The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20223497.tiffEXHIBIT INVENTORY CONTROL SHEET CASE COZ22-0010 - KENNARD AND VICKI KNUDSON I1 ! Exhibit Submitted By Page # Description Planning A. Commission Resolution of Recommendation Planning B. Commission C. Planning Services Stephanie Vest, Southwestern Weld D. Constituent Craig Poulsen, Brighton Outdoor E. Storage Email regarding Adams County position on C-3 zoning F. Adams County 29 on the subject property (received 12/16/2022) Stephanie Vest and surrounding G. neighbors Petition, theft report, maps, miscellaneous information H. Stephanie Vest 58 supporting opposition (received 12/16/2022) Jim and Shirley Email in opposition of COZ22-0010 I. Beliveau 85 (received 12/19/2022) Summary of Hearing (Minutes dated 11/1/2022) 2 PowerPoint Presentation Email in opposition of COZ22-0010 26 (received 12/5/2022) 28 Email in support of COZ22-0010 (received 12/15/2022) 31 PowerPoint Presentation (received 12/16/2022) Arnold and Janice Email in opposition of COZ22-0010 J. Lopez 86 (received 12/19/2022) Email in opposition of COZ22-0010 K. Rusty Knels 89 (received 12/19/2022) Email in opposition of COZ22-0010 L. Michael Sedio 93 (received 12/20/2022) Jeffry and Jodi M. Korbe Email in opposition of COZ22-0010 95 (received 12/21/2022) Petition with electronic signatures N. Stephanie Vest 97 (received 12/20/2022) O. Applicant Email and map regarding property to the north of the P. Applicant 114 subject property (received 12/21/2022) Written statement of what was presented at the hearing Q. Bill Wycoff 117 (received 12/21/2022) 100 PowerPoint Presentation (received 12/21/2022) R. Applicant S. V. Chadwin Cox narrative of what was presented at the 118 hearing (received 12/21/2022) 2022-3497 Co 220010 APPLICANT: KENNARD AND VICKI KNUDSON PLANNER: CHRIS GATHMAN REQUEST: CHANGE OF ZONE FROM THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT TO THE C-3 (BUSINESS COMMERCIAL) ZONE DISTRICT. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT A REC EXEMPT RECX16-0028; BEING PART OF THE SE4 SECTION 33, Ti N, R67W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO. LOCATION: NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 2; WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 19. I PAGE OF DOCUMENT INCLUDED IN PAPER FILE. REMAINDER RETAINED ELECTRONICALLY IN TYLER. rty wilt be heantbefoi concerning this grope county Planning Commission; and Both, hearings will be ADMINISTRATION CO �' NNE.L.0 COUNTY Greeley, ii 50 " t rte' �+�, , a�30 , do fission rieesong willi; �p°�'�' � r �'�ci � �1 � yll'- air L&-° ,� ,� spitipologair_ �°tur's( ��,�,� ilk �A� _�-t �� .jr_� �� ,Tf' as 141 s.- c 't - _e pop it:4 In it 1 tit- 7" J' ;pJlt Cr)�` d_'i;:'4 p,�`�� J1 s ilti: t. e�P� t ANC LZ 7 sir P a7a. _,,. r. mod. r#a+ r'• _ 1 z'I Altj-sireti nit," 17.-7t ' I I �� A rite j -air a. We coneettning this prOperty vole be toward batre the Coorii? Planning c mrnesszvl and Board al County C.arriertissioners :E3nth1 h wit be '�' of WELDCOUNTY .ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 1150 "Cr Street ¢Greeley,. co 80621 iaarawswitc r ' 1= , IN!t F I c 0rc4 1".! e, . . 1•' 1 9 1 ,, 0.1 ( Pk !. 7.01Nt or; 1..Rs'' i Tc;_I , a .. I:.a I -., CO I 1?'Y 1 _ ,rawai i'!t [,•lt.F/ it -7��S-M�I•R'' n ��17'141y1g.�4iiT caisworeavew notancono Ear ., .. .r_-. aka -Tom' --7 -��? �_-- - r'y =y 86`l. J. I WELD COUNTY, CO CUD Mr is • i I a .. ' - "Ea a �_ _ —' _"~� I LS - 4 4\ int st‘einoviAmsaktits1 rei %Se l'i1/474%thie Wee % it Is 4 w44 \ itAlsoiv‘,.\\,0\iii, cit t \ AVeNtiPt4 S4S .**%‘‘NiStt h Eststl 4"‘A‘ et 04:14:nt‘ti%1{Usysi4‘s>4 A., iket 44 411% ,N1/4 fl 14\ 1%4 4* 7S I 444VW`Ss V* i 1 / wet stS laarvoisa 3 r a ASS 4 :4114;3(011 , e Tools ti • WELD COUNTY, CO ,=,1y 8 `l. WELD COUNTY, CO /xi' au SnsuA �, TT y3n.3. '."`"-:„,..,(F.:::.„ Gcc. Hx way hA. \ • _ rumirut onwloocm \ cl. vnl I,n Smm .ue (rl ff W fTCIp"L M1.I.A.mIN zem COMMERCIAL ZONE DISTRICT BULK STANDARDS ♦ •.tt� Sm]S. MM 1H DN R[, (KUW3T rM. Wxt n .l,T m� �uaL nom,., trtnr m3 Uu rmnur ,uwea u..n'ao 1\I 8114 ci W I[ SYNEDL LEGEND ��x wt P•�J ant o�°ier3i�ao�eeon YIID♦ EYE— + i�Yuia ucne�caiv . I6 nSL `e wnn non. rmnou..„ ,, as rm C ewna LWETYPE LEGEND /a n`w Sacilm u.l ,74-71; to. Tm3• 0 �-DO.�Siuoi m OTC CO SPO RESPONSE LOCATIONS +4' WELD COUNTY, CO )acono U 1 r U I i WELD COUNTY f ADAMS CO ottir ! f/ klIIIMISSISIIIIMI IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMentS 1 I a I lir ale Jlipt6 a!F WELD COUNTY, CO Figure 1: Dacono Municipal Limits and Planning Area u 0" I Miles STATE Legend r ''i Dacono Mun►cipal Boundary Growth Boundary Parcels River / Creek Lake / Pond 100 -Year Floodplain 1 9 500 -Year Floodplain Future Land Use Map WELD COUNTY, CO R PKWY sass es Note: The Crty of Thornton GIS has made every reasonable effort tc represent geographic data as accurately as possible, and assumes no liability associated with the use or disuse of its prod,icts. Information contained herer is for representational purposes only and rs not rntendec to be suosttutee for accurate boundary locations, legal or professional opinions. LD COUNTY ADAMS COUNTY riILL WELD COUIJTY,.CO 1 That the, proposal is consistent with the policies of Chapter 22 of this Code, if not, then that the zoning of the property under -consideration is faulty, or that changing conditions in the area warrant a Change of Zone 2 That the USES which would be allowed on the subject property by granting the Change of Zone will be compatible with the surrounding land USES 3 That adequate water and sewer service can be made available to serve the site If the rezoning is approved, the applicant shall demonstrate, pnor to issuance of building permits bn the site, that the water and sewer services:are available at the site and are adequate and appropriate to meet the DEVELOPMENT requirements - 4 For zoning amendments to any,zone district other than A (Agriculture), unpaved STREETS/ROADS providing access to the subject parcels shall have a minimum 26 -foot -wide traversurface with a minimum 4 -inch depth of aggregate surface course (gravel) and a minimum RIGHT-OF-WAY width of sixty (60) feet Otherwise, the rezoning shall only be approved on the condition that the applicant shall enter into an Improvements Agreement pnor to recording the Change of Zone plat Such agreement shall be in conformance with Appendix 8-N, Transportation Plan,'and Section 2-3-30, Collateral for improvements, both of this Code The Improvements Agreement shall provide for the road to be improved to a minimum of 26 -foot -wide travel surface with a -minimum 4 -inch depth of aggregate surface course (gravel) and a minimum RIGHT-OF-WAY width of sixty (60) feet pnor to the recording of any land use permit map/or issuance of any building permit, access permit, or grading permit, whichever comes first, and shall be re-evaluated for compliance with any additional improvements upon submittal of an application_for a land use permit, building permit, access permit, or grading permit Additional improvements, if necessary, may require an amended or new Improvements Agreement documenting additional requirements No land use permit, building permit, access permit, or grading permit shall be issued without review of the_Improvements Agreement 5 That, in those instances where the following characteristics are applicable to the rezoning request, the applicant had demonstrated compliance with the applicable standards - - a If the proposed Change of Zone is located within any OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT identified by maps officially adopted by the COUNTY, that the applicant has demonstrated compliance with the COUNTY regulations concerning OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICTS Compliance may be demonstrated in a previous public hearing or in the hearing concerning the rezoning application b That the proposed rezoning will not permit the USE of any area known to contain a COMMERCIAL MINERAL DEPOSIT as defined by state statutes in a manner which would interfere with the present or future extraction of such deposit by an EXTRACTOR to any greater extent than under the present zoning of the property c If soil conditions on the site are such that they present moderate or severe limitations to the construction of STRUCTURES or facilities proposed for the site, that such limitations will be addressed by the applicant and/or the applicant's successors or assigns pnor to DEVELOPMENT of the property WELD COUNTY, CO VIEW TO EAST DOWN CR 2 WELD COUNTY, CO WELD COUNTY, CO WELD COUNTY, CO WELD COUNTY, CO y° 18 61 ! •1- flap WELD COUNTY, CO FM 0.1% VIEW TO EAST (WEST PROPERTY ON CR 2) 1 y° 1861-C ttiE WELD COUNTY, CO tialuse VIEW TO SOUTH - FURTHER NORTH ON CR 2 • End •f •Z22-010 Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments sender and know the content is safe. Dear Ms. Saine, I have been in communication with you for more than the past year regarding developmental pressures on my community along CR 19 and I am contacting you again regarding an upcoming proposal that will have lasting, detrimental effects to the rural character of the area where we live. During the 2020 pandemic, public meetings were shut down and yet the BOCC pushed forward with an update of the Comprehensive Plan. The County chose not to mail postcards to residents directly affected by the addition of ' Opportunity Zones" along CR 19 and elsewhere. The County has in the past sent postcards to notify residents regarding major changes to land use and planning, as in the case of the dissolution of the Dry Creek RUA. By limiting their outreach to the attendees at a farm show and on social media, the County eliminated the critical input of my neighbors. Now, because of the addition of "Opportunity Zones," the residents in my community will be fighting off absentee developers in addition to the continual encroachment of slum -building municipalities like Fort Lupton. In the past when we have spoken, I have urged you to take action and to join us in working to develop a better plan for our community as we move forward. We need you to help us put a stop to reckless development that threatens the livelihoods and peace of the farmers, ranchers, agriculturally -geared businesses, and rural residences that value this incredible place. COZ22-0010 asks the BOCC to rezone a small parcel for the benefit of ONE property owner. The parcel is too small to reasonably buffer C-3 activities, which could include NIGHTCLUBS, BARS, LOUNGES, OR TAVERNS. The roads and intersections in the area are already in very poor shape, and the increase in traffic with a C-3 rezone would further deteriorate the roads and DECREASE safety at an already dangerous intersection. The county has in the past voted against increasing the intensity of land use in the area. The parcel directly west of COZ22-0010 applied for a USR in 2017 and was DENIED by the planning commission on the basis that an increase in commercial activity would not be compatible with the surrounding rural properties and agricultural -related businesses. The addition of these "Opportunity Zones" has renewed interest in developing these intersections but that is all that has changed ---these areas are still RURAL, AGRICULTURAL, and RESIDENTIAL. I urge you to please stand united with your Southwestern Weld constituents on December 21, 2021 when you will vote on this proposal. Respectfully, Stephanie Vest 2 Jessica Reid Subject: FW: Opposition in District 3 to Proposal COZ22-0010 From: Chris Gathman <cgathman@weldgov.com> Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 1:54 PM To: Jessica Reid <jreid@weldgov.com>; Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com> Subject: FW: Opposition in District 3 to Proposal COZ22-0010 FYI. Item for COZ22-0010 — in case you have not received it. Chris Gathman Planner III Weld County Department of Planning Services cgathman@weldgov.com 970-400-3537 From: Tom Parko Jr. <tparko@weldgov.com> Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 12:49 PM To: Chris Gathman <cgathman@weldgov.com> Cc: Maxwell Nader <mnader@weldgov.com> Subject: FW: Opposition in District 3 to Proposal COZ22-0010 FYI From: Lori Saine <Isaine@weldgov.com> Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 10:34 PM To: Tom Parko Jr. <tparko@weldgov.com> Subject: Fwd: Opposition in District 3 to Proposal COZ22-0010 Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Stephanie B Vest <burkhars@gmail.com> Date: December 2, 2022 at 12:29:33 PM CST To: Lori Saine <Isaine@weldgov.com> Cc: Perry Buck <pbuck@weldgov.com>, Steve Moreno <smoreno@weldgov.com> Subject: Opposition in District 3 to Proposal COZ22-0010 December 14, 2022 Mr. Chris Gathman Planner III Weld County Planning and Zoning 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Re: Letter in support of Change of Zone Case No. COZ22-0010, Knudson Property, North of and adjacent to CR2, West of and adjacent to CR 19, Weld County Colorado. Mr. Gathman, I am the managing partner of Brighton Outdoor Storage at Todd Creek, located at 312 Weld County Road 19, Brighton, CO 80603. We are located approximately 500 feet north and across the street from the Knudson property. Our business fully supports the property owners request for a change of zone from Agricultural to a Commercial C-3 Zone. The proposed commercial zoning makes sense here, and it is located on a major arterial roadway, with a future 140 -foot -wide right-of-way, at the intersection of WCR 2, another major roadway on the Adams -Weld County line. Also, there are already allowed similar "commercial -style" uses in this immediate area, including a horse -boarding and training business at 305 WCR 19, about 525 feet north of the Knudson's property and an enclosed self -storage facility about 1100 feet east of this site, at 9191 WCR 2. Finally, as you know, this property is located within a "Weld County Opportunity Zone" as shown on the County's Comprehensive Plan Map, where this type of commercial change of zone application is encouraged. Please share this letter of support with the Board of County Commissioners at the upcoming hearing on the 21c of this month. Sincerely, Craig Poulsen For and on behalf of Brighton Outdoor Storage EXHIBIT .D Jessica Reid From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Esther Gesick Friday, December 16, 2022 2:34 PM Jessica Reid Stephanie B Vest FW: Weld Rezone COZ22-0010 image001 jpg From: Stephanie B Vest <burkhars@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 16, 2022 2:18 PM To: Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com> Subject: Fwd: Weld Rezone COZ22-0010 CO7--aQ - CO k Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Esther, Can you also include this clarification email I received from Adams County regarding COZ22-0010? Thank you, Stephanie Vest Forwarded message From: Layla Bajelan <LBajelan@adcogov.org> Date: Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 3:24 PM Subject: RE: Weld Rezone COZ22-0010 To: Stephanie B Vest <burkhars@gmail.com> Cc: Matthew Emmens <MEmmens@adcogov.org>, Jen Rutter <JRutter@adcogov.org> Hi Stephanie, Adams County would be supportive of neighborhood -supporting commercial uses, which would be akin to our C-0 through C-2 zone districts. The highest intensity commercial district may not be in alignment with the anticipated development in Adams County. Additionally, Adams County is responsible for the section of 168th Avenue from Holly on the west to the South Platte River/City of Brighton. I have included our Engineer on this email if you have any further questions on roadway responsibility. Have a great weekend. 1 Thanks, Layla Bajelan Senior Long Range Planner, Community and Economic Development ADAMS COUNTY, COLORADO 4430 S. Adams County Parkway, 1st Floor, Suite W2000A Brighton, CO 80601 720.523.6863 I LBajelan@adcogov.orq www.adcogov.org ** New Schedule: Tuesday -Friday 7 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.** County operating hours: Monday through Friday, 7 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. From: Stephanie B Vest <burkhars@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2022 3:32 PM To: Layla Bajelan <LBatelan@adcogov.org> Subject: Weld Rezone COZ22-0010 [You don't often get email from burkhars@gmail.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification Please be cautious: This email was sent from outside Adams County Dear Ms. Bajelan, In August of this year, you received notice from Weld County regarding a rezone of an AG parcel on CR 2/168th bordering Adams County. I have attached the email and your response. I am hoping to clarify with you, does Adams County support a rezone to "Commercial -3", which is the highest intensity commercial use in Weld? A rezone to C-3 would allow for "nightclubs, bars, lounges, or taverns." I wasn't sure from your email what types of uses the county would find compatible with the planned residential developments in the area. Also, C-3 zones are anticipated to generate high volumes of traffic —which county is responsible for maintaining and making improvements to the roads along CR 2? Thank you for your clarification. 2 Respectfully, Stephanie Vest Sent from my iPhone 3 ♦ nuisance may be merely - wrong place, _ a pig - parlor instead of - barnyard." Justice George Sutherland, in the Landmark Supreme COZ22 0010 In order for the Board to approve this application, it MUST MEET ALL of the criteria described in the Weld County Code (522-4-loA.iJ. This application FAILS to meet Code by: -3 Incompatibility of the uses allowed in C-3 with the surrounding rural residences; a previous BOCC ("the Board" hereafter) decision (USRI7-ool6) supports this fact (523- 2'-40.B.2) The increase of traffic, crime, and inability of the County to provide equal emergency services to rural areas does not meet the Guiding Principles or Land Use Goals of the Comprehensive Plan (522-2-lo.D and §22-2-30B.2) It does not meet the INTENT of the C-3 District. (523-3-230.A) ..,1_i-. , COZ22 OO10 In order for the Board to approve this application, it MUST MEET ALL of the criteria described in the Weld County Code (522-4-lo.A.1). This application FAILS to meet Code by: .4 "Uses that are incompatible must be able to mitigate conflicts" (22-2-3o.C.1). THE APPLICANT HAS FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE IT CAN MITIGATE THE USES ALLOWED IN C-3 WITH SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL AND AGRICULTURAL PROPERTIES. Properties within Opportunity Zones MUST be in compliance with the other provisions in the Comprehensive Plan. This proposal FAILS to meet ALL of the criteria described in the Weld County Code, and therefore, cannot be approved. §22-4-loA.1 i C0Z22 OO10 is INCOMPATIBLE WITF!SHE SURROUNDING AREA Section 22-2-30.C.1 Harmonize Development with Surrounding Land Uses...Uses that are incompatible with existing uses must be able to mitigate conflict." � s00% of the land surrounding the proposal is zoned Ag -4 Nearly go% of surrounding properties (by area) within 1/2 mile used for Rural Residential and Ag (Exhibit A) C-3 Zoning here will allow for uses that will DECREASE the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Weld County. ExhbIt Q Nearly go% of the surrounding 28 parcels by acreage are Ag or Residential. The character of this area is NOT Commercial L rtOrtfYN .l gia... WELD COUNTY ONt.IN:t .MAIl1'ING Properties Within 1/2 Mile of COZ2.2-0010 rcrt CA boulder Denver I 1 Legend • Parcels Highway Road Hajewstv pa,aa r - N II County Boundary M �� Greater than 90% "'-J ■ Ag+Residential 1 Greater than 80% Ag#ReiidenUal r Greater than 50% I Ag+Residential G Other Uses r-- F Based Weld County on A I Valuation Information Collected December 13, C 2022. • E • COZ22.OOf0 �� Please see attached document for criteria "'s`` we r, `-/ + land must meet to qualify for agricultural classification (Colorado Division of Property Taxation, Department of Local Affiars, Publication 1b -OPT -AR PUB B5 (1f21)) 1' 17'350 O Notes 2.891.7 0 1.44535 2891 7 tat Thi map d a user generated MAX cu'dA from an Instinct m appp+q At and 4 for reference only Data layers tat appear on Pin nap may or may not be accurate WGS_ 19x4 Web_Mercator_Austhary_Sphere current or °beswer reliable C Wald County Colorado THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION COZ22 0010 DOES NOT MEET INTENT OF THE DISTRICT §23-3-230.A The purpose of the C-3 Zone District is to designate areas of commerce for the benefit of the broader region, such as large- scale regional shopping centers and entertainment districts. C-3 District properties may require large amounts of space or generate high traffic volumes. Properties zoned C-3 arc typically located near high - traffic corridors. C0Z22-oolo is a mile away from HWY 7, through a residential area. The intent of the district DOES NOT MEAN BEING CONSISTENT WITH USRs IN THE AREA. COZ22 0010 is INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA The Board DENIED a previous land use cases in this area due to LACK OF COMPATIBILITY and FAILURE TO MEET THE INTENT OF THE DISTRICT. The Board, including "no" votes from Commissioners Freeman and Moreno, DENIED USRI7-ool6, an RV Storage Facility and Roll -off Commercial business. Jr• •, r� WILD COUNTY ,\SAI•I'Itic Properties Within 1/2 Mile of CO722-0010 1 I NCR4 WC rr USR17-0016 1 C O222-0010 1: 17,350 O 2 891 WGS_ 1984_Web_ Mercator _ Auxiliary _Sphere C Weld County Colorado • 445 85 2,891.7 Net The map is a user generated staic output from an Internet mapping w and is for reference only Data ►ayers that appear on this map may or my not be accurate current, or (Jthnrcw a rmlta* THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION roes Cr1rn• Davider . Legend Parcels Highway Road NgAaAy Road County Boundary Notes C0Z22 0010 is INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA USRI7-ool6 was DIRECTLY ADJACENT to C0Z22-oolo "...the application is not compatible with existing surrounding uses due to the number of residential locations in the quadrant, and to approve the request, the application must meet all requirements." - Commissioner Freeman at June 21, 2017 BOCC Hearing, Docket No. 2017-48 "Commissioner Moreno expressed his agreement with his fellow Commissioners regarding the lack of compatibility." -at June 21, 2017 BOCC Hearing, Docket No. 2017-48 USP17-0016 was five years ago. Since then, 8 more custom homes have been built (see Exhibit B) and there have been NO additional USRs. Rural residential properties are expanding in this area, not commercial properties. WELD COUNTY (")NI INF MAI`I•INc 1 Parcel No. 146933200013 2 Parcel No. 146933300027 3 Parcel No. 146933300028 4. Parcel No. 146933300006 5. Parcel No. 146933100017 6 Parcel No. 146933400043 7 Parcel No. 146933200009 B Parcel No. 146933100001 1891 1 Building Building Building Building Building Building Building Building WGS_1984 Web_MercatorAuxiliary sphere C Weld County Colorado Permit No. RSN22.0112 Permit No. RSN22-0093 Permit No RSN22-0056 Permit No. RSN22.0036 Permit No. RSN20.0132 Permit No. RSN19-0154 Permit No. RSN19-0001 Permit No. RSN17-0036 9/22/2022 7122.2022 4/25/2022 3115/2022 9/20/2020 914/2019 1/312019 3/10/2017 COZ22-0010 C 2.8911 Feet SCR 4 27 homes in Section 33 Ira map floe use+ genetateo static output horn an Internet mapping we and is lot re*rrence ony Data tamers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate current or anew rskal* THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION i f oo t Cohen Boulde. • Denver Notes -- Exhibit B Dark purple parcels are new builds since 2017, pink lots are residential COZ22 0010 DOES NOT MEET CODE There are 34 uses allowed subject to Site Review in §23-3- 230.C Many of these uses are as incompatible (or more so!) than the use proposed in USRI7-0016. §23-2-40.B "the Board of County Commissioners shall approve the request for the Change of Zone only if it finds that the applicant has met the standards or conditions of Paragraphs 1. through 5. below AND Section 23-2-50 are met. The applicant shall demonstrate: That the proposal is consistent with the policies of Chapter 22 of this Code. X23 -2- 40.B.2 That the USES which Would be allowed on the subject property by c ranting the Change of Zone will be compatible with the surrounding land USES." §23-2-40.B.2 COZ22 0010 wILL DECREASE safety §22-2-loD. "Land use regulations and policies will protect and enhance the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Weld County." Combining the off -site impacts of Ag (farm vehicles on roads, livestock on roads, open burning) with the traffic and hazards associated with high -volume traffic is irresponsible and puts lives at risk. Do drunk drivers from bars and livestock on the roads make a safe combination? Should gas stations be adjacent to areas where open burning may occur? On the Change of Zone Planning Questionnaire, the applicant only addresses dust and noise produced by their undefined project. This proposal does not demonstrate that it can meet the Guiding Principles of the Comprehensive Plan with regards to health, safety, and welfare. SHWY74 in It,, pc Ora CAM r'w sir rpreat -, - i _�-tea.. - r- 'e 1,• . • t J tI F am. .?, ��' a _ a .2.,es - . What business Will end up here? The highest intensity MUST be assumed. The applicant has FAILED to demonstrate the ability to MITIGATE the negative impacts on the area. §22-2-30.C.2 C0Z22-oolo wilt DECREASE safety §22-2-lo.D. "Land use regulations and policies will protect and enhance the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Weld County." In addition to the traffic concerns, increased traffic wilt lead to increased crime. "Law enforcement is based on responses to complaints more than on patrols of the County, and the distances which must be traveled may delay all emergency responses, including Law enforcement, ambulance, and fire." —Weld County Right -to -Farm Statement 522-2-30.A.4.a. "Vehicle thefts in south Weld County are area of focus for sheriff's office" Greeley Tribune, May 8, 2020 "In April 2019, Noonan said the sheriff's office dealt with reports of 10 stolen trailers and vehicles. This year, the number is up to 26 and 42% of those have been in the south end of the county... ...Noonan also suggested there might an organized criminal effort behind the thefts because about 60% of the thefts are happening at commercial properties such as rental or storage facilities where people come and go freely and on -site traffic is not questioned as it might be in a residential area." Robert Bidwett, property owner directly adjacent to the north of this proposal, had his Locks cut and trailers stolen Last week1 "CALL TIME: 10:33 AM 12/16/22 CALL TYPE: Theft JURISDICTION: Weld WCSO REPORT: 22W042822 NEIGHBORHOOD: 80 block of WCR 19 CaLL ID: 20221216-00321 PRIORITY: 4" Weld County Sheriff's Office Daily Call Report , see Exhibit C in attachments Land Use Goats and Objectives 522 2 30.B2 Urban -scale development SHALL only be placed Where urban services, including water, ARE available. The applicant has failed to demonstrate that urban services ARE available. Urban services are not limited to water. They include (but are not limited to, police, fire, sewer, and road maintenance. Urban -scale services, all of them, MUST be available in order to approve C0722- 0010 Opportunity Zones "The property is Located within a Weld County Opportunity Zone." -Planning Commission Recommendation Nov. 1, 2022 Weld County Opportunity Zones. If incompliance with the other provisions in this Section (Comprehensive Plan Map), zone changes to C (Commercial), I (Industrial), and Planned Unit Development (PUD) containing C and I uses are preferred [in these locations]. §22-4-lo.A.1 "Such a designation (Opportunity Zone) does not guarantee a zone change application will be approved. All applicable criteria in Chapter 23 or 27 of the Weld County Code must be satisfied in order for the Board of County Commissioners to approve a zone change application, including location - specific attributes such as surrounding land uses, topography, and availability of utilities." C0Z22 0010 DOES NOT MEET INTENT OF THE DISTRICT §23-3-230.A The purpose of the C-3 Zone District is to designate areas of commerce for the benefit of the broader region, such as large-scale regional shopping centers and entertainment districts. C-3 District properties may require large amounts of space or generate high traffic volumes. Properties zoned C-3 are typically located near high -traffic corridors. Being in an Opportunity Zone DOES NOT MEET THE INTENT OF THE DISTRICT "A sign shall be posted for the applicant on the property under consideration for a rezoning. The sign shall be posted adjacent to and visible from a PUBLIC STREET/ROAD RIGHT-OF- WAY." 523-2-20B,7 This sign has been down in the grass since at least November 5th, 2022, when this photo was taken. As of December 15, 2022, the sign is still not posted as directed by the Weld County Code §23-2-20.B.7 r_rrsrata:fl_ecstererj • 1ibete:46v An r 1 ti a . y CIOP ;W. Act /:". I�uUllc htrtrrings conc.►rnln 9 this pre)porty will bo hoard betoro tta� County Planning Commtssion and Board of County Comrrisscnors Both hearings well be hokf at WELD COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 1150 "0" Street • Greeley, CO 80631 Planning Commission Hearing will be held un tMBESZ L,__202l. at 13n9 %o PM Board of County Commissioner Hearing will be held on _PaCE-tr18eg 21, 20n_, at IC AM Applicant: K turtNtic NICK ( Ks) v .50iv Request. CHANGE OF ZONE FROM T► te. (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT TO THE C-3 (BUSINESS COMMERCIAL) `'iI'dE DISTRICT. ALP. Case Number C-02OO) 0 Acres:tes ) .9 1 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT 64 RiS G "Hilipti1T THE WELD COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES. AT 970-400-3531 For Additional Information visit www.weldcountyptanningcases.org Ant t, xOMnApcneic.rninvy':rbr&toinni4eSort✓&Dvwioptlw'wi+114oneUKby5on'&AnaPeer,&guestre4z•ow: of "Cie inedto Sty na►n r• Ora towable eninfoyet. ►+oist dflW4C*C'% Korean* ono ns'+tw'NdbwobirriewkY and vre-, wes LW wet". t0 r NNW co ref o 0g of Dods the"annex; Cornfvts.on o d tkanf of County C oan*% onon t"oreht' sti Tit 2 re 441 LiteS . tea'its • F r a - I • _r' ilebitZ • 4 is aa COZ22-0010 This request cannot be approved because it does not meet the criteria in the Weld County Code. 4% . welt EXHIBIT .A S Cotfl- OG 1O "NO" to Commercial -3 Rezone of Northwest Corner of CR 2 and CR 19 On December 21st, 2022, the Weld County Board of County Commissioners will vote on Case COZ22-0010, which is a proposal to rezone a 20 -acre parcel on the northwest corner of CR 2 and CR 19 from Agricultural (AG) to Commercial -3 (C-3). This parcel is currently surrounded by agriculturally -zoned properties and is directly adjacent to an active agricultural -related business. Past attempts to develop parcels adjacent to the one in question were denied by the County on the basis that they would be detrimental to the surrounding rural and agricultural properties. A rezone to C-3 would open development on this property to a wide variety of uses -by -right that would be incompatible and detrimental to the surrounding rural community and would decrease safety at an already dangerous intersection. The property is too small to adequately buffer the negative effects from potential C-3 activities. Finally, a rezone now to C-3 would deny surrounding residents the ability in the future to request conditions of approval when the site is developed. We, the undersigned residents of Weld County, submit the following objection to the Weld County Board of County Commissioners with regards to the proposal COZ22-0010, a change in zone from Agricultural (AG) to Commercial -3 (C-3). ' Date Signature Address Printed Name Comments 2 \t\t t L ,4� �r�1 v j`- V .�-�2-631 Og 1 A R` t 11111 3 3 );- / s3.4.1,,‘... f .!p -cc 13 w e c_, .,,,. ..; 7 c U S (' j� el Z % 1 Fri e / cr We, the undersigned residents of Weld County, submit the following objection to the Weld County Board of County Commissioners with regards to the proposal COZ22-0010, a change in zone from Agricultural (AG) to Commercial -3 (C-3). Date Printed Name Signature Address Comments 2 I asfricrtat r3 3 -A\41*k -NCI Ct Pi f--4---birm 0,--5-- 21 1 -Cc A /J;31ve2nt& V\9IQ Cry � Lif4Do tq 5 211.\ltisibt li'vy‘elly dla 4Co) k.� uAI�I'SIa�, �lq �1 � F+ leh ko4oa7 ' �Cb zovtk.,'9 .6,�, Git//jz�- LCNYi& /_l�c.Jirj ,�� ovi C /d/p,.��N ,d [H Malt) /'e Eassza 0% 7 7 g c;2a.. #kok* $Onrsl `nall LI 8 1 �%/. ; � . �, L� 4,--,3oY,Cmiewit � /. � -- ._ � � , • C4411/5 � -yin RP ti Ric, L2/ IL ii -Stela- tiu-rho -7A. 10 12,131jta Seunotpita heti, I _, � i� I / Rio�u fzl7/ z2- dndLl/�'l%i, I Lars 8-4e.ii vra,a16� � � 3sZJ3 Wc(t I`j Fr Grq�Jdv 12 /j/y �Dnai J E1L�3s c3 /ll2 / /3 �F1G„ ,s Z�< ��IM�' r7j".3�'1 Sc06 Ci(/0 -� eO62,( �/' �k_ 14 .1 ?� Se- c; C K ko icAit. Lce(4-oin 314,a4 � �rf-�-'(;�.�c�" Tole- c 1 � ovc� ,' We, the undersigned residents of Weld County, submit the following objection to the Weld County Board of County Commissioners with regards to the proposal COZ22-0010, a change in zone from Agricultural (AG) to Commercial -3 (C-3). � Date Printed Name Signatur Address Comments Fog' 2 i 2-`ta LI °Oar VEIT- 47,01( R i o, cuPpiu 3 ) Leg a 21 c (11 5 A A) I VE3t Liyu d C�lLupt�nn CD ef.)74 1intt��,r�- , -II ea �atr 1[37 G/kIt Fr L.np (2bkb} PathLL1e,r �/ ii to SiL=CI�'r2d' �'.j��*SPdL�; �1Gy 1.L 7/2.z d�q4/+i 5%�'Chf�- �.� Lisp-� kfr 1`wh I 13vcI Cf11 5 il?Pera S-C4C ilf Sillibe =tit- h -c 703 (Kr? reticartoi-. w6., I I iii 2/3 2 449rs1Thorpt 9 02 20 P0/7714)ite. <97 We73 lit;e6 icte4;961fr-A614/thi 10 JYLa Tcrpc 41/7 311O5 cR19 Ft. Lail -opt � 11 I3.I5-i1 IcAft L'.u�- , q.SC -6L‘n ea4s/se CA.Z 4 Litebt 12 1.41(th. C,Sej,k()Cctt-t_ c _cLfiCit 13 IC) 41 /lel- CeiVe/'t il ° tis l, 115--siA Li ?()1 Ct/'J l' 14 1isCZz_.73—casz2,1 k/t)ce )41ifiv\ ilk tiak_SE:ift Cou Ntrw�zcerattCMscoas "NO" to Commercial -3 Rezone of Northwest Corner of CR 2 and CR 19 On December 21st, 2022, the Weld County Board of County Commissioners will vote on Case COZ22-0010, which is a proposal to rezone a 20 -acre parcel on the northwest corner of CR 2 and CR 19 from Agricultural (AG) to Commercial -3 (C-3). This parcel is currently surrounded by agriculturally -zoned properties and is directly adjacent to an active agricultural -related business. Past attempts to develop parcels adjacent to the one in question were denied by the County on the basis that they would be detrimental to the surrounding rural and agricultural properties. A rezone to C-3 would open development on this property to a wide variety of uses -by -right that would be incompatible and detrimental to the surrounding rural community and would decrease safety at an already dangerous intersection. The property is too small to adequately buffer the negative effects from potential C-3 activities. Finally, a rezone now to C-3 would deny surrounding residents the ability in the future to request conditions of approval when the site is developed. We, the undersigned residents of Weld County, submit the following objection to the Weld County Board of County Commissioners with regards to the proposal COZ22-0010, a change in zone from Agricultural (AG) to Commercial -3 (C-3). I Date Printed Name Signature Address Comments 2 K r/zet( 141K -ea_ S - 32'7 cee7y r ff. L'eri° -1 •-----'e'l kg/. /27.mb, reaLd6(/ ` / l 2.), „ f 9 1` r5 CZ �- 7 �� a. 4 ' ic\Zer' -1 tli i hrtiiii / (Ir\A 5 /z/k/z z --i c >2 a -------,.. -'---4-----" --t , 3 reej CK/ 5 /4", ,, i t,,,,,,, /ca. PC I el ca `," /21 /Li _ -2(.• c ecc j. S -1)6c9 e-, m u 6 lit4_ _ tJ "NO" to Commercial -3 Rezone of Northwest Corner of CR 2 and CR 19 On December 21st, 2022, the Weld County Board of County Commissioners will vote on Case COZ22-0010, which is a proposal to rezone a 20, aci e parcel on the northwest corner of CR 2 and CR 19 from Agricultural (AG) to Commercial -3 (C-3) This parcel is currently surrounded by agriculturally -zoned properties and is directly adjacent to an active agricultural -related business Past attempts to develop parcels adjacent to the one in question were denied by the County on the basis that they would be detrimental to the surrounding rural and agricultural properties A rezone to C-3 would open development on this property to a wide variety of uses -by -right that would be incompatible and detrimental to the surrounding rural community and would decrease safety at an already dangerous intersection The property is too small to adequately buffer the negative effects from potential C-3 activities Finally, a rezone now to C-3 would deny surrounding residents the ability in the future to request conditions of approval when the site is developed. We, the undersigned residents of Weld County, submit the following objection to the Weld County Board of County Commissioners with regards to the proposal COZ22-0010, a change in zone from Agricultural (AG) to Commercial -3 (C-3). 1 Date Printed Name Signature Address Comments 2 i 2r 6Lair f? 3 ia, Is� ( �lf�i C -irsf.� y�-LI� a -PAL. Co 131562c( 4 1x/7/4_ -.1,1, '4 c'r s �, , o o�( 5 l f it z � Z l tliNt Alep y - �c. (trick 1' s f 1 G° �G 67-3 I1-(11 21- I I e55 Gael —rod (� 96 6 it ,� . 0 G �-I c �r�s� c o ceb (9a3 5 We, the undersigned residents of Weld County, submit the following objection to the Weld County Board of County Commissioners with regards to the proposal COZ22-0010, a change in zone from Agricultural (AG) to Commercial -3 (C-3). � Date Signature Address Comments Printed Name WI/ /Jig Z44Agli gag ,M.2,4/444 nero 12-11-72 - .ail_ IA fib , iirLit. S.14-e(h);(,.., ite,2, I ii V ij )sh ) ,5,11,6 ,roir) , Pi I') I i ) d9)*'--- S , / n 0 otiii,/ ) 6 Cam'' ! t Cc(• /c/ V rr fitue cc: Ate./ , tie? Z- 6 1 1eII \zLoL7fl ,n Cr) �rlC a. Ctccri lq filitA,i 7 12LV22 AA Velidi v; a 5506 coNttly rood ldj r+lLips4 � is I' Q7tI�r4-6i 0 157 -01- _s_c i 1 / 5+14 Ca-- Me V ea ( 12___1/ ite I 9 %Z- lS - 2-z-�. n (c.) gblvLJ ��...r.1- ,; 10 (0.);_oe 1 ti9V5 *Irk, tjt vattei 91r3O 11 12 13 14 12/17/22, 10 35 PM JURISDICTION: Weld NEIGHBORHOOD: 39000 block of,WCR 31 CALL TIME: 8.48 AM12/1\6/22 CALL TYPE: Repossession JURISDICTION: Weld NEIGHBORHOOD: 3000 block of 34TH ST CALL TIME: 7.44 AM 12/16/22 CALL TYPE: Selective, Enforcement - JURISDICTION: Weld ' NEIGHBORHOOD: near HIGHWAY 392 CALL TIME: 10.37 AM 12/16/22 CALL TYPE: Sex Offense JURISDICTION: Weld NEIGHBORHOOD: 20000 block of WCR 33 CALL TIME: 2:41 AM,12/16/22 CALL TYPE:Suspiclous JURISDICTION: Weld ' NEIGHBORHOOD: near WCR 54 CALL TIME: 5 23 AM 12/16/22 CALL TYPE: Suspicious JURISDICTION: Weld NEIGHBORHOOD: near INTERSTATE 25 SB CALL TIME:10.29 AM 12/16/22 - CALL TYPE: Suspicious JURISDICTION: Weld ' NEIGHBORHOOD: near WCR 69 / COTTONWOOD LN CALL TIME: 12 10 PM 12/16/22 CALL TYPE: Suspicious JURISDICTION: Weld NEIGHBORHOOD: 1000 block of WCR 27 CALL TIME: 2:53 AM 12/16/22 CALL TYPE: Theft ' JURISDICTION: Weld NEIGHBORHOOD: 2000' block of WCR 37 CALL TIME: 3 46 AM 12/16/22 CALL TYPE: Theft JURISDICTION: Weld NEIGHBORHOOD: 49000 block of ANTELOPE LN CALL TIME: 5.06 AM 12/16/22 , CALL TYPE: Theft JURISDICTION: Weld ' "y ,, WCSO REPORT: 22W042831 NEIGHBORHOOD: 1000 block of RAILROAD DIAGONAL ST CALL TIME: 10:33 AM 12/16/22 CALL TYPE: Theft JURISDICTION: Weld WCSO REPORT: 22W042822 NEIGHBORHOOD: 80 block of WCR 19 CALL TIME: 1:49 AM 12/16/22 CALL TYPE: Traffic Accident, JURISDICTION: Weld` https //appsl weldgovcom/sheriff/dailycalls/index cfm Weld County Sheriffs Office Call ID: 20221216-00940 PRIORITY: 8 Call ID: 20221216-00868 PRIORITY: 5 Call ID: 20221216-00326 PRIORITY: 3 Call ID: 20221216-00075 PRIORITY: 3 Call ID: 20221216-00118 PRIORITY: 3 Call ID! 20221216-00317 PRIORITY: 3 Call ID: 20221 21 6-0001 1 - PRIORITY: 3 `:Call ID: 20221.216-00588 PRIORITY: 4 Call ID: 20221216-00651 PRIORITY: 4 Call ID: 20221216-00751 ' PRIORITY: 4 Call ID: 20221216-00321 PRIORITY: 4 =1 ) Call ID: 20221216-00515 '`PRIORITY: 3 6/10 717WELD COUNTY ditaissig ONLINE MAPPING Zoning of Area Surrounding CO722-0010 5,602.3 0 2,801.17 5,602.3 Feet WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere c Weld County Colorado This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION Legend r. L_ I Parcels Zoning A (Agricultural) A-1 (Concentrated Animal) C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) C-2 (General Commercial) C-3 (Business Commercial) C-4 (Highway Commercial) E (Estate) I-1 (Industrial) 1-2 (Industrial) 1-3 (Industrial) PUD (Planned Unit Development) R-1 (Low Density Residential) R-2 (Duplex Residential) R-3 (Medium Density Residential) R-4 (High Density Residential) R-5 (Mobile Home Residential) Highway Road Highway Road County Boundary Notes NIW. W1;LD COUNTY Properties Within 1/2 Mile of C0722-OO1O ONLINE MAPCINC ►Air' 1: 17,350 0 2,891.7 0 WGS_ 1984 Web Mercator_AuxiliarySphere it -Weld County Colorado 1 445 85 2,891 7 Feet This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mappi g site and is for reference only Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reli b'e THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION Legend r -1 L_ Parcels Highway Road Hsghveay, Road County Boundary Greater than 90% Ag+Residential Greater than 80% Ag+Residential Greater than 50% Ag+Residential Other Uses Based on Weld County Valuation Information Collected December 13. 2022. Please see attached document for criteria land must meet to qualify for agricultural classification (Colorado Division of Property Taxation, Department of Local Affiars, Publication 15-DPT-AR PUB 85 (1121)) Notes Properties Within 1/2 Mile of COZ22-0010 Label on Map See Attached ( ) Parcel Number Residence on Parcel Acres Ag Acres Residential Acres Ag + Res Acres Other (Waste Land, Warehouse/ Storage Land/Special Purpose Land) Acres Total Percentage Acres Ag or Residential Per Parcel A 146933400042 No 58 568 58 568 12 882 7145 82 B 146933400044 Yes 35 56 35 56 — 3 61 39 17 90 8 C 146933400033 No 7 92 7 92 0 48 8 4 86 8 D 146934300010 No 55 707 55 707 4 485 60 192 92 5 E 146934300009 No 0 0 9 602 9 602 0 F 146934300005 No 19 37 19 37 " 15 61 34 98 55 4 G 146934300006 No 82 56 82 56 10 22 92 78 89 H 146934000014 Yes 6 71 6 71 0 - 6 71 100 I 146933400031 No 4 55 4 55 0 45 5 91 J 146933400032 No 5 5 0 5 100 K 146933400043 Yes 2 5 2 5 0 2 5 100 146933400030 Yes 122 ) 122 1 2 22 55 M 146933400041 _ Yes 6 34 6 34 0 6 34 100 N 146933300028 Yes 44 37 44 37 2 09 46 46 95 5 O 146933300027 Yes (New) 6 6 0 6 100 P 146933300037 Yes 0 511 511 0 5 11 100 Q 146933300005 Yes 0 6 1 6 1 0 6 1 100 R 146933300006 , Yes (New) 5 77 0 5 77 3 29 9 06 63 7 S 146933300011 Yes 6 72 6 72 0 36 7 08 94 9 T 146933300035 Yes 0 2 04 2 04 0 2 04 100 U (Thornton) 146933300016 No 62 84 0 62 84 0 62 84 62 84 V 146933200013 Yes 66 08 0 66 08 4 32 70 4 93 9 W 146933100018 No 42 01 0 42 01 2 44 01 95 5 X 146933100004 No 9,45 0 9 45 0 , 9 45 100 Y 146933100003 , Yes 8 8 0 8 8 0 41 9 21 95 5 Z 146934000009 Yes 182 175 0 182 175 16 198 175 91 9 AA 146933100017 Yes ) 5 04 0 5 04 5 04 100 BB 146933100007 Yes 5 82 0 5 82 0 66 6 48 89 8 TOTAL Ic l 731 081 13 251' 744 331 87 4691 831 7991 '89`48. *Acreage data from Weld Property Portal CLASSIFICATION For property tax purposes, land must meet one of the following five requirements to qualify for agricultural classification 1 A parcel of land that was used,the previous two years and is presently used as a farm or a ranch, or is being restored through conservation practices Such land must have been classified or eligible for classification as agricultural land during the 10 years preceding the year of assessment Agricultural land includes land underlying a residential improvement, if the occupant participates in the agricultural operation or is a statutorily specified relative of a participant in the agricultural operation It also includes land under other improvements if such improvements are an integral part of the farm or ranch and are typically used as an ancillary part of the operation A farm is defined as a parcel of land used to produce agricultural products that originate from the land's productivity for the purpose of obtaining a monetary profit - A ranch is defined as a parcel of land used for grazing livestock for the primary purpose of obtaining a monetary profit The term "livestock" refers to domestic animals used for food for human or animal consumption, breeding, draft, or profit A parcel of land is considered to be in the process of being restored through conservation practices if the land has been placed in a conservation reserve program established by the Natural Resource Conservation Service pursuant to 7 U S C secs 1 to 5506, or a conservation plan approved by an appropriate conservation district implemented for the land for up to a period of 10 crop years Real property improvements, such as structures, buildings, fixtures, and fences, are valued separately from the land 2 A parcel of land that has at least 40 acres of forestland and that is subject to a forest management plan The land must produce tangible wood products that originate from the productivity of the land for the prnmary purpose of obtaining a monetary profit Land underlying any residence or other improvements used as an ancillary part of the operation is classified as agricultural land 3 A parcel of land that a) consists of at least 80 acres, or less than 80 acres if the parcel does not contain any residential improvements, b) is subject to a perpetual conservation easement, c) was classified as agricultural at the time the easement was granted, d) the easement was granted to a qualified organization, e) the easement 0 exclusively for conservation purposes, and f) all current and future uses of the land are described in the easement This provision does not include any portion of land that is used for nonagricultural, commercial, or nonagricultural residential purposes " 4 A parcel of land used as a farm or ranch the owner has a decreed water right or a final permit to appropriated ground water for purposes other than residential use, and water appropriated under such right or permit is used for the production of agricultural or livestock products on the land This provision does not include the two -year -use requirement detailed in item 1 5 A parcel of land that was reclassified from agricultural to another classification and met one of the foregoing requirements during the three years before the year of assessment The land need not have been classified or eligible for classification as agricultural during the 10 years preceding the year of assessment All other agricultural property that does not meet the foregoing requirements will be classified according to its actual use on January 1 and valued using appropriate consideration of the three approaches to value (cost, market, and income) VALUATION AND TAXATION Agncultural Land The actual value of agricultural land, exclusive of improvements, is based on the earning or productive capacity of the land, capitalized at the statutory rate of 13% The landlord's gross income is calculated by multiplying the 10 -year average puce of the commodity or grazing rental rate by the yield associated with the subject property's sod classification, and then multiplying that figure by the typical landlord's crop share The 10 -year average of typical landlord expenses are subtracted from the landlord's gross income to arrive at the landlord's net income The net income is then capitalized by the statutory 13% rate to arrive at an indication of actual value The assessed -value of the land is calculated by multiplying the actual value of the land by the assessment rate (currently 29%) Agricultural Residential Improvements Residential property is valued using only the market approach to value In this approach, the actual value of the subject residence is based on an analysis of comparable sales minus the value attributed to the land _ "Residential land" also includes two acres or less of land on which a residential improvement is located and where the improvement is not integral to an agricultural operation conducted on the land The assessed value of the residence and associated residential land is calculated by multiplying the actual value of the residence by the current residential assessment rate Agricultural Structures Agricultural structures used as an ancillary part of the operation are valued using appropriate consideration of the three approaches to value (cost, market, and income) While all three approaches to value must be considered, agricultural structures are typically valued using the cost approach - In the cost approach, the actual value of the budding is based on the replacement cost new minus accrued depreciation The actual value is multiplied by the statutory 29% assessment rate Personal Property Agricultural equipment used on a farm or ranch for planting, growing and harvesting agricultural products or for raising or breeding livestock for the primary purpose of obtaining a monetary profit is exempt from property taxation Other personal property such as livestock, livestock products, agricultural products, and supplies are also exempt from property taxation COLLECTION OF INFORMATION To ensure that land is accurately classified and valued, the assessor may request an on -site inspection and/or additional information such as the IRS 1040-F form filed in the previous year, grazing lease(s), or an agricultural land classification questionnaire Any documentation provided to the assessor by the property owner is subject to confidentiality requirements as provided by law QUESTIONS For additional information regarding property taxation procedures in Colorado. contact the Colorado Division of Property Taxation at (303) 864-7777 or contact your county assessor. Prepared by: Colorado Division of Property Taxation Department of Local Affairs 15-DPT-AR PUB B5 (01/21) OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ASSESSOR Adams County Alamosa County Arapahoe County Archuleta County Baca County Bent County Boulder County Broomfield County Chaffee County Cheyenne County Clear Creek County Conejos County Costilla County Crowley County Custer County Delta County Denver County Dolores County Douglas County Eagle County Elbert County El Paso County Fremont County Garfield County Gilpin County Grand County Gunnison County Hinsdale County Huerfano County Jackson County Jefferson County Kiowa County (720) 523-6038 (719) 589-6365 (303) 795-4600 (970) 264-8310 (719) 523-4332 (719) 456-2010 (303) 441-3530 (303) 464-5819 (719) 539-4016 (719) 767-5664 (303) 679-2322 (719) 376-5585 (719) 937-7670 (719) 267-5229 (719) 783-2218 (970) 874-2120 (720) 913-4162 (970) 677-2385 (303) 660-7450 (970) 328-8640 (303) 621-3101 (719) 520-6600 (719) 276-7310 (970) 945-9134 (303) 582-5451 (970) 725-3060 (970) 641-1085 (970) 944-2225 (719) 738-3000 (970) 723-4751 (303) 271-8600 (719) 438-5521 OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ASSESSOR Kit Carson County Lake County La Plata County Larimer County Las Animas County Lincoln County Logan County Mesa County Mineral County Moffat County Montezuma County Montrose County Morgan County Otero County Ouray County Park County Phillips County Pitkin County Prowers County Pueblo County Rio Blanco County Rio Grande County Routt County Saguache County San Juan County San Miguel County Sedgwick County Summit County Teller County Washington County Weld County Yuma County (719) 346-8946 (719) 486-4110 (970) 382-6221 (970) 498-7050 (719) 846-2295 (719) 743-2358 (970) 522-2797 (970) 244-1610 (719) 658-2669 (970) 824-9102 (970) 565-3428 (970) 249-3753 (970) 542-3512 (719) 383-3010 (970) 325-4371 (719) 836-4331 (970) 854-3151 (970) 920-5160 (719) 336-8000 (719) 583-6597 (970) 878-9410 (719) 657-3326 (970) 870-5544 (719) 655-2521 (970) 387-5632 (970) 728-3174 (970) 474-2531 (970) 453-3480 (719) 689-2941 (970) 345-6662 (970) 400-3650 (970) 332-5032 CLASSIFICATION AND VALUATION OF AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY IN COLORADO This brochure was created to provide general information on the classification and valuation of agricultural property In Colorado For additional information regarding property taxation procedures in Colorado, please visit cdola.colorado.gov/oronertv-taxation. LEASE THIS LEASE (Lease) entered into between the City of Thornton. a home rule municipality of the State of Colorado. (Thornton) and Mr. William R. Wycoff and Mrs. Adriann C. Wycoff (Tenant) shall become effective as of the date executed by Thornton below. Whereas. Thornton is the owner of real property located in Weld County. Colorado. Whereas. Thornton is desirous of leasing said real property to Tenant. NOW THEREFORE. in consideration of the terms, covenants. and conditions contained herein. Thornton and Tenant agree as follows: SECTION 1 FUNDAMENTAL LEASE PROVISIONS 1 Parties: Landlord City of Thornton 9500 Civic Center Drive Thornton, CO 80229 Tenant Mr. William Wycoff Mrs. Adriann Wycoff 333 County Road 17 Brighton, CO 80603 2. Tenant Contact Information: Home Phone Number: 303-659-7259 Cell Phone Number: 720-301-1632 (Bill) Email address: acwycoff@aol.com Emergency Contact: Jane Tallman 303-489-2678 With Copy to: Jody Harper Alderman Alderman Bernstein 101 University Blvd. #350 Denver. CO 80206 3 Leased Premises: Thornton hereby agrees to lease to Tenant and Tenant hereby agrees to lease from Thornton, the Leased Premises LOT B ("Leased Premises') as described below, except the 8 -acre pump station site depicted on Exhibit A ("Pump Station Site"). Thornton reserves the right to temporarily occupy a portion of the Leased Premises where Thornton plans to construct a water pipeline and all appurtenances thereto (`Project"). Currently the Project Location is generally depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto. Tenant acknowledges and agrees that the Project Location is subject to change and. in the event of such change, Tenant will be notified by Thornton. Tenant shall have no Lease rights or access rights of any nature to the Project Location during Project construction. Once the Project is initially complete, and upon Thornton's notice of such completion to Tenant. Tenant shall have access to the Project Location. subject to the terms and conditions contained herein. During construction and after completion of the Project. Thornton shall retain access rights to the Project Location through the Leased Premises on established roads and driveways in a reasonable manner subject to the terms and conditions of this Lease Notwithstanding the foregoing, Tenant shall have access to and right to use the Leased Premises outside of the Project Location, subject to -the terms and conditions of this Lease, from the Commencement Date of the Lease until termination 4 Term The Initial Term of this Lease shall be for a 5 -year period commencing on the _ day of , 2021 ("Commencement Date"); and terminating on the _ day of , 2026 (Initial Term) Tenant has the option to renew the Lease for an additional twenty-five (25) year term (Second Term) by providing written notice to Thornton of its election to renew the Lease for the Second Term by no later than January 15, 2026 If such notice is not timely received by Thornton, the Lease shall terminate on the last day of the Initial Term The Second Term of the Lease may be shortened pursuant to Section 2, Paragraph 7 below 5 Rent 6 Additional Provisions This Lease is not assignable The use of the Leased Premises Is strictly limited to dog training, including training hunting dogs and shooting blank rounds in relation to such training, horse riding and training, activities associated with farming and weed control and other personal recreational activities, not including shooting except for training hunting dogs as above ("Uses") Other than activities associated with farming and weed control, the Uses allowed above are limited to Tenant's uses only and no more than six (6) other people in addition to Tenant at any one time Tenant may not charge such persons or accept other remuneration for such Uses from such persons Tenant must either accompany such other persons at all times or physically be at the Residence defined in Section 2, Paragraph 7 below during the Uses The shooting of blank rounds allowed in relation to training hunting dogs shall be allowed a maximum of three days per week for no more than three hours each day during daylight hours In the event Tenant desires to perform activities other than those outlined herein, Tenant must submit a written request to Thornton for permission to conduct such activity on the Leased Premises at least two weeks prior to such activities Thornton, in its sole discretion, may deny such permission In the case of a conflict between these Additional Provisions and the Terms and Conditions in Section 2 of this Lease, these Additional Provisions shall prevail SECTION 2 TERMS AND CONDITIONS Leased Premises Thornton hereby agrees to lease to Tenant and Tenant hereby agrees to lease from Thornton the Leased Premises as described in Section 1, Paragraph 3 of this Lease 2 Term The Term of this Lease is as described in Section 1, Paragraph 4 of this Lease 3 Rent The rent for the Leased Premises is as specified in Section 1, Paragraph 5 of this Lease After the Initial Term, the annual rental amount is due on the month and day that is 5 years after the Commencement Date and on the same month and day each year consecutively thereafter until the Lease terminates If the Lease is terminated per Section 2, Paragraph 7, before the end of the Initial Term, the rent amount will be apportioned accordingly and the amount applicable to the remaining portion of the Initial Term returned to Tenant, or, if during the Second Term, before an entire year has passed, the annual rent amount will be apportioned accordingly and the amount applicable to the remaining portion of the year returned to Tenant Payment shall be made to Thornton at the address stated in Section 1, Paragraph 1 of this Lease, or at other location as noticed by Thornton Payments to Thornton from Tenant must be in the form of a check, money order or cashier's check Thornton will not accept cash 2 C 0 D no rn a0 zX 0 �m O -4 O r r- > Z ow -� DA D 0 0 r C) r 1.6 C) 0 z O 0 0 m .4 vet 'J14 :o CZ r 0 -4 z A O 0 0 0 m m 0 m ED 60' PETROLEUM PIPELINE EASEMENT SUNCOR ENERGY (USA) PIPEUNE CO. REC. 3660967 50' —, 30' —ono POINT OF BEGINNING S89'32'35 -W 79.97' N. Li 1 50' 30' Pn 3 O en b S00 494.90' LOT A (PROPOSED Al RECXl7-01 TO POINT OF COMMENCEMENT SW COR. SEC. 33 T1 N, R67W, 6TH P.M. FOUND #6 REBAR W/ 2-1/2" ALUM. CAP MKD. "LS 23027 1999" 0.2' BELOW ASPH. SURFACE IN MONUMENT BOX. 50' GAS PIPELINE EASEMENT NORTHERN GAS PRODUCTS CO. REC. 1673825 RW S- W1 /16 COR. SEC. 33 NOT FOUND OR SET WELD COUNTY ROAD 17 W LINE W1/2, SW1/4, SEC. 33 (BASIS OF BEARING) NO0'46'31"W 2640.76' N ' '46'31"W 1875.0 S00'40'27'E 2145.59' E. LINE W1/2, se/4, SEC. 33 50' PETROLEUM PIPEUNE EASEMENT DISCOVERY DJ SERVICES, LLC REC. 4304263 SE1/4 SEC. 32 W1/4 COR. SEC. 33 ---. FOUND #6 REBAR W/ 2-1/2" ALUM. CAP MKD. "INTERMILL LS 12374 1999" 0.9' BELOW GRAVEL SURFACE. RW C- W1 /16 COR. SEC. 33 NOT FOUND OR SET. �--- RECORDED EXEMPTION 1469 -33 -3 -RE 4681 PROPOSED RECORDED EXEMPTION 1469-33-3 RECX17 0110 W N 0 i< I co D FITIP• WELD crryer Toe INI' COUNTY MAPPINGof Properties Within 1�� 'V�le fphi)'N:t CO722-0010i I fi Fort Clint AbWdec 1 •, rer ati, Ardi DeAve -_r .3 Legend - - . WCR 4 $ �-- Parcels Highway Road Highway Road C` r 11 County Boundary U I Li I� USR17-0016 I, C OZ22-0010 rI Lc ,-.. ►--, Wi 1: 17,350 Notes 2,891 T 0 ,44525 2,891.7 Feet This map is a user generated stat►c autput from an Internet mapping site and is for WGS_ 1984_Web_Mercator_Auxil►ary_Sphere .c_ Weld County Colorado reference only_ Data layers that appear THIS MAP on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION HEARING CERTIFICATION DOCKET NO. 2017-48 RE: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT, USR17-0016; FOR ANY USE PERMITTED AS A USE BY RIGHT, ACCESSORY USE, OR USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW IN THE COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ZONE DISTRICTS (RV AND BOAT STORAGE, A DUMP STATION, ENCLOSED SELF -STORAGE AND THE PARKING AND STAGING OF TRASH CONTAINERS, ROLL -OFFS, AND VEHICLES AND/OR EQUIPMENT TO PICK UP AND DELIVER SAME AND FOUR (4) INDIVIDUAL FLEX OFFICE BUILDINGS) PROVIDED THAT THE PROPERTY IS NOT 'A LOT ,IN AN APPROVED OR RECORDED SUBDIVISION PLAT OR PART OF A MAP OR PLAN FILED PRIOR TO ADOPTION OF ANY REGULATIONS CONTROLLING SUBDIVISIONS IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT — WW, LLC A public heanng;was conducted on June 21, 2017, at 10 00 a m , with,the following present Commissioner Julie A Cozad, Chair Commissioner Steve Moreno, Pro -Tern Commissioner Sean P Conway Commissioner Mike Freeman Commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer Also present Acting Clerk to the Board, Tisa Juanicorena Assistant County Attorney, Bob Choate Planning Services Department representative, Kim Ogle Public Works Department representative, Evan Pinkham Planning Services Engineer representative, Hayley Balzano Health Department representative, Lauren Light The following business was transacted e [ hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated May 18, 2017, and duly published May 23, 2017, in the Greeley Tribune, a public hearing was conducted to consider the request of WW, LLC, fora Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit, USR17-0016, for any_ Use permitted as a Use by Right, Accessory Use, or Use by Special Review in the Commercial or Industrial Zone Districts (RV and boat storage, a dump station, enclosed self -storage and the parking and staging of trash containers, roll -offs, and vehicles and/or equipment to pick up and deliver same and four (4) individual flex office buildings) provided that the property is not a lot in an approved or recorded subdivision plat orpart of a map or plan filed prior to adoption of any regulations controlling subdivisions in the A (Agricultural) Zone District Bob Choate, Assistant County Attorney, made this a matter of record ' e Chair Cozad stated there was a request this morning for someone to accommodate a member of the public with sign language services and the Board and staff have made multiple attempts to locate services without success (Clerk's Note However, staff is accommodating said person with a laptop to view the related documents and is sitting next to the person transcribing the conversation and ready and available to intercede regarding questions ) cc• pLcKofmm), Pic N®3, HLCLL), cTGCTT), c-.csc) 2017-1696 PL2475 HEARING CERTIFICATION - WW, LLC (USR17-0016) i PAGE 2 e Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services, presented a brief summary of the proposal and described the location of the site in relation to relevant County roads and surrounding municipalities He reported the site location to be within the three (3) mile referral area of the Town of Dacono, City of Northglenn, and' Adams County, however, he a stated it is not in any Intergovernmental Agreement areas or Coordinated Planning Agreement area of any municipality Mr Ogle reviewed the referrals returned by surrounding municipalities and described the proximity of surrounding residences ,and adjacent businesses and relevant land uses He reviewed the proposed construction plans, RV and boat storage, dump station, self -storage, roll off dumpster storage and hauling, truck parking, and the four (4) flex buildings with no planned use at this time He mentioned staff had received eight (8) letters of opposition from surrounding property owners (SPO's) with concerns including compatibility, property values, eyesore, traffic volume' and safety, staging vehicles, nuisance with debris, trash and varmints, and crime to include theft and vandalism He stated staff sent out 18 referrals and received eight (8) referral responses with comments Mr Ogle reviewed the following Code references in support of the proposal Section 22-2-20 B (A Policy 2 2), Sections 22-2-20, 22-2-10 F, and 22-2-20 G (A Goal 7) Furthermore, he reviewed the reasons for the 6-1 denial from the Planning Commission Mr Ogle displayed images of the site and surrounding views and stated should the Board approve the application, the Planning Commission has some recommended conditions In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr Ogle pointed out other RV Storage places in the area In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr Ogle stated the proposal application did not start as a violation as there is an existing business on the lot In response to Chair Cozad, Mr Ogle explained roll -offs as commercial property trash containers El Evan Pinkham, Department of Public Works representative, provided a brief overview of the transportation plans and requirements, stating the applicant will need to work with Adams County regarding an Access Permit and any maintenance requirements He reviewed a prior traffic study for information purposes only and stated the average daily vehicle count on County Road (CR) 2 reflected 3,121 vehicles with 14% trucks In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr Pinkham considered the information she presented and agreed the Access Permit would need to be applied for through the Weld County Department of Public Works In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr Ogle reiterated the Town of Dacono and City of Northglenn presented no objections during the referral process I ID Hayley Balzano, Planning Services Engineer representative, presented the drainage and grading requirements and stated a final drainage will be required and she reviewed relevant Conditions of Approval (COA) and Development Standards (DS) _ e Lauren Light, Department of Public Health and Environment, reviewed the water and sewer provisions and stated an on -site commercial well provides water and a new septic system may be installed, or the applicant may use the current system which will require a Commercial Permit, including upgrades to current commercial standards She explained the types of businesses in the flex buildings determines whether portable toilets may be used Ms Light reviewed the State drinking water regulations and noise standards, and clarified many Development Standards have been added to address any type of business that may occur in the aforementioned flex buildings She reported DS# 15-31 address Environmental Health items 2017-1696 PL2475 HEARING CERTIFICATION - WW, LLC (USR17-0016 j PAGE 3 IR In response to Chair Cozad, Mr Ogle stated regarding certain future uses for the flex buildings, the applicant would be required to apply for an amendment to the USR ormay have to apply for a new USR In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr, Ogle stated referrals were not sent to the City of Brighton or the Town of Fort Lupton because they are outside the three (3) mile referral area Commissioner Kirkmeyer clarified thereere Intergovernmental Area Agreements in place and they should have been -sent referrals e Julie Coleman, represented the applicant and reviewed the history of the purchase,^uses and permits, and stated the current request is for additional uses_ necessary to the business She stated the use for the business has not changed, other than using the office, and she provided a Powerpoint presentation to reflect the proposed_plans to include landscaping, fencing, cameras, an on -site management resident, security, site plan of improvements, existing oil and gas uses, concepts of covered storage, and storage buildings Ms Coleman reported the area is growing rapidly and the use will fit nicely with the growth She reviewed the Code requirements and how the applicant has met them and she pointed out many other commercial uses and other storage facilities in the area She stated the road infrastructure in the area is expanding as -well Ms Coleman described mitigation efforts to address impeding views of SP,Os and the plan to utilize landscaping and fencing to screen views `and noise from neighbors She reviewed the distance to the nearest residential property line and reminded everyone of the large compressor facility planned for the future Ms Coleman provided photos of the surrounding residences and pointed out family -owned businesses and storage facilities and reported that many surrounding! properties are being marketed commercially as development is coming to the area Furthermore, she stated the applicant purposely located the proposed development as far away from the neighbors as possible, the design and landscaping will add to the community and be nice to look at, and the facility will create jobs Ms Coleman reiterated safety and security measures to assure the SPOs of their effort to make this a secure location and that the applicantwishes to do things correctly by attaining the necessary permits and meeting all requirements She demonstrated how the application meets the Weld County Code requirements and stated they would love to meet with the neighbors and work with them to mitigate any concerns In response to Commissioner Moreno, Ms Coleman explained the hours of operation and peak times She also explained the construction will be phased and the proposal includes approximately 35-40 spaces per acre once built out In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer,, Ms Coleman stated the property size is 76 acres in total, with 20 acres for the RV and boat storage and the rest of the property left open, aside from the self -storage In response to Commissioner Conway, Ms Coleman stated there were five,(5) residents that attended(the community meeting and she reported crime as the main concern and stated the applicant is_ mitigating with installing cedar fencing and cameras She clarified the invitation for the community meeting was sent to every property owner within 500 feet e Steve Neal, SPO, stated he bought his land because it was zoned Agricultural and they were looking for the peaceful life He explained there never were break-ins until the other RV Storage Facility, also located in close proximity, was opened and since then, there have been several just in their neighborhood He stated the quality of life has decreased because of that , facility and he is opposed to another one Mr Neal,expressed his frustration with the Agricultural zoning getting whittled away and how it is affecting the property values He requested the Board protect the Agricultural zoning In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr Neal pointed out his property on the map and explained his intent to build a home In further response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, he stated he has not had anything stolen because they do not have anything of value 2017-1696 PL2475 HEARING CERTIFICATION - WW, LLC (USR17-0016) PAGE 4 stored on the property yet but he has had conversations with his neighbors regarding break-ins and theft In response to Commissioner Conway, he stated he purchased the property 10-12 years ago and has not built on the property because he was paying college tuition for his daughter In response to Commissioner Moreno, Mr Neal stated he did not know about the meeting until a neighbor shared the notice with him and he didn't even have time to write a letter IE A J Goddard, SPO, submitted maps (Exhibit N) and explained the history of his property purchase and the changes in the last 15 years to include 24 homes in the immediate area of this proposed use He explained, they are very nice homes and there are three (3) more under construction right now He explained his own small business USR fora small machine and welding shop and how there are small "mom and pop" type businesses but nothing large scale and he disagrees with the comments made by the applicant that there is a lot of industry in the area Mr Goddard also explained the historic use of the site in question and stated it was a small operation with only two to four dumpsters at any one time and they allowed him to do test shooting on their property He displayed a map of the area and expressed his concern with the unknown use of the flex use buildings He further stated' he is concerned with property values, the height of the RV canopies, and the overall impact to the -neighborhood Lastly, -he mentioned he has plans to sell another lot but it is adjacent to the site and it does negatively impact property values He stated he has sold other lots and folks have built million dollar homes and now this business will be in their backyard El Bill Wycoff, spo: submitted maps and a Powerpoint presentation (Exhibit O), and began by explaining the topography and slope of the landscape and utilized another map identifying the parcels by number, as he spoke He stated he purchased an 80 -acre parcel and over the years had operated a kennel, trained dogs and horses, and harvested hay Mr Wycoff explained that since the original farm was broken into 80 -acre parcels, buying land, building houses, and enjoying the agriculture way of life was the norm and he displayed photos of the homes in the area to further explain why this proposed use is not compatible He clarified the land can still grow grass and can still be irrigated, the land is agriculture focused and the future should be consistent with the past In response to Commissioner` Kirkmeyer, Mr Wycoff pointed out the adjacent subdivisions and rural urbanization area He stated he did not go to the neighborhood meeting In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr Wycoff explained he divided and sold a portion of his property which was later subdivided again 0 Rusty Knels and wife, Sarah Knels, SPOs, stated they are the most impacted as they are adjacent and he is very concerned about property values He expressed his frustration regarding the applicant's claims that the proposed use would increase the values as there is no validation for that He also stated the neighborhood concern regarding the crime is not regarding the proposed property but that the business will draw crime to the neighborhood as evidenced by the similar operation that is also in close proximity which caused the crime rate to triple in the last year Mr Knels stated Mr Walker purchased three (3) roll -off businesses and relocated them to the property and it is a large-scale dumpster and painting operation without permitting and it continues to fly under the radar without being addressed He further stated the sites with no purposes means they can do anything commercial in the future and he reported the traffic issue is already terrible in that area and the access to that location is on top of a hill with a blind spot as the sun rises and sets 'He mentioned the applicant's effort to provide visual mitigation with_a cedar fence and landscaping is a good idea but questioned its maintenance Mr Knels requested a denial In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr Knels stated they did not attend the meeting, 2017-1696 PL2475 HEARING CERTIFICATION - WW, LLC (USR17-0016) PAGE 5 as they were out of state and he mentioned several neighbors did not even receive a notice In response to Chair Cozad, he stated they were never contacted and they received information at the Planning Commission heanng , IR Chair Cozad adjourned the meeting with plans to reconvene at 1 15 p m i e Chair Cozad reconvened the hearing at 1 15 p m and invited the public to continue their input David Campbell, SPO, pointed,out his residence on the map and stated his agreement with what has already been stated by his neighbors and voiced his disagreement with the applicant's statement that this facility adds value to the community as it does not fit the community, will create traffic and is not compatible In response to Commissioner Moreno, he stated he did not attend the meeting due to illness Jeffry Korbe, SPO, pointed out his residence on the map\and explained their investment in the purchase of this property and that he is currently building a home He expressed his frustration with the unknown element of the four (4) flex buildings and not knowing what these buildings will be used for In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr Korbe stated he did not receive any notification for the USR or for the community meeting, even though his property is adjacent, therefore, he did not attend the meeting 0 Sheila Morelli, SPO, pointed out her property on the map and stated they are adjacent to the proposed USR; location She clarified the applicant did disclose there would be an RV Storage Facility, however, they did not realize the size of the facility and she disagreed with thassumption that there is no traffic or crime associated with these facilities Ms Morelli explained the items that have been stolen from her property due to the storage facility on the other side of her property She shared her frustration with traffic, crime, and the landscaping that has been allowed to die, and the applicant's effort ko display all the outbuildings of the residences to dishonestly show compatibility Ms Morelli made the point that agricultural land in Weld County is priced lower than commercial property and corporations are taking advantage of those prices instead of purchasing commercial land In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Ms Morelli explained her issues with the change of use and stated people don't always follow the rules e Shirley Amerin, SPO, pointed out her property and explained how her well was contaminated by the oil and gas in the area She shared she is now homeless, sold her farm in Keenesburg to purchase this property, and can't even build there because there is no good source of water Ms Amend provided a poster board with photos (Exhibit P) She discounted the applicant's claims that it would increase the value, as there are facts of properties being sold for much less She provided the real estate comparable sales examples (Exhibit Q) to show the value was decreased and explained how she had requested proof that this establishment would increase the values and Mr Walker never provided any proof She also expressed her fear of living there because of the crime She stated the roll -offs have been there supposedly for painting, and she claimed they are still there and not on job sites Ms Amerin explained traffic would be 'early morning and evening and she knows two families who have lost family members in traffic accidents because of the sunrise and sunset 'and where the access is She cited concerns with noise, RV Storage areas that are not full, flex office, different answers regarding the number of employees and the 2017-1696 PL2475 HEARING CERTIFICATION - WW, LLC (USR17-0016) s PAGE 6 general disregard for the neighborhood and adjacent properties Ms Amenn `stated she does not spread her agriculture manure in someone's residence in the city and asks that the city folk not bring their commercial uses to her backyard She reiterated her concerns regarding theft, traffic accidents, not conforming, and that all this is to the applicant's benefit and to the SPO's expense Lastly, she stated she spoke to Adams County regarding the expansion of CR 2 and they stated it won't happen in the next 20-30 years In response to Commissioner Moreno, she stated she attended the community meeting ) El Mike McDonough, SPO, pointed out his residence on the map, and expressed his frustration with the height of the proposed canopies used to cover the RVs He stated the presentation was misleading with an effort to show all kinds of industrial equipment in the area and he clarified the equipment being shown is not even in their quadrant, it is in surrounding quadrants He further stated there are 24 homes in their quadrant which is more than any quadrant in the area and they are trying to build a community out there Mr McDonough stated this use is not compatible and trying to put a commercial business in an agricultural zone is not the right fit He expressed agreement with the aforementioned concerns to include theft, noise, and decreased property value, and in response to the neighborhood meeting, he was not notified 8 Chair Cozad, on behalf of James Torgerson, SPO, read his statement for the record (Exhibit R) and stated he looked for land for the benefit of their kids in 4H He did not realize this was planned, and he asked where is the protection for the homeowners? Esther Gesick, Clerk to the Board, provided assistance and stated that Mr Torgerson wrote his response that he was working and did not attend the meeting but that he did receive a notice He further indicated that he agreed with all the comments stated by his neighbors and he is very concerned regarding property values In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Ms Amenn provided the real estate comparable prices to the County Attorney (Exhibit Q) IE 11/1 Coleman stated she appreciates the opportunity to hear from the neighbors and address the objections and stated the applicant's desire to be a good neighbor She offered their willingness to put up an eight (8) -foot privacy fence, deleting the flex buildings, and removing the roll -offs She clarified the applicant did purchase three (3) roll -off companies, but they are being operated at other locations Ms Coleman stated they are willing to work with the neighbors and the Commissioners to come to some sort of agreement She reiterated they want to have a good, secure business to lessen the impacts on surrounding property neighbors and she expressed a desire to operate a good company and offer storage opportunities She stated they are willing to submit to traffic studies and'anything needed 0 In response to Commissioner Conway,(Ms Coleman stated the canopies were only a proposallor screening and they are willing to get rid of them She stated they would be attractive but if the neighbors don't like them they can get rid of them E Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated the burden of proof is on the applicant and she read the intent of the Agricultural Zone District and asked how is the application consistent with,the intent of the Agricultural Zone Distnct'7 Ms Coleman stated their proposed use is consistent with the other like businesses in the area Commissioner Kirkmeyer repeated her question with the 2017-1696 PL2475 HEARING CERTIFICATION - WW, LLC (USR17-0016)' PAGE 7 emphasis on how is their proposed use consistent with the intent of the Agricultural Zone, not how the proposed use is consistent with other uses in the area She asked Ms Coleman again, how does a RV Storage Facility or a roll -off commercial business meet the intent of the zone? Ms Coleman responded that their use meets it the same way the other approved uses do and stated she understands they aren't farming but would reiterate no one is farming out there Ms Coleman stated she cannot answer the question as desired In further response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, 'Ms Coleman explained where she obtained the information regarding road infrastructure increasing'in the area and that there is no timeline but it is designated for the future She also clarified she did not say the business would increase the value in the area, but that if done nicely with landscaping and the canopies it would be an added value to the community Ms Coleman confirmed she is not an appraiser She further stated they are not painters and do not have a painting business When asked about the access, Ms Coleman stated it would be off of CR 2 and it would not access the road used to, access oil and gas She also stated they had plans to put a fence all around the north border Regarding the notices to the neighborhood, she stated they sent them to everyone on the list provided by Kim Ogle e In response to Chair Cozad, Ms Coleman stated they would be willing to reduce the number of rolloff containers to four (4) at any time on the property and they are willing to remove the flex buildings from the application In response to Chair Cozad, Ms Coleman stated they would get the list of plants most recommended by the County and utilize a landscaper to prepare a plan to include maintenance for the long term Regarding the existing berms, she explained there is a large berm that runs in mostly an east/west direction and yes they are willing to work with Planning staff and the neighbors to accommodate as they want to be there long term El In response to Commissioner Conway, Ms Coleman stated the community meeting was held before Planning Commission She stated the timeframe was too short between the meetings to provide another meeting in light of the lack of attendance at the first meeting She explained there are some things they cannot change the neighbors' minds on, such_ as crime, however, they are willing to educate and change the plans as much as possible to offer mitigation e In response to Chair Cozad, Mr Pinkham stated he had an 'opportunity to meet with staff over the lunch hour and it has been determined that the applicant will be required to work with Weld County for an Access Permit and to complete an Improvements Agreement and a Traffic Study, with the results of the Traffic Study being the basis for off -site improvements and potential auxiliary lanes Mr Pinkham clarified the document regarding the infrastructure expansion was the Crossroads Alignment Study completed with Adams County and the Cities of Northlenn and Thornton He stated the study provides the ultimate size of` each particular roadway as growth continues, however, there is no timeline for construction In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr Pinkham reiterated there would be an ultimate buildout of four (4) lanes, however, there is no date set Commissioner Cozad stated it could be developed)as development occurs and as things change e In response to Chair Cozad, Ms Light reviewed the requirements for an Air Emissions Permit through the State She confirmed deleting the flex buildings is helpful 2017-1696 PL2475 HEARING, CERTIFICATION - WW, LLC (USR17-0016) PAGE 8 E In response to Chair Cozad, Mr Ogle responded that the application has a buffer setback from future right-of-way that shows grasses and trees, and when the application came in there was no landscape treatment along the north or south property lines Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated the burden of proof lies with the applicant and they must meet all of the criteria to be able to approve the application according to State Statutes, however, if they do not meet all of the criteria, the Board must deny the application She emphasized she is in agreement with the recommendation for denial from the Planning Commission and Planning Staff She provided her findings, stating the application is not consistent with the following Weld County Code references regarding Section 23-2-230 B1 Section 22-21-20 Agriculture Goals and Policies (A Goal 1, A Goal 2, A Policy 2 3, A Goal 4, A Goal 9), Section 22-2-40 Urban • Development Goals and Policies (UD Goal 1), Section 22-2-80 Industrial Development Goals and Policies (I Goal 1, I Goal 6), Section 22-2-100 Commercial Development Goals and Policies (C Goal 1, C Goal 2, C Goal 5), Section 22-2-140 Regional Urbanization Area Goals and Policies (RUA Goal 7) Regarding Section 23-2-230 B 2, Commissioner Kirkmeyer explained meeting the intent of the Agricultural Zone does not mean being compatible with other USRs in the area, which is what the applicant demonstrated She clarified the intent as directly related to agriculture and there is nothing about an RV storage or roll -off business that maintains or supports agriculture Regarding Sections 23-2-230 B 3 and B 4, she stated it is not consistent with the Regional Urbanization Area or compatible with the rural residential area regarding existing surrounding land uses or future development as projected by Chapter 22 Regarding Section 23-2-230 B 7, Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated the drop in property values is very real and the increase in crime and traffic does not provide -for the adequate provisions for the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood and the County Lastly, she stated the access is dangerous and she feels the applicant has not met the burden of proof and the Board should uphold the denial as recommended by Planning Staff and the Planning Commission a Commissioner Freeman stated his agreement with some portions of what Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated, however, he clarified the USR process is often because the application is not related to agriculture He agreed the application is not compatible with existing surrounding uses due to the number of residential locations in the quadrant and to approve the request, the application must meet all the requirements in Commissioner Conway stated he concurs with Commissioner Freeman, and agrees with most of what Commissioner Kirkmeyer said He emphasized the residents clearly demonstrated the agricultural- components of their rural residential neighborhood Commissioner Conway agreed this proposal is not compatible and, based on the public input, it seems impossible to get to compatibility il Commissioner Moreno expressed his agreement with his fellow Commissioners regarding the lack of compatibility la Mr Choate explained the motion to deny e Chair Cozad stated the Board tries to find a way to mitigate and approve applications if possible, however, the burden of proof is on the applicant She stated there was a lack of dialogue 2017-1696 PL2475 I HEARING CERTIFICATION - WW, LLC (USR17-0016), PAGE 9 between the applicant and the neighbors concerning coopei•ative mitigation to make it more compatible She noted the applicant did not pursue an opportunity to request a continuance at this hearing to provide more time Chair Cozad seated the land use patterns demonstrate a lot of residential development which supports the importance of mitigation for SPOs, also the applicant did not address the consistency with the Comprehensive Plan or consistency with the Agnculturat Zone District IR Commissioner Conway expressed his appreciation for the neighbors participating in the process and, in light of the denial at the Planning Commission hearing, there wasn't an effort to continue the dialogue and that was problematic la Commissioner Kirkmeyer moved to deny the request of WW, LLC, for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit, USR17-0016, for any Use permitted as a Use by Right, Accessory Use, or Use by Special Review in the Commercial or Industrial Zone Districts (RV and boat storage, a dump station, enclosed self -storage and the parking and staging of trash containers, roll -offs, and vehicles and/or equipment to pick up and deliver same and four (4) individual flex office buildings) provided that the property is not a lot in an approved or recorded subdivision plat or part of a map or plan filed prior to adoption of any regulations controlling' subdivisions in the A (Agricultural) Zone District, based on the recommendations of Planning staff and'the Planning Commission along with the findings as incorporated by all the Commissioners and as entered into the record The motion was, seconded by Commissioner Conway, and it carried unanimously There being no further discussion; the hearing was completed at 2 43 p m ` This Certification was approved on the 26th day of June, 2017 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO ATTEST ddettA) ' j Weld County Clerk to the Board 1 BY •R9'y Clerk to the Board APP County Attorney Date of signature —I 190 ((1 Ju ozad, Chair Steve Moreno,, Pro-Tem arbara Kirkmey 201.7-1696 PL2475 ATTENDANCE LIST DATE: Co%2L Jr7 NAME - PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY - ,EMAIL - r ADDRESS , , CITY - ST - ZIP A ,i(m4 arw crr 3c/ 71 (reeky ,C0 f 4a CD C 7rJ7 e0603._'y-61,./.4-,/ Cz s Web 4 1- Ww ycorrb»'700.c., 3 33 C2 r8 tliC, ,5x / -'s n- - Z p� C ka‘c" 60,4. G0J<t4.J-c.� ,i;4 n 2 ire /Ki,),, 4 e h e.� �`� 9,5 C k D n !l � e It a f e y `fc7923 .1310g9 0 yil-ko, , Co., 8z -co c.,2 Z y BIt?hrTeiA. ('v F:0(0O3 B'cn lS Sm eN s /na„ff .(col 87,7S Gg- 2 `5k-F-un CO' &Q3 '?\ 4y .gfrirls rwtrNeks& 7,.v:it ,e,-,-, alS. - az `" &I -402m CO dg She, la NktrP,iI: imp rt,W rOnee+mmOah 305'0la /9 GYy,v, OD N.p 2o(o,©.3 $60 -AVerf Ai/Ale-or 6P @M .Ce-K Sz2=1 X12. 7 / •Ae GOoao 5 '. , %lam 0cr,�1 �,,s , cot2 , �/ 7 A/ C-4:7/ 9 ,c3ru.�,,,c -- o G3 X51 36 q iair h ,eon7/5Dk k -saap_. 40 1X c) --e,--4. IJ .9.e. \ S\ -e c,,e , 9, ( 1 G'1 ® (t',,r ,o ,-, Lit( c, 5 di (r"X, . s F,e CO $ 0)3 Cmry6-ell ctaoid Qkc. ,., ion, Rai c a qt "Pcr56,-o,-, co aoGo3 RICrfl ,( -m- W-'-- a 10793 �,ars�c- gene p , g_ c poi za' K04—( �)1 ij Kwt6 w ,< 0,- q0S «�- S , , +_ Z C ge 1Z4, ,U E Cd1x0PPml Jwc,Itar Lllewitih0"(1161,;), teiti in -St S Actpr. k1.,._ Cy -012,6 - ONLINE MAPPING 1. Parcel No. 146933200013 2. Parcel No. 146933300027 3. Parcel No. 146933300028 4. Parcel No. 146933300006 5. Parcel No. 146933100017 6. Parcel No. 146933400043 7. Parcel No. 146933200009 8. Parcel No. 146933100007 COZ22-0010 Building Permit No_ RSN22-0112 9/22/2022 Building Permit No. RSN22-0093 7/22/2022 Building Permit No. RSN22-0056 4/25/2022 Building Permit No. RSN22-0036 3/15/2022 Building Permit No. RSN20-0132 9/20/2020 Building Permit No. RSN19-0154 9/4/2019 Building Permit No. RSN19-0001 1/3/2019 Building Permit No. RSN17-0036 3/10/2017 WGS_ 1984_ Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Weld County Colorado CO722-0010 2.891 7 Feet 27 homes in Section 33 r ►�5 map is a use! generated static L, tput tr orn an Internet mapping site ano is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION )r Highway Road County Boundary New homes as of 2017 Residences Notes To: Weld County Department of Planning Services From: Jim & Shirley Beliveau Date: December 19, 2022 RE: Letter of Objection to Case # COZ22-0010 Had our neighbors not notified us of this zoning change proposal, we would not have known about it. The sign that was supposed to be posted is not visible from the road. It is lying down in the tall grass and looks like a piece of trash. It is our understanding that this sign should be posted to alert the neighbors of any pending change to the zoning of the property. All neighbors have a legal right to be notified and this was not done! Our concerns are many; 1. Lack of adequate road infrastructure 2. County Rd 2 road condition is very bad 3. Increased traffic harmful to local agricultural properties 4. Uncertainty of what would be built on the property Can they build anything they want? 5. Lack of law enforcement to enforce "quiet enjoyment" 6. The property in question is residential & agricultural, not commercial 7. Is this proposal consistent with Chapters 22 & 23 and compatible with the surrounding land uses? Thank you for allowing us to voice our concerns over this proposal. We encourage you and the board to carefully consider the ramifications of this rezoning proposal. Jim & Shirley Beliveau 8285 County Rd 2 Brighton, Co. 80603 shirleyatmts@gmail.com 303-478-6677 Jessica Reid From: Sent: To: Subject: Esther Gesick Monday, December 19, 2022 11:28 AM Jessica Reid; Chris Gathman FW: Opposition to COZ22-0010 From: Janice Lopez <jlopez@stormguardrc.com> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2022 11:18 AM To: Lori Saine <Isaine@weldgov.com>; Steve Moreno <smoreno@weldgov.com>; Perry Buck <pbuck@weldgov.com>; Mike Freeman <mfreeman@weldgov.com>; Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com> Cc: Janice Lopez <jlopez@stormguardrc.com>; Isaac Lopez <heavyx3@msn.com> Subject: Opposition to COZ22-0010 Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Weld County Board of Commissioners 1150 O Street PO Box 758 Greeley CO 80631 RE: Opposition to COZ22-0010 To Whom it May Concern: Our names are Janice and Arnold Lopez and we live at 8495 County Road 2 Brighton CO 80603. We are writing this letter to oppose the passing of COZ22-0010 which would change the property to the east of us on the corner of County Roads 2 and 19 from Zone from the A (Agricultural) to Zone District to the C-3 (Business Commercial) Zone District. We are 5th generation Colorado natives but relatively new to Weld County. We were looking for something quite unique and purchased our 9 -acre property in June 2020. Our goal was to own a property where we could live full time, establish a bit of a hobby farm, and run our contracting business. Prior to purchasing our property we worked closely with Weld County to ensure we understood the nuances of owning in the A (Agricultural) Zone district. What impressed me most about Weld County was their commitment to helping us achieve our dream while making sure that our contractor business was fully compatible with the land use requirements. We had multiple conversations with Weld County about the nature of the business and impact it would have on the parcel in terms of land development, storage needs, increased traffic, etc. Over two years later I am happy to report that our partnership with Weld County is strong and we are achieving all we had dreamed of for this land. We do this while being good neighbors and not negatively impacting the surrounding agricultural community. That is why we are writing to oppose the passing of COZ22-0010. Our understanding is that a C-3 (Business Commercial) Zone District is intended benefit a broader region, such as large-scale regional shopping centers and entertainment districts. I understand that C-3 District properties may require large amounts of space, generate high traffic volumes and are typically located near high -traffic corridors. In our opinion, this i 1 definition does not seem to align with the characteristics of the parcel in question which creates some potential safety and welfare concerns for us and our community Parcel Size The parcel in question +/- 20 acres While that is a good amount of land in most scenarios it does not seem to be enough to fit a large-scale regional shopping center, entertainment district, and require parking We are , struggling to identify one type of broad region, large scale business that would not have a negative impact on the surrounding agricultural land, property owners, and businesses that are properly zoned to operate on an A (Agricultural) zoned district Safety Issues with Road Capacity The parcel is located on the corner of County Road 2 and County Road 19 Neither of these county roads are large enough, or currently maintained enough, to be used as a high traffic corridor Our property entrance is located directly off County Road 2 just west of the proposed zoning change In the two years we have lived here we have come to learn that County Road 2 is already a very busy road and handles a lot of daily standard vehicle and large semi -truck traffic which is mostly likely thru traffic avoiding the traffic signals and congestion on Highway 7 County Road 2 and County Road 19 are heavily rutted and broken down from the weight of the semi -trucks that regularly use them They are single lane roads with no traffic control lights, turn lanes, shoulders, or sidewalks We assume these county roads were originally constructed to meet agricultural needs There was no intent for either county roadito be a high traffic corridor therefore these important safety features of a high traffic corridor were never built in Under current conditions it can be very dangerous pulling out onto County Road 2 due to the amount of traffic and the speed of traffic that is passing by If the property is rezoned to C-3 Business Commercial) and a large scale, high traffic generating business is allowed to develop on that parcel, it will become increasingly dangerous to all property owners and A (Agricultural) Zone businesses that currently use these roads Potential Increases in,Traffic Accidents, Theft, Violence Rezoning this parcel also creates some concerns for our welfare and that of our surrounding community Large scale shopping centers and entertainment districts create more activity that can lead to higher rates of traffic accidents, theft, and violence related incidents It is our understanding that County Road 2 is the county line between Weld and Adams County and is not heavily patrolled by either Sheriff Department If a large scale, high traffic business is allowed to develop on this corner our fear is that there will be an increase in traffic accidents, theft, and violence related incidents which may not receive the needed attention from Weld County resources to deter the activity I We don't want the Board of Commissioners to think we are anti -business or anti -development We are very much pro -business and pro -development but strongly believe business development in this specific area should be compatible with the surrounding community which is primarily zoned A (Agricultural) Property owners should be able to establish a business on their A (Agricultural) Zoned property as long as it does not interfere with neighbors and other agricultural activities that occur here Changing this parcel to a C-3 (Business Commercial) Zone would allow business that are very incompatible with the current make-up of the community It could be the start of a very negative trend that will completely degrade this very special Weld County area , 2 Unfortunately, we are unable to attend the board meeting in person on Wednesday 12/21/22 We are asking the Board of Commissioners to support our community by focusing on the right type of business development and growth for this area by voting down COZ22-0010 Sincerely, - Janice & Arnold Lopez 8495 County Road 2 Brighton CO 80603 303-557-8157 / 303-359-3064 1 J 3 EXHIBIT , .0 a Jessica Reid From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Jess — for the file. Thanks! Esther Gesick Tuesday, December 20, 2022 8:13 AM Jessica Reid; Chris Gathman Tom Parko Jr. FW: COZ22-0010 Opposition Letter image001.png Esther E. Gesick Clerk to the Board 1150 O Street/P.O. Box 758/Greeley, CO 80632 tel: (970) 400-4226 Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. From: rusty knels <rwknels@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2022 8:39 PM To: Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com> Subject: COZ22-0010 Opposition Letter Caution This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Commissioner, This is the first time I have reached out regarding developmental pressures in my area in proximity to CR 19 & CR 2 and I wanted to contact you on an upcoming proposal that will have long term detrimental effects to the rural community where we live. During the 2020 pandemic, public meetings were shut down and yet the BOCC pushed forward with an update of the Comprehensive Plan. The County chose not to mail postcards to residents directly affected by the addition of "Opportunity Zones" along CR 19 and elsewhere. 1 Now, because of the addition of "Opportunity Zones", the residents in my community will be fighting off absentee developers and land speculation for years to come We need you to help us put a stop to reckless development that threatens the livelihoods and peace of the farmers, agriculturally -geared businesses, and rural residences that value this incredible place COZ22-0010 asks the BOCC to rezone a small parcel for the benefit of ONE property owner The parcel is too small to reasonably buffer C-3 activities, which could include bars, gas stations, more storage units/RV Storage and basically whatever they want The roads and intersections in the area are already in very poor shape and are not suited to accommodate the increase in traffic associated with a C-3 rezone With the county having no line -of -sight on improvements and the fact that this proposed parcel in no way is near any main arterial road by definition it doesn't conform to the neighborhood and is not compatible to the area , The county has in the past voted against increasing the intensity of land use in the area The parcel directly west of COZ22-0010 applied for a USR17-0016 in 2017 and was DENIED by the planning , commission and BOCC on the basis that an increase in commercial activity would not be compatible with`the surrounding rural properties and agricultural -related businesses The addition of these "Opportunity Zones" or loop hole to be exploited has renewed interest in developing these intersections but that is all that has changed ---these areas are still RURAL, AGRICULTURAL, and RESIDENTIAL (See Picture below), 0 a 2 In fact the parcel owner to the West is again waiting to see the outcome of the current C3 rezone request, if passed he plans to apply for a zoning change as well, so really this vote isn't for just a 20 acre parcel it's really about a 92 acre block because there would now be compatibility set in motion by the BOCC - - \ I Urge you to please deny this proposal on December 21, 2022 A development of this magnitude doesn't meet the criteria and is not compatible with the area/neighborhood and would have long lasting detriment to the community Regards, Rusty Knels J M r 3 I q I a t 1 a r a Sae a. as Jessica Reid From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Jess - for the file. Thanks! Esther Gesick Tuesday, December 20, 2022 8:16 AM Jessica Reid Scott James; Perry Buck; Mike Freeman; Steve Moreno; Lori Saine; Chris Gathman RE: Opposition to change from agriculture to business commercial zone; COZ22-0010 Esther E. Gesick Clerk to the Board 1150 O Street/ P.O. Box 758/ Greeley, CO 80632 tel: (970) 400-4226 rit 7-4i et Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. From: Michael Sedio <mjsedioll@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2022 7:12 AM To: Scott James <sjames@weldgov.com>; Perry Buck <pbuck@weldgov.com>; Mike Freeman <mfreeman@weldgov.com>; Lori Saine <Isaine@weldgov.com>; Steve Moreno <smoreno@weldgov.com> Cc: Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com> Subject: Opposition to change from agriculture to business commercial zone; COZ22-0010 Caution This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. To Weld County Commissioners, I am opposed to change COZ22-0010 because there has not been satisfactory public notification of the change nor has there been appropriate consideration of the adverse effects of increased traffic on the roads involved. I became aware of the proposed change as I was searching the Weld County web site for information on a different issue. I was surprised that I hadn't seen anything to draw my attention to this as I drive County Road 19 to County Road 2 numerous times each day. I began to look closer to better understand where the proposed change was located but had difficulty because there was no signage to indicate the location. I now know the location from looking at the zoning map and reconciling that to the property. To this day there is no visible signage to make anyone aware of the proposed zoning change. It is the responsibility of the person or group requesting such a change to post and maintain signage to make people aware of the intended change. This change should be postponed until the signage is redisplayed so that passing parties and stakeholders can be made aware of the zone change proposal. As mentioned, I drive County Road 19 to County Road 2 every day. Depending on the time of day County Road 2 seems overloaded already and it can be dangerous to turn onto CR 2 from CR19. Further it can be dangerous to turn onto County Road 2 from our driveway. To increase traffic on County Road 2 due to the establishment of commercial business is inviting trouble. This rezoning should be paused until a traffic study can be performed to make us more aware of the roads capabilities to support such a change and to suggest mitigations to the danger of increased traffic on the already over- burdened road. 1 I feel that it is premature to make this zoning change Please delay the proposed change until proper notification of appropriate parties and a traffic study (complete with recommendations) can be done to legitimize change COZ22-0010 Please feel free to contact me for comment Regards, Michael Sedio 2 Jessica Reid From: Sent: To: Subject: Esther Gesick Tuesday, December 20, 2022 5:23 PM Jessica Reid FW: Letter of Opposition to Rezoning of 22-0-0100 Original Message From: Jeffry Korbe <jmkorbe@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2022 3:24 PM To: Lori Saine <Isaine@weldgov.com> Cc: Steve Moreno <smoreno@weldgov.com>; Perry Buck <pbuck@weldgov.com>; Mike Freeman <mfreeman@weldgov.com>; Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com> Subject: Letter of Opposition to Rezoning of 22-0-0100 Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Ms Saine, It has just recently been brought to my Wife's and my self's attention about the potential Re -Zoning (22-0-0100) and development along County Road 2. I must First ask why this was not POSTED? I drive County Road 2 in both directions past this proposed site and have never seen any kind of signage. I do understand Weld County's rule of notifying neighboring property owners within 500 feet of proposed changes in zoning but in this case in particular that is 3 owners of which one has already tried to change zoning in 2019 and that proposal was defeated and we all know he would not oppose this as it only aids his case to try again and it also would set a president in him also acquiring thus increasing the area from 20 acres to around 92 acres. Anyway there has been no signage to notify all others that might be interest in such a change. I also understand that the owner of this said proposal posted this in the Greeley Tribune? Hardly any thing us on the Southern most edge of Weld County would have access to or read as our address are Considered Brighton. I have to question the intent to actually notify all interested parties and would give the appearance that they wanted very few to know about and this could be evidenced by the lack of people in attendance of the first Planning Meeting where just a few were aware of? One of the most significant concerns and validity to this proposal being declined is County Road 2 is just that a County Road that is a narrow two lane road that has a speed limit if 45 mph. It has already seen a surge in traffic the last 5 years because as Adams County has continued to address the concerns of Speeds have a total of five (5) stop lights to mitigate safety concerns between Hwy 85 and Colorado Blvd. on a Hwy with a speed limit of 60 mph. Weld County Road 2 has NO such impediments, again it has a speed limit of 45 with one (1) 4 way stop at Colorado Blvd. that being said the traffic volume has shifted one mile North onto County Road 2 with ZERO Mitigations. Adams County has another Two (2) Stop lights on Hwy 7 from Colorado Blvd. to where County Road connects to Hwy 7, County Road 2 has ZERO impediments. So to recap County Road 2 has one (1) traffic stops in a similar length of roadway that Hwy 7 has installed seven (7). Weld County does NOT Maintain, it does not Patrol, it essentially has nothing to do with County Road 2. A C-3 Zoning requires a Major Atrial Road within 1/2 mile of a C-3 Zoned Property, this is Weld Counties Statues. This alone is grounds for the dismissal of the proposal, the lack of infrastructure both currently and nothing on the books for the next 10-20 years, it meets none of the requirements of Weld County Statues, its effects on the current 35-40 primary residents in this section alone currently living in Weld County and not some out of County Residents trying to force this here, it is NOT the RIGHT TIME nor the RIGHT PLACE for this proposal I hope we have your support as well as the other County Commissioners in defeating this proposal Sincerely, Jeffry & Jodi Korbe Sent from my 'Phone J 2 Jessica Reid Dm: n. To: Subject: Attachments: Esther Gesick Tuesday, December 20, 2022 5:26 PM Jessica Reid FW: Documents OnlinePetition_COZ22-0010.pdf From: Stephanie B Vest <burkhars@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2022 4:19 PM To: Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com> Subject: Documents Caution; This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Esther, I have finished collecting signatures from neighbors who could not meet in person to sign the paper petition. Attached is the Google Forms petition I created. If there are any questions, please let me know ---I am happy to share the petition link and any other documentation you need to validate it. The link will close tomorrow after the meeting. ,J1ephanie 1 "No" to Commercial -3 Rezone of Northwest Corner of CR 2 and CR 19 —Online Petition On December 21st, 2022, the Weld County Board of County Commissioners will vote on Case COZ22-0010, which is a proposal tosezone a 20 -acre parcel on the northwest corner of CR 2 and CR 19 from Agricultural (AG) to Commercial -3 (C-3) This parcel is currently surrounded by agriculturally -zoned properties and is directly adjacent to an active agricultural -related - business Past attempts to develop parcels adjacent to the one in question were denied by the County on the basis that they would be detrimental to the surrounding rural and agricultural properties A rezone to C-3 would open development on this property to a wide variety of uses -by -right that would be incompatible and detrimental to the surrounding rural community and would decrease safety at an already dangerous intersection The property is too small to adequately buffer the negative effects from potential C-3 activities ,Finally, a rezone now to C-3 would deny surrounding residents the ability in the future to request conditions of approval when the site is developed We, the undersigned residents of Weld County, submit the following objection to,the Weld County Board of County Commissioners with regards to the proposal COZ22-0010, a change in zone from Agricultural (AG) to Commercial -3 (C-3). Timestamp Name Address Comments 12/18/2022 13 35 02 Frank Buschman f 3225 cr 19 I moved out in this area to get away from the commercial way of life and would like not to see lust keep moving in this area Thanks 12/18/2022 14 02 14 Janice Lopez 8495 County Rd 2 Brighton CO 80603 12/18/2022 14 2153 Steven Thorpe 2128 county road 19 Fort Lupton CO 80621 Against Do not approve 12/18/2022 15 11 52 Arnold Lopez 8494 County Rd 2 Brighton CO 80603 12/20/2022 8 42 01 Marcus Jessen 487 County Road 19 Brighton 80603 I oppose the rezone to C-3 for COZ22-0010 12/20/2022 9 16 43 Kendall Jessen 487 County Road 19, Brighton, CO 80603 We oppose the rezoning of this parcel of land due to safety issues, traffic, noise, and our property's The zone change would be inconsistent with the current surrounding uses 12/20/2022 9 51 36 Josh Brasseal 9443 CR 6, Fort Lupton, CO 80621 r USR-13? 6 P V LANDSCAPING BUS. J !FRP I.ID COUNTY C-littLlfit _ CIA:1'1.1L WCR 2 r WCR 19 Acjacent Land Use Permits & Divisions FHDP21-0001 FHDP19 0024 FHDP17-0O32 FHDPIEG015 ... X15 0089 RE 3222 LOT B LOT A RECX13 0001RF-46 11 i_U1 A I OT a 1-tLL-X1 U-O0iI3 1OTA %le Il% I1 .558 a 979 Ce 1,958: Feet Lc:x1 /-U1 flT _USR 17 0032 .._ IILI F'KLSsUbL•rtAI r_,AS RF1.X1F, ^ran I DT al RECX17-02'12 LOT B rHOPfl-00On El (UPI !-UUJ4 A M itF..15- _15 _ US 12-r � 8aM 3 LOT B LIST A MAMMA! ra_Sw nNTrn,I RFC )C?0al1" rNnr'l R-no15 4 ee ��_ l:Z� IJSR 1077 LU I ttmarierear— OIL'aga& GAS SIJPPORT�SERVICE FACGAS IIT° L NA CF-S4R 4 RE -25!16 i; LOTA RF-4?57 R ECX 17 021 LOT A t-LLt: Xl 1_Ul1'S LOT A R ECX12-00' 8 LOT A IOTR R E CJC 1 ? 0212 LO A AM RRt L-44: LO I A RF -4438 LOTA SF -10a t RECX1€-0'O?6 LOT B RECX13 00.11ZPAkG2O 0023 IZF-468- RE -t38 LOTB LO LOTS RE 4 :all nF-?7fi RF-4?Sfi OT S IOTA RECX18-0174 LOT A ::L-4.4E3d LC) I A _LliI IS RF.4!1F. 1_ISH-1UG] ACeti AeS I •ACs' I IEJF l4' R RECX19-D105 LOT B `I C U -0 C"3 -1 1 N C l; --41 REC X 1 E. 0 174 LW 1 Ij RE 1370 LOT A ----a t_x1 3_01C F LOT A U`I-'11 DU,02 tiTil(�At.F Pia xi 3-D054 LOT A USR1 7 C067 RECX16 0028 J f LLF S I ORA I I r LC) TA E :X19 -at o LOT A RECX13 0051 LOl L RE -4482 LOTC 1 WG ._ ' 96•C_'t#e _`tercator _Au xi! an _Scree `I *ovoid C aunty '- a•arado T'c: M.1C tt. a -Lea grarataC2 Etin: Ca1lp..t t'nrn in trot r"apir9 OW and a Poe reloirenra as% Data layers Ira Naar an this -Tap , a Car 'Mir ra to irritant ant t a' ata-st. a THeS MAP IS NOT TO SE USED FOR NAV1GATIOP. Legend Parcels ZPAG - zoning Penntl lbr AG ZPSF - Zoning Perms, ltn Sdaa ZPTT - Zoning Pert 'foe Te lec FHDP - Fboa Kazar O Develop NC U - Non C o nlbrrnl ng use J=R - Ste Plan Review USR - Use Coy Special Review FFD - Famly Farm DP 1sion R1 L D - Resolution Mega! Lana RLD - Rural Lard Dtvlsion RE/RECX - Reawtlea Exempt A A a II LORI LC7I: LOT A LOte LOT C LOT O Lty/ E LOTSASS PaRCbc I ~tat 2 P API CIEL A ritRICELS MC�.^_? A Notes M .. M • .•w. w.r�. •win►. ••••• •r•: • •• .rw • •• I. •. <. r 2 • • • Y •• • •• N •w w+..•••�••�-•ww••• • •• wr M.. 04 •• 00••.. •• 0r I •••... -w •i••• no. ••••••• tas�.''�•_y44 •w..I • •ry • ... •1 w• • w.•. •�•• �.. • • •'•t..mow • . �•••••••••- •� •.•M fir•• • •w •4 . • ••.W �.• .. .• . r ♦� vtwiw �•i'^ +.ii•.'ir �.•-33�%j 1..�.i4*-i+ZM�.•/ wi r w r .�• r. ".. -.• •B Ire MI VI, mowIn : Pa4 ww •rw►•I a • net fir.. • d s ve ILA Et I a ® n! s as e y e a d w o o "II WEI D : • . ._. Weld CountyComprehensive Plan CncLIN_c•!•lfIN... nrirrinit 1 rst nig Fist rtrair Legend S Parts Weld County Opportunity Zone Deveiop4nenz Ciasst on rnino!r lib an 1. .1,"c Paz — Highway Road Rood P•) County Boundary ,, • p s . Ire • Sla *a ECM • .. as - . I • r .. r • Or .. •e .•. NNW aka 4. e ate'. 4. • r I+ • •Mr • - nu . fnac s a a 9larta ernlC cia: Cat t -r. a- I-tarnat faapprq QTls and is it t .Qtrawn an% =aria I t 7s Yaar an ms -roc, ma ar rruy ra y a[rle nn a r st 3, fl'estss roi'art T►4S MAP S NiOT TO 81 USED FOR NAVIGATION City of Thornton AMMS --a- Weld/Adams Counts Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 19/Yosemite Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection FRAM HOLT 6 CLIUVIO )k. Recommended Alternative COLORADO ADAMS ( ()LINTY 4tl SAOO ao‘ City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 19/Yosemite Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Typical Sections Weld County Road 19/Yosemlte Street (Interim) 1 rr RXDO OF WY s SEEINULL 1r 1? ‘Vr LOCAL ROAD .12' SEMI 3-5 C+Y/G3I ©Qvaninthy Mould, it J/1 ozsonlec> Voting ND Mime* 120' R1CS1 OF i 10' 4' ELK Ic I[ i• 't 1L TR1YR� n l a 1f�M1% meta T1i 1 UME 1/ JV! 4 TJR 4 WE UMf 4 St. 4 4. 10' SWIM MINOR ARTERIAL NSA ©Mt.411113LV Rolled 2/C&i'sQ lffiNtblo knows QU tm ct a )) 140' CT Or WY gawk lr '2' 1r Ir TRr Nfl i�►E MAR LANE TRAVEL LAW Q TROYE1 1f MAJOR ARTERIAL r e' Figure 32 FEI �IIIRC`. �� I4OLT & I:1.LEVTt; Pap 39 October 2006 Typical Weld County Arterial Road Cross Sections TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS - RURAL ARTERIAL INITIAL PHASE ROW 32' RCIADWAY I 40' ROW ROW 32' ROADWAY I 24• -SO a •,r 76-28• 24' s' 24 MT 12' 734 OUPTIR T• DRAINAGE AI LANE TRAVEL UWt MLDAN DITCH . , LAMPTRA1Q tern LDV. LW. ORAPOG[ . ULTIMATE ROADWAY INTERSECTION TRAVEL ,HIES w/TURNS 4' A DWI BETWEEN OPPOSITE BOUND LANES • 12't 12' 12' I / 12' e'* i BIKE LANE/ SHOULDER/ SIDEWALK/ SUFFER NOT TO SCALEGRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION ONLY WELD COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1111 11 Street/Post Office Box 758 Greeley. Colorado 80632-0758 atilISSING SETBACKS OF UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICTS ARE MEASURED FROM THE EDGE OF THE ROW. t TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS - URBAN ARTERIAL ROW 22. eurnER ROW r L t 40' ROW INITIAL PHASE ►.•_ Buns, EDtW/Wt cults 1 C Ott LANE SNO,/LDER 24' 12' f2• 1RAVIL Lend TRAWL LAME 41LTIMATS ?HAn TRAVEL LADIES W/TURN$ 4't 140 1 ROW 104' 28' MEDIAN OR TURN LANE1 • .-- 24' 12' j 12 14'! 'TRAM UWEdmmAVEI LANE etKt LANE SNOW.oER ULTIMATE ROADWAY VINMUII 8' S,DrWALKs Rroust° 12't 12' 1 1 4 1 Z' I 6' 14" 11' 104 BUtTEA aDEVIALA CURB NOT TO SCALE: GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION ONLY VARIES / WELD COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1111 H Street/Post Office Box 758 Greeley, Colorado 80632.0758 ^U911 BUILDING SETBACKS OF UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICTS EorE wTHED oMTHEDGE ROW. FHCWP21-00O1 FHDP15 0024 F I IUI'.IbI J FHDP17-0032 FHC'P1 B 0015 WCR 2 / WCR 19 Adjacent Land Use Permits 8/. Divisions rNr��r•y�� Fliu��; .aUu Am otFels95 riFfr -th:�� rHr-tnl R-1'1 s LIDT_.USK=i i ��Ar� LOT B A NATi1RA1 IAS 1 .ONTRCII OILLa RE 3222 LOTA [_[31 A iota RL.42 XI U -00113 10TH S ATAT1 C: N ■�� IS :11111-C, U S R 1077 _ GAS• SUP PORT!SERVICETFACGAS LW. L 1-4 NA I UNAL?GAst;ASD: i4INF.?4 SF -S48 R E ZX19-01 O ! REC XI -01 O5 LOT A LOT B RE -25!i6 LOT A RF-4?r.7 RECX17 021`_ LOTA LOTA R=.CX12-00 8 RLtA1/-011S LOTA 1OTR IJ SR 17 0032 11 1l�L11 111VIt H'HCLSsUb L nod' I AS RF' -X1fi.�DCY 1 DT it RLCX1 r-111 1OTS ttF -168- LO T B RECX17 -02'12 LOT B RECX17 0212 ILO IA REC X13 LOI RE -4;13'! AM RL-44: LIES 1 A RF -4438 LOTA RECX16-0O76 LOT B f2F-4.1i56 RF-4rSFi IOTS IOTA RECX 18-0 74 LOTA L -4 4 l3 4 LO 1 A —mil L RF.wwaA !DTA _ MCU-OC"341 NCIJ -41 FtEC X18 0174 LOT U RE 1370 C X 13-01 f F LOT A RECX16 0028 LO 1 A USR1 ? 0067 L IA- S I I -La. Lit I-- a Pl. I l_ I I Z RECX13 0051 LO1t3 RE -4482 LOT C ran mat sal .rs+ 1 eataa ssatai ctswt.t ram a- t -tor -.et rinacceig a and Is t • ralrnrcc cn% iars Tat accsar an tt s srvp ma a• °nay rot DO aasaG4. a..nrm a• remiss reliable t• -t5 MAP '5 NOT TO 81 USED FOR PIGAVIGATKDerb Parcels ZPAG - Zoning Permit tar AG - Z ning Perrin for Zola ZPTT - Zoning Permit T ele< FHDP - Fboo t-ia.zarfl Develop NCU - Non Contort -fling Use SPR - Ste Plan Review USR - Use Dy spectat Review FFO - Farnly Farm D vt51on RI L D - R esoiution Illegal Land RLD - Rural Lartd DrvtsJon RE'RECX - Recoroed Exempt LO'1 Lutz L07 A Los e 10'? C LOT o Lowe tozsAaa r,►flaL wanes 3 ~tat A ~tat a MECA „hp, sior if "etas— NritvemollteVseva i, vent wit,v. tins ass `” .;.1 IS IA via ilf"MeelPh xi MC v.,.`ew S•� arta Cara+Yd, Jessica Reid Subject: Attachments: FW: WCR 2 / WCR 19 Property to the N 0433-002-WEC-X-TOPO-AERIAL-20220701-N PROP.pdf From: Chadwin Cox @ Western ECI <chadwin.cox@westerneci.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2022 11:13 AM To: Chris Gathman <cgathman@weldgov.com> Subject: Fwd: WCR 2 / WCR 19 Property to the N Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I might need to pull this up during rebuttals Get Outlook for Android From: Cameron Alexander <c.alexander@westerneci.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2022 9:51:35 AM To: Chadwin Cox @ Western ECI <chadwin.cox@westerneci.com> Subject: WCR 2 / WCR 19 Property to the N Attached is a pdf showing the portion of the property to the north that was in the 7/1/22 aerial. From what I can see there are: • 6 pickups • 51 trailers w/ misc piles throughout the property of: • wood / building materials • landscape materials • tires • shopping carts • tanks • pallets The existing building is approximately 10,000 sf. On behalf of: WESTERN ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC.LLC 127 South Denver Ave. Fort Lupton. CO 80621 1 Office: (720)685-9951 Email: c.alexander@westerneci.com Vi*< CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message transmission, and any attachments, is intended only for use by the recipient and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictl}J prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify our office at (303) 913-7341 and permanently delete any hard or digital copies. Thank you in advance for your responsiveness. 2 09 OS .09 i Y2S 'VII. ,0c = _ TWOS nn, C �V GS Honorable Chair and Commissioners. I am Bill Wycoff and a long-term resident at 333 County Road 17. I appreciate this opportunity to address the Board with several items. First, the notice sign for this proposal was not successfully posted as directed by the Weld County Code, section 23-2-20,B.7. This sign had been down, in the grass for over a month. Many more neighbors would have been at the November 1st, Planning Commission meeting had this sign remained properly posted. However, because it was not visible from the public street many residents were unaware of this proposal. A small sign lying in the grass looks like a piece of trash blown around; not a public notice. The Application Review Notification Card mailing was successful and news started circulating at the end of October. However, there was little opportunity to prepare for the Planning Commission hearing. Since finding this sign down on November 5th, we have collected over 50 signatures in opposition to this rezone. [Next Slide] This proposal to change Mr. Knudson`s agricultural property to C3 does not meet the Weld County Code requirements. I do not see C3 activities as compatible with the many horse properties in the area. Along a 2/3 -mile segment of Road 17, including my neighbors there are eight horse properties. Two of them converted in the last three years. The Board cannot approve the request for the change of zone because the applicant has not met ALL of the standards detailed in section 23-2-40.B, as previous speakers have pointed out. Another example, for me it is hard to accept a septic field as an appropriate "Urban service" for wastewater. Particularly for an Opportunity Zone. The proposal is not consistent with the policies of Chapter 22, the proposal is not consistent with the intent of the zone, nor is it compatible with the surrounding land uses as required by Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code. The Applicant has demonstrated that this proposal meets some of the requirements, but it cannot be passed because it does not meet ALL of the requirements. Thank You 1 Good Morning Mr. Chairman and Honorable County Commissioners: My name is Chadwin Cox, I own and operate Western Engineering Consultants — we office at 127 South Denver Avenue in Fort Lupton and are representing the Owner (the Knudsons) and the Applicant (KW Commercial). The first slide is a general reference of the previously approved land use cases surrounding the proposed rezone at WCR 2 and WCR 19. The case before you is for rezoning. We want to keep this presentation as straight forward as possible focusing primarily on the adopted plans to guide the future of Weld County and the factual representations of the adjacent and near adjacent land uses. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN One of those adopted plans is the Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 22 of the County Code) which serves as the foundation for the policies the County uses when managing growth. While the Comprehensive Plan has 4 overall Articles and several additional sections, in an effort to streamline our presentation we focus on those Principles and Criteria we believe are the clearest and most relevant but stress this Rezoning application meets the all the necessary criteria for approval not just these we identify. Specifically this application was prepared and submitted to align with the Principles (under Section 22-2-10 — titled Guiding Principles) of the current adopted Comprehensive Plan. This Section identified these following four Guiding Principles. • Item A is for respecting Weld County's Ag Heritage and Right to Farm • Item B Respects Private Property Rights. One of the basic principles upon which the United States was founded is the right of citizens to own and utilize property so long as that use complies with local regulations and does not interfere with or infringe upon the rights of others. Item C Promoting Economic Growth and Stability. Land use policies have a significant impact on economic conditions in the County and should be structured to encourage economic prosperity. To ensure the continued strength of Weld County's economy, land use processes and decisions based on this plan shall be consistent and promote fiscally responsible growth. • Item D Protecting Safety, and General Welfare Land use regulations and policies will protect and enhance the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Weld County This application is in full alignment with and fully supports each of those guiding principles. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP The second most relevant Article and Section are Article IV Comprehensive Plan Map Section 22-4-10 B identified Weld County Opportunity Zones which clearly details that zone changes to Commercial, Industrial, and Planned Unit Development containing Commercial and Industrial uses are preferred in the specific locations. Item 5.b of that criteria denotes at arterial/arterial intersections. The second slide is the overall Weld County Comprehensive Plan Map which entails an enormous amount of land from Wyoming south to Adams County and from Morgan County west to the 125 corridor The purpose of this map is to briefly identify the gray cross hatched areas within the County that represent Opportunity Zones On rough count it appears there are nearly 100 Opportunity Zone intersections and corridors. The third slide shows this property within the Comprehensive Plan Map and Opportunity Zones Again the gray cross hatched areas represent the Opportunity Zones, the maroon are those areas that are intended to be annexed to adjacent municipalities, and yellow area as Urban Development and the light green as Urban - Non Urban Mix. This slide is important to identify not only is this property within an Opportunity Zone but is clearly in an intended Urban Use consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Articles and Sections as previously discussed The fourth slide is a quick representation, of the Opportunity Zone at this intersection ;and the adjacent existing USRs with Commercial/Industrial land uses MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLANS The fifth slide is a quick representation of WCR 19 in red (representing arterial) and WCR 2 (168th Ave) in green representing a section line/major arterial as well as Fort Lupton's IGA boundary with Weld County and Adams County shown to,the south i I quote from Weld County's web site as follows: In both rural and urban areas (County and Cities), the primary function of local roads is to provide access to adjacent land uses, whether they are residences, businesses, or community facilities Local roads are closely spaced, two lanes wide, and carry relatively lower traffic volumes short distances They generally are internal to or serve an access function for a residence, farm, single neighborhood or development, and generally, should'lead traffic to a collector road Collectors link local roads with the arterial road system. Both mobility and access are of equal importance on these roadways Travel speeds and(volumes are moderate, and distances traveled are short to medium Traffic on, collector roads typically has an ongin or destination within the nearby area Artenals carry longer -distance traffic flow for regional, intercommunity and 'major community purposes The primary difference between freeways and major arterials is access Freeways have fully controlled accesses with no at -grade intersections, while arterials include limited at -grade intersections Arterials can carry significant traffic volumes at higher speeds for longer distances and are seldom spaced at closer than one -mile intervals Future right of way widths are based on roadway classification type as follows Arterial -140' of right of way Collector - 80' of right of way Local - 60' of right of way Building setbacks are based off of future right of way widths Multiple Master Transportation Studies are performed and updated on a regular basis to plan for the various locations within the County as time and development continue The sixth slide shows the planned intersection for WCR 19 and WCR 2 in the future as taken from one such Master study that included 5 governmental jurisdictions who joined together to have the Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study performed and completed The study focused on six primary intersections between Interstate 25 and Highway 85 along the WCR 2 corridor -\one of which included WCR 19 and Yosemite Street Those jurisdictions included Weld County, Adams County, City and County of Broomfield, City of Northglenn,`and the City of Thornton Government representatives met 6 times throughout the study performed by Felsburg Holt and Ullevig' The -study detailed that 900 notices were distributed to the property owners within the study limits Slides 7 and 8 show the cross sections as taken from the Weld/Adams study and the current Weld County Master Transportation plan — exhibiting 4 lanes of travel for both WCR 2 and WCR 19 The relevance of this discussion and background is to clearly denote the efforts of 5 neighboring governments who came together identifying solutions for transportation issues now and in the future as collective whole. These plans and studies also clearly show the necessary relationship between Transportation Master Plans and Comprehensive Plans and the appropriate planning for commercial and industrial zones along major transportation corridors AVAILABLE ACCESS TO PUBLIC UTILITIES This site is immediately adjacent to Todd Creek Water District and the applicants have a commitment letter from the District for future water service ADJACENT LAND USES The fourth item to briefly discuss are the existing area and adjacent uses The ninth _ slide (a repeat of the first slide) depicts the land use -cases within the project vicinity acid the tenth slide is a clean aerial of the neighboring properties and beyond As can be seen in both there are approved Use by Special Review activities immediately east and northeast of this property with Commercial/Industrial uses — consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Comprehensive Plan Map. , The USR approved in 2017 is a Self Storage Facility and the 2012 approved USR is an outdoor RV and Boat'Storage Facility Immediately Southwest in Adams County lies a major oil and gas battery In addition to the approved active USRs and oil/gas battery there are other adjacent and nearby properties that do not have land use cases approved through the County that include the following. • Large steel outbuilding with significant outdoor storage and no primary residence — immediate property north to the north • An approximate 50 stall Boarding Facility and Equestrian Center that includes Training, Private and Group Lessons, Specialized clinics, on site trainers, a lounge, picnic area, and viewing loft that exists the next property north. • Residence and equipment servicing business located northwest • Residence and roofing business located west This discussion is not to identify others zoning violations (if they are occurring) — but only to identify the near and adjacent approved land use cases on file with the County and the appearance of nearby property operations in the area. SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION The last topic I would like to address regards a petition against this rezoning that included approximately 50 signatures and a presentation prepared by one individual that lives under a WCR 19 Fort Lupton address approximately 2.5 miles north of this project. In general there appear to only be 6 addresses on the petition within 2 miles of this property as shown in the 11th slide by the blue dots. And only one within the 500 foot referral area that is also adjacent to the property (noted as 305 WCR 19). I have no opposition to free speech just a concern for factual information and discussions taken in whole context and not partialities. There are` several items within the presentation we believe were taken out'of context of County code as well asa reference to a past land use case that was not for this property. , Specifically ) , SLIDE 3 , • ,22-4-10 A.1 — this code reference is for the Comprehensive Code Map — not a singular criteria for approval, it clearly references all applicable criteria in Chapter 23 or 27 of the Weld County Code. Reference used isn't for approval — Chapter 23 and/or 27 are for approval 23-2-40 B 2 regarding the process to consider rezoning (which includes items 1- 5a,b, and c) whereas item B 2 identified in the presentation denotes compatibility with surrounding land uses Reference suggests this property isn't compatible with surrounding land uses but it clearly abuts and oil/gas battery in one direction, an approved USR Self Storage Facility to the east, an active outdoor storage with no pr►marvres►dence to the north, a large 15,000 sft boarding facility north, and an approved USR large Outdoor RV and Boat Storage facility to the northeast. 22-2-10 D and 22-2-30.B.2 regarding crime and traffic and emergency services not meeting guiding principles orland use goals. Development pays its way — before any activity can occur on site the specific uses in line allowed by the zone will have to be determined and a site plan and multitude of engineering studies completed that will include a Traffic Impact Study (TIS). Said TIS will include any improvements to WCR 2 and WCR 19 responsible by the developer as well as a Road Maintenance Agreement will be required to be entered into that will perpetually require any successor ownership to participate in improvements as determined by their specific traffic impacts. • ' 23-3-230 A — Does not meet intent of C3 District The language specifically reads "Properties zoned C-3 are typically located near high traffic corridors". That is what arterial corridors are intended to be designed and constructed to and for SLIDE 4 • 22-4-10.A.1 — Must meet all criteria. This section is for the Comprehensive Plan Map Item A 1 denotes "Areas of opportunity for commercial and industrial development These are potentially logical areas for rezoning land to C, I, and PUD based on transportation infrastructure of roads and railroads. ,The map is intended to encourage rezoning ►n appropriate areas." I believe the petitioner is suggesting that the infrastructure isn't in place for the development — but that's - how development works, it must build the infrastructure in order to develop and - do so within the framework of Transportation Engineering Studies and Construction plans and approvals by and within the Weld County Public Works, Planning, and Enq►neennq departments. 22-2-30.C 1- "Use that are incompatible must be able to mitigate conflicts". C.1. specifically states "Transition between land use types and intensities with buffers Uses that are incompatible with existing uses must be able to mitigate conflicts " Agreed —_buffers and alternative and/or additional steps will be necessary when the use and layout is determined in the future The applicant fully expects screening will be necessary along all sides (public r►ghts of way and non 13 zones) - and additional steps or alternatives along the northern and western borders if the, adjacent uses are residential. However — the property north by northeast is currently an outdoor storage yard with an accessory building (i.e no living residence).,The property west is vacant and in support of this development The property south has an oil and gas battery and the property east is an approved USR for indoor storage • 22-4-10 A 1— This proposal fails to meet all 'of the criteria This is a repeat of the first item but without reference of what if fails to meet Section 22-4-10.A 1 denotes those areas of opportunity for commerc►al`and industrial development using words such as "logical" and "transportation infrastructure" which have - been ►n planning and enq►neer►nq stages for future improvement SLIDE 5 • 22-2-30 C 1— Incompatible The slide denotes all the land surrounding the proposal is Ag. The surrounding zon►nq ►s Aq, however the uses are not Ag (► e USR approved RV Boat Storage, Oil and Gas Battery, USR Approved Indoor Storage Fac►l►ty, etc), non residential outdoor storage property with a large steel out building (non residential) !, 90% of surrounding properties within Y2 mile used for rural residential and Ag The majority of properties referenced are in support of this development and are not residential. Property A has no residence, property C has no residence and is an outdoor storage yard and steel outbuilding, Property D and E are approved USRs for Indoor Storage (E has an existing storage building), Property F is an approved active USR for RV and Boat Storage, properties A, D, and G are in support of th►s` application. • C-3 Zoning will allow uses that will decrease health, safety, and welfare of citizens of Weld County. The Owner and Applicant disagree -they believe a C3 , zoning will allow for development to pay for the necessary improvements to the area to enhance and better health, safety, and welfare. SLIDE 6 • Ag Residential Slide — See also the Adjacent Land Use Slide SLIDE 7 • 23-3-230 A - Does not meet intent of the district This is a repeat comment that the language specifically reads "Properties zoned C-3 are typically located near high traffic corridors": That is what arterial corridors are intended to be designed and constructed to and for • COZ22 is a mile away frbm Hwy 7, through a residential area Adams County has Yosemite (WCR 19 extended south) as an arterial roadway It does not go through a residential subdivision — ►t will collect the subdivision's traffic and deliver it to Highway 7 as transportation design and development is intended to do. • The intent of the district does not mean being consistent with USRs in the area The actual code language following the title of "Itent "reads "The purpose of the C-3 Zone" and does not refer to being consistent with any reference let alone a USR SLIDES 8 & 9 • Prior USR denial — This reference is irrelevant because it's not this property and it was for a USR before the zoning code and Comprehensive Plans were updated. • However for additional narrative the denied property was adjacent to a minimum of 5 residential properties and wasn't located at the intersection of an arterial and arterial planned corridor. That property is located in the now current 2020 Comprehensive Plan Map and code Opportunity Zones (i.e. it was heard in 2017 before the Comprehensive plan update). SLIDE 10 • Incompatible — The 2017 USR was submitted and reviewed under a previous code that did not include the current Comprehensive Plan Code and Comprehensive Plan Map that includes Opportunity Zones designated for this intersection and exactly intersections like it. SLIDES 11 & 12 • Reference to 8 new custom homes. The homes referenced in the exhibit are not neighboring properties nor do the lie within % mile of this property with exception to one (#6) that is approximately 1,700 feet away from the closest boundary. Further the homes referenced in the exhibit do not fall within the Opportunity Zone except for part of property #6 (+/- 50% in and 50% out of the Opportunity Zone generalized area). SLIDE 13 • 23-3-230.C — 34 uses allowed subject to Site Review. Yes agreed — C3 is a Board Approved straight zone definition. Further current County code reads as "22-4- 10.A.1. Areas of opportunity for commercial and industrial development. These are potentially logical areas for rezoning land to C, I, and PUD based on transportation infrastructure of roads and railroads. The map is intended to encourage rezoning in appropriate areas." and section 22-4-10.B. — "Weld County Opportunity Zones. If in compliance with the other provisions in this section, zone changes to C (Commercial), I (Industrial), and Planned Unit Development (PUD) containing C and I uses are preferred in the following locations:" items 1-5 whereas item 5 reads as "Within one half mile of the following types of intersections:" Item 5.b reading as "arterial/arterial" ® Board shall only approve if the applicant has met the standards or conditions of paragraphs 1-5 and section 23-2-50 are met Paragraphs 1-5 are as follows: 1 Proposal is consistent with the Policies of Chapter 22 of this code By the multiple references to the whole context of Chapter 22 the application meets this paragraph 2 That the Uses which would be allowed on the subject property by granting the Change of Zone will be compatible with the surrounding land USES The property proposed to be rezoned is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan Map, and multiple surroundinq`land uses (i e USR Boat and Rv Storage, USR Indoor Storage, existing Oil/ Gas battery, non-residential out building and outdoor storage property, a commercial equestrian and boarding facility, and the adjacent arterial roadways 3 Adequate water and sewer service can be made available to serve the site Todd Creek Water District service is immediately abutting the property. i 4 Zoning Amendments other than Ag shall require roadway improvements The code requires the developer to improve the adjacent roadways consistent with County code, approved Master Transportation plans, and will be specific to the traffic impacts proposed in the future(by any development on site 5 That, in those instances where the following characteristics are applicable to the rezoning request, the applicant had demonstrated compliance with the applicable standards. a) If the proposed Change of Zone is located within any Overlay zoning District identified by maps officially adopted by the COUNTY, that the applicant has demonstrated compliance with the COUNTY regulations concerning OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICTS "'Compliance may be demonstrated in a previous public hearing or in the hearing concerning the rezoning application b) That the proposed rezoning will not permit the USE of any area known to contain a COMMERCIAL MINERAL DEPOSIT as defined by state statutes in a manner which would interfere with the present or future extraction of such deposit by an EXTRACTOR to any greater extent than under the present zoning of the property. A Mineral Resource Statement was prepared by a Professional Geologist j I I c) If soil conditions on the site are such that they present moderate or severe limitations to the construction of STRUCTURES or facilities proposed for the site, that such limitations will,be addressed by the applicant and/or the applicant's successors or assigns prior to DEVELOPMENT of the property Any soils cond►t►ons identified by further enq►neennq studies will be mitigated accordinglyand in accordance with County and State of Colorado standards. 6. Proposal consistent with 23-2-40.B.2 — The property proposed to be rezoned is cons►stentrw►th the Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan Map, and multiple surrounding land uses (i.e. USR Boat and Rv Storage,-USR Indoor Storage, existing Oil/ Gas battery, non-residential out building and outdoor storage property, a commercial equestrian and boarding facility, and the adjacent arterial roadways. 23-2-40.B 2 — The USES/which would be allowed on the subject property by granting the Change of Zone will be compatible with surrounding land uses. The property proposed to be rezoned is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan Map, and multiple surrounding land uses (i e. USR Boat and Rv Storage, USR Indoor Storage, existing Oil/ Gas battery, non- residential out building and outdoor storage property,,a commercial equestrian and boarding facility, and the adjacent ar'ter►al roadways The uses in C-3 include 5 Uses Allowed by Right (non-commercial tower, public nark, aubl►c school, telecommunication towers, and utility service fac►l►t►es) The Uses allowed subject to Site Plan Review are similar to and include the following current adjacent uses. 1. ' Agricultural Support and Service Z Commercial Storage Buildings 9 Contractors Shops 23. Outdoor Storage 26.1 Recreational Facilities, Commercial, Public, and Private In short the uses per each zone district within the County are intended to be similar in nature to the others for that district The above list includes the ne►ghbormg uses to this property. SLIDES 14-26 In general —following the adopted code of the County including Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan Map, and Master Transportation studies will appropriately guide development to improve and enhance the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Weld County by building the necessary infrastructure to do so The reference to combining Ag and high volume traffic is not a new condition proposed by this development — it's on going everywhere within the County and the appropriate way to mitigate impacts (regardless from more homes or commercial business) is to follow the adopted codes and Master Plans and meet l their requirements as further development,occurs A reference to a traffic study wasn't completed — it's not required at this level The Site Plan review for a specific use in the future will require a complete Traffic Impact Study along with several additional engineered studies and engineered designs before ANY development can begin ' It originated in 1973 and updated 4 times since and is under it's fifth update currently. Hello