PHONE NAME ockiL� es5ec NAME ADDRESS . D (Aj�z 1'/`'` . Le.. 04.77.\ ............ PHONE . (3.°3) . J Sz3 .. . . . . . NAME u!cC eSS� NAME � ADDRESS ISO\ f1i� PHONE . 3P 3.) 233-3 a3 NAME NAME ADDRESS PHONE 972297 yAly August 2, 1997 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1400 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 CASE NUMBER: USR-1162 We would like to submit a letter detailing the reasons we DO NOT want the Spanish Assembly of God Church to be issued a Special Review Permit. 1. We live in an agricultural area. We enjoy sitting on our deck, entertaining in our yard and enjoying the peace and quiet. Building a church between Elm Street and Maple Street on the road easement for Road 15 1/2 will ruin this peace and quiet. There will a continuous stream of cars going up and down our dirt road. This will increase the noise and dust surrounding our home. Our road is very bumpy with the small amount of traffic that now uses it - mainly the residents, their family and friends, postal and newspaper people. It is our understanding that this church has at least 170 members. This could result in 50 to 85 or more cars per service plus special functions and services. This would be a tremendous increase in traffic. There are many people who like to ride horses, take walks, jog, and ride bicycles. The large increase in traffic will also bring serious safety concerns. With the amount of dust generated, damage to the dirt roads, plus the increased amount of vehicles, the potential risk for accidents will increase also. This is an unsatisfactory situation. We also are aware that the church holds services on Sunday and Wednesday. There is no mention of special functions such as bible classes, religious education, weddings, funerals, holiday celebrations, socials, etc., that will be held in addition. With the large number of people attending these functions, the negative impact they will have on the roads and serenity of this area will be staggering. The size of the building is also a concern to us. Currently, outbuildings in this area, such as a barn, are limited to 1,500 square feet on a 5 acre plot. The church's proposed 27,000 square feet structure is out of proportion for a 5 acre agricultural setting. It seems to be a very large building for a 170 member congregation to need for two Sunday services and one week -day service. Are they contemplating a school or day care center? 972297 2. What is listed as Weld County Road 15 1/2 is merely a dirt path through a wheat and weed patch. There is no drainage system established and this path is not currently maintained by the county. We do not wish this path to become a road because there are no homes built in this area. 3. The members of this church do not live in the immediate vicinity. They have listed their membership at 170, which is more people than currently live in this small, rural area. We are not sure where their members will be coming from, but we feel that their church should be built in their own community. 4. There is land that has recently been annexed into Frederick and Firestone. This would seem to be a much more acceptable area for them to build as utilities are readily available and accessibility would be much easier. In closing, we would like for you to withhold the Special Review Permit from the Spanish Assembly of God Church. We do not want to lose the serenity surrounding our home. This is an Agricultural/Residential area and we would like to keep it that way. We feel that the church could locate in a more appropriate area. Thank you, tikkx u4) LibLct,� Mr. and Mrs. Lloyd 'Williamson 7300 Elm Street Enchanted Hills R-4 Longmont, CO 80504 972297 Dear Sirs, August 5,1997 This letter is to inform you of our adamant objection to the proposed Special Use Permit for the property adjacent to WCR 15 ',h, one-fourth mile north of WCR 22. We believe the proposed permit would not be in keeping with the character of the surrounding area. The numerous horse, cow, and other farm animals in this area would generate eventual complaints. In addition, the access roads to the site are gravel/dirt and cannot handle the increased traffic such a change would bring. Local traffic already creates difficult road conditions such as washboarding, and dust. We as homeowners in the immediate area believe this Special Permit should be denied. The general and surrounding properties are residential and/or agricultural and have created a definite character that we believe the Weld County Planning Commission should protect. In the long run, this change permit would be detrimental to the homeowners long established in this area. This area is country and should remain so. Sincerely, gamey Barbara L. Northcutt Terry E. Northcutt 1350 C 1.ri .S . %-t . OS S (....O.-n,vv-o., it to g'cSoy ?.)t;a - 833 ccss 97?29'7 Hello