HomeMy WebLinkAbout20211295.tiffINVENTORY OF ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION
Applicant Gerrard Investments, LLC
Case Number COZ21-0002
Submitted or Prepared
Prior to
Hearing
At
Hearing
1
SPO Response
Cummings,
April
5, 2021
X
I
—
2
SPO Response
— Cotner
& Worthley,
April
16, 2021
X
3
Public Response
— Kisker,
April
19, 2021
X
4
Public Response
— Oplinger,
April 19, 2021
X
5
SPO Response
Ross,
April
V
20, 2021
.
X
'I
—
I hereby certify that the five items identified herein were submitted to the Department of Planning
Services at or prior to the scheduled Planning Commissioners hearing.
ngela Snyder
April 20, 2021
April 05, 2021
From: John Cummings
26700 Weld County Road 13
Johnstown, CO 80534
To: Weld County Commissioners
cio Angela Snyder, Planner
Weld County Department of Planning Services
1555 North 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: Case COZ21-0002
FOR PUBLIC RECORD
Dear Commissioners:
b
S
EXHIBIT
1
I am in COMPLETE OPPOSITION to Case COZ21-0002 the proposed zoning change from
Agricultural (A) District to Heavy Industrial I-3 proposed by Gerrard Investments, LLC. The
zoning change proposal is an incompatible development for our community. Industrial sites
belong in a location that will not impact our quality of life due to traffic, noise, odor, safety,
pollutants and contaminates. The community doesn't want the possibility of Heavy I-3 zoned
facilities such as Asphalt Plants, Junk Yards, Hazardous Product Transloading, Petroleum
Refineries or Oil and Gas Storage Facility.
WHY PUT THIS HEAVY I-3 ZONING AMONG COUNTY RESIDENTS, THE
COMMUNITY AND SMALL ESTABLISHED NON -INTRUSIVE BUSINESSES.
The primary purpose of zoning is to segregate INCOMPATIBLE uses like the proposed HEAVY
I-3 INDUSTRIAL ZONING from an already pre-existing established WEDDING VENUE
(Rockin S Ranch) and adjacent residents. Cited in Weld Counties Zoning Guide.,..ZONING IS
USED TO PREVENT INCOMPATIBLE NEW DEVELOPMENT FROM INTERFERING
WITH EXISTING RESIDENTS OR BUSINESSES AND TO PRESERVE THE
"CHARACTER" OF A COMMUNITY.
NOT KNOWING WHAT IS PLANNED FOR THIS SITE COULD HAVE AN ADVERSE
EFFECT ON RESEIDENTS, SOIL, WATER, AND AIR.
HEAVY I-3 ZONING brings a whole host of concerns, whether an asphalt plant, refinery,
composting facility or junk yard, these facilities will have multiple sources of emissions.
Emissions such as, benzene, formaldehyde, ethylbenzene, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons,
hexane, toluene, xylene, silica and particle matter 2.5-10 all can have harmful effects on
human health and be detrimental to the environment. These compounds can adversely
influence either the health of the workers on these sites or of those who live in the surrounding
community. We cannot rely solely on state and federal agencies to protect our health, so these
Heavy Industrial I-3 sites need to be located away from residents, communities and businesses.
What we do not know for sure are the effects of long-term exposure to these chemicals and
whether they will accumulate in individuals living near this facility. According to the US EPA
roughly one out of every three people in the United States is at a higher risk of experiencing
PM2,5 related health effects. One group at high risk is active children because they often spend a
lot of time playing outdoors and their bodies are still developing and the elderly population.
People of all ages who are active outdoors are at increased risk because PM2.5 penetrates deeper
into the parts of the lungs and blood streams unfiltered, causing permanent DNA mutations, heart
attacks and premature death.
A few additional comments:
1. They are removing 30+ acres of prime farm land. Per Weld County zoning guide, farm
ground should be conserved.
2. They should include in their application that there is a legal action against Rock and Rail
Railroad that the current operation is in violation of the Interstate Commerce Commission
Termination Act, pending court date late Fall 2021.
3. The proposed change of zone IS NOT compatible with the surrounding land uses. There
is NO industrial zoning for at least 2 miles to the west in Larimer County and there are
NO USR's in Weld County near the proposed site that would be considered even close to
being industrial barring the current court case.
4. Heavy I-3 Zoning will increase traffic, noise levels, dust and chemical emissions,
pollution and effect community safety and change the aesthetics of this area for ever.
Should the Weld County Commissioners approve this application, I would hope they would
develop the following resolutions for Gerrard Investments, LLC and any future owners or leasees
of the site:
1. Require a 16 ft tall dirt berm planted with pine trees on the entire south and west border
of the site to block the view of the I-3 site,
2. That stormwater be directed away from adjacent farm ground, laterals, and main
ditches.
3. That land owner or leasee maintain water quality before leaving any detention pond.
Thank you,
John Cummings
April 2021
Referral for CO721-0002
From:
Dakota and Thomas Cotner
Randy Worthley
27238 County Road 13
Johnstown, Colorado, 80534
To: Weld County Commissioners
c/o Angela Snyder, Planner
Weld County Department of Planning Services
1555 North 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Commissioners,
EXHIBIT
z
As a property owner directly adjacent to the site applying for a change of zone from Agricultural
to Heavy Industrial 1-3, I object to this application as the proposed change of zone is not
compatible with surrounding land uses.
Our home which shares two fence lines with Gerrard Excavating owned by Gerrard
Investments, LLC, seems to have been left out of this planning proposal. This is a residential
agriculture property with a home that was built in 1909. My family has been in residence for
almost 10 years now and prior to Gerrard Excavating building their new site. Numerous times
throughout this proposal, the subject indicates that surrounding property is industrial and
commercial. In the Questionnaire, Question 4: Explain how the uses allowed by the proposed
rezoning will be compatible with the surrounding land uses. Include a description of existing
land uses for all properties adjacent to the property — there is no mention of my home on their
north and west fence line. There are numerous other residential homes throughout this area
surrounding the site applying for 1-3.
Prior to Gerrard Investments purchasing and building on this land, this was 35 acres of beautiful
farmland. Gerrard Investments even acknowledge this when they applied for their USR — that
they would be building and using a small portion of this land and leaving the rest as farmland in
order to stay compatible with the surrounding area.
This proposal does not give enough information for what the land will be used for if the zoning
is changed. Without an intent, including hours of operation, noise control, air pollution control,
water control, as well as guarantees to provide quality natural and physical screening to its
residential neighbors, there is not enough information to approve this request.
The Rock N Rail/Martin Marietta Plant should not be used as an example of an existing 1-3 site
within this application while there is ongoing legal action that the current operation is in
violation of the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act.
With hundreds of new homes built in this area, as well as the addition of a Fire Department and
Elementary School directly to the west of County Road 13, all within 2 miles of the subject's
property, a change to 1-3 Zoning should not be viewed as compatible with the surrounding area.
To address these issues, should a change of zone occur:
1. The speed limit on County Road 13 from Highway 34 to a minimum of County Road 56,
should be dropped from 55mph to 35mph.
2. All three rail road crossings on County Road 13 between County Road 56 and Highway
34 should have lights and traffic arms.
3. Gerrard Investments should be required to provide adjacent and nearby property
owner approved natural and physical screening from site, noise and contaminants.
Specifically, to my residence, we would ask for fencing barriers along CR 13 to block
traffic and a 16ft berm along the north line of the subject's property as well as
additional trees and landscaping to all open areas where we have a direct line of sight
into the property.
4. Only one business/company shall be allowed to operate from the property.
5. A "No Engine Brakes" enforcement shall be put in place from a minimum of Highway 34
to County Road 56.
6. The current USR approved noise limit should stay enforced.
Thank you for your consideration.
Dakota Cotner
(Photo looking East from 27238 CR 13, at the farmland before selling to Gerrard Investments)
(Current East property line between 27238 CR1 and Gerrard investments)
(Current South property line between 27238 CR 13 and Gerrard Investments)
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Dave Kisker
Angela Snyder
COZ21-0002
Monday, April 19, 2021 8:28:00 AM
.0
.0
2
EXHIBIT
3
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 Planning Commission
Re: Rezoning application,COZ21-0002
Members of the Weld County Planning Commission:
I write this letter to express my strong objection the application submitted by Gerrand
Construction in which they wish to change the zoning for their property from the current
zone to the I-, heavy industrial zone. I respectfully request that you recommend denial of this
applictation.
There are several reasons for this request.
1. The Weld County Code requires that all allowed uses in a rezoned are must be
compatible with the existing, surrounding uses.
Although the Planning Department has represented that this property is already surrounded by
industrial uses, this is simply not correct. There are several residences, unmentioned by the
Planning Department, that are in proximity to this parcel, one of which is directly adjacent and
others which are across WCR 56 or WCR 13. Within 1 mile, there are over 100 residences.
This fact is essentially totally ignored by the Planning Department report.
2. Gerrard is not disclosing the intended use of this site.
Unlike the recent rezoning case, Coz o-0004, in which Martin Marietta Materials argued that
the the rezoning was necessary because, after losing at the Colorado Court of Appeals in
November of 2017, their operation was no longer legal since there was no longer any active
USR, Gerrard can make no such argument. The existing USR at the Gerrard site (which is
NOT industrial, based on the requirement that the residential noise limit must be met at the
property line) is still in force, and has been for several years since its original approval. Given
the lack of disclosure of the planned uses, there is no justification for subjecting the
surrounding neighbors to the wide ranging risks associated with the 1-3 zone.
3. If rezoning is approved, there is no mechanism within the Weld County Code to
protect surrounding property owners from the impact of I-3 activities.
Although the Planning Department suggests that Development Standards and the Site Plan
Review process will be used to assure that the impact upon the (unacknowledged) surrounding
residential properties, this is incorrect. There is simply no mechanism to do this. Development
Standards that would address impacts such as noise may not be incorporated into a rezoning
approval. There is no opportunity for members of the public and surrounding land owners to
express concerns during the Site Plan Review process. In fact, this exact issue was clarified ed
by the Weld County Attorney at the 11 MMM rezoning hearing on July 22, 2020. Given this
complete lack of control over the impacts of I-3 activity on the surrounding properties, any
suggestion of potential compatibility is unsupported, at best.
4. The rezoning at the neighboring MMM site is under appeal and may be reversed.
One of the arguments that is routinely used for this type of application is that the area is
already and inevitably becoming industrialized, using the MMM case a the example.
However, this argument fails to acknowledge that the original MMM USR was invalidated by
the Colorado Court of Appeals, and the 2020 rezoning is under appeal and likely to also be
reversed given the fundamental incompatibility between heavy industrial activities and
adjacent residential areas.
Because of the likely reversal of the MMM rezoning, that case cannot be used to justify the
rezoning application in the current case.
In addition, an honest review of the surrounding uses undermines the "already industrial"
claim, given that most of the land within a mile of this site is actually residential, agricultural
or small business, and includes two organic farms, and an agriculturally themed event center,
all of which would be incompatible with I-3 zoning on this parcel. Indeed, the few light
industrial activities that do exist are far less impactful and invasive than nearly any of the
allowed uses under the I-3 zoning.
For these reasons and more, it's imperative that the Weld County Planning Commission issue a
recommendation for denial of the rezoning application, COZ21-0002.
Respectfully,
Dave Kisker, Ph.D.
President
CLR-34 Neighborhoods Assn.
19 April 2021
Angela Snyder
1555 North 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Ms. Snyder:
I want to express my opposition to Change of Zone Application CO721-0001, which changes the zoning
of the subject property from Agricultural to Industrial 3. This rezoning, if approved, would be unlawful
for several reasons.
1. It is a Spot Rezoning, which is unlawful under Colorado Law. Two Colorado Supreme Court
decisions impose certain requirements on rezonings:
In Holly v. Commissioners, the Colorado Supreme Court cited decisions from other states:
"If a general zoning ordinance is passed and persons buy property in a certain district, they have
a right to rely upon the rule of law that the classification made in the general ordinance will not
be changed unless the change is required for the public good. * * * * * * * * * "* * * The power
to amend is not arbitrary. It cannot be exercised merely because certain individuals want it
done or think it ought to be done. The change must be necessary for the public good."
and:
"When a general zoning ordinance is passed, those who buy property in zoned districts have
the right to rely upon the rule of law that the classification made in the ordinance will not be
changed unless the change will be required for the public good."
In Clark v. City of Boulder, the Court said:
"In determining whether spot zoning is involved, the test is whether the change in question was made
with the purpose of furthering a comprehensive zoning plan or designed merely to relieve a particular
property from the restrictions of the zoning regulations."
The Commissioners cannot simply rezone a parcel of land because they want to. Local homeowners
have a right to stability in zoning unless the change is made for the public good. In this case the
applicant has not identified any purpose for requesting a rezoning.
The current use under USR is not heavy industrial, and the applicant has not presented any proposal for
any other use. Therefore it cannot be claimed that the proposed rezoning is being done in the public
interest. Instead, it is being done for the sole benefit of one private party. This fits perfectly the
definition of a spot rezoning.
2. It is inconsistent with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan includes 4
guiding principles. The proposed rezoning is inconsistent with 2 of them, making the rezoning
inconsistent as a whole:
B. Respecting 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."
This rezoning would infringe on the rights of nearby horneowners, business, and farms to peaceful and
quiet enjoyment of their property. Both Weld County and Colorado have established residential noise
limits which can be violated by otherwise lawful operations in the rezoned parcel. A nearby wedding
venue business needs an agricultural setting, and not an industrial one, to thrive. Property values can
and will be degraded. Most importantly, the Colorado Supreme Court has recognized the right of
neighboring homeowners to rely on stable zoning in the area.
D. "Protecting Health, 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. "
Colorado Revised Statute 25-12-101 states the following:
"The general assembly finds and declares that noise is a major source of environmental pollution which
represents a threat to the serenity and quality of life in the state of Colorado. Excess noise often has an
adverse physiological and psychological effect on human beings, thus contributing to an economic loss
to the community. Accordingly, it is the policy of the general assembly to establish statewide standards
for noise level limits for various time periods and areas. Noise in excess of the limits provided in this
article constitutes a public nuisance."
The State Legislature has declared that noise is physiologically and psychologically harmful. By placing a
noisy industrial zone near a large subdivision and other homes, this rezoning would damage and
degrade the health, safety, and general welfare of the surrounding community.
3. It is incompatible with the surrounding area. The Weld County Code requires that a rezoned parcel
must be compatible with the surrounding area. In fact, with the contested exception of the Rock & Rail
facility, there are no other heavy industrial facilities nearby. The status of the Rock & Rail facility is
currently in litigation, and is likely to be overturned. Substantial evidence of incompatibility can be
found in the court record for OZ20-0004.
Gary Oplinger
27687 Hopi Trail
Johnstown, CO 805 34
14 April 2021
EXHIBIT
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Janet Ross
Anoela Snyder
Gerrard filing for 1-3 desigination
Monday, April 19, 2021 11:02:49 PM
5
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.
Angela,
I oppose the designation of I-3 for Gerrard for the following reasons:
1. There isn't any industrial on site.
2. I-3 allows a myriad of businesses without any input from residences.
3. Trucks are on CR 56 24/7 creating a loss of quality of life for my family. Trucks go by
rattling my house, slamming on jake brakes creating additional noise.
4. Between trains and trucks, i am startled awake out of deep sleep and do not get a decent
nights sleep.
5. The vagueness of what Gerrard is wanting to do with his property is not compatible with
the area. I-3 could operate 24/7, creating more noise at a higher decibel.
6. If there is paving of the road, then snowplows would plow the road which would create a
potential blockage of my driveway. This happened about 10 years ago and my mailbox and
driveway was blocked with a wall of ice 5 feet tall and a good 4 foot wide. A shovel nor
pickaxe put a dent in the ice. Our feedlot neighbor came with a loader to unblock the
driveway and clear the mailbox.
7. Put a speed limit of 20 miles per hour to reduce noise and dust. Currently, on -haul are the
only vehicles that voluntarily go that speed. Vehicles speed up on the stretch of road in front
of my house.
I have lived in my house for over 30 years and love the area where I live. I realize that
property owners have a right to utilize their property to their advantage, however, as a
homeowner across the street I should have a right to a quality of life. I am unable to open
windows at night due to noise and dust. I believe that an I-1 with USR is more compatible and
isn't as broad with types if businesses.
Pleasr deny this extreme designation.
Thank you,
Janet Ross
6248 CR 56
Loveland CO 80534
Hello