The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20202124.tiffINVENTORY OF ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION, CONTINUED Applicant Gerrard Industries, LLC Item Case Number COZ20-0004 Submitted or Prepared Prior to Hearing At Hearing 92 SPO 5th Response Slides - Oplinger— hand delivered on June 11, 2020 X 93 2nd Legal Response — Ireland -Stapleton — email — dated June 12, 2020 X 94 SPO 6th Response — Oplinger — email — dated June 14, 2020 X 95 NIH Journal Article — Oplinger— email — dated June 14, 2020 X 96 Applicant Submittal - Abrams Residential Real Estate Report — email — dated June 15, 2020 X 97 Clear 34 Presentation — hand delivered on June 15, 2020 X 98 Gerrard Presentation — email — dated June 15, 2020 X 99 Town of Johnstown Statement — June 16, 2020 X 100 Clear 34 Names and Signatures for donated minutes — June 16, 2020 X I hereby certify that the one hundred items identified herein were submitted to the Department of Planning Services at or prior to the scheduled Planning Commission hearing. Angela{Snyder, Planner II Page 1 of 1 EXHIBIT I 92 Dust Emissions at Rock & Rail Facility November 7, 2018 January 13, 2019 June 5, 2019 ral I I= I !Ft, MEW June 7, 2019 August 7, 2019 August 14, 2019 . - --lam 144 August 19, 2019 August 20, 2019 September 17, 2019 September 27, 2019 September 27, 2019 October 9, 2019 October 17, 2019 October 20, 2019 October 25, 2019 November 7, 2019 November 13, 2019 November 13, 2019 November 16, 2019 November 16, 2019 Aerial View of Indian Head Estates May 27, 2020 Locomotive beaming its headlight into a bedroom window May 28, 2020 Employees from Rock & Rail Plant trespassing on Occidental Petroleum Property, Trampling Crops May 15, 2020 Dust rising from unloading station as seen from Rockin' S Ranch June 1, 2020 Martin Marietta Materials mixer on County Road 56 in front of Rockin' S Ranch. CR 56 was marked off limits to MMM traffic. June 1, 2020 Dust from Rock & Rail Plant at Rockin' S Ranch June 1, 2020 4 I. View of Concrete Plant from Indian Head Estates May 1, 2020 Rock & Rail Facility May 31, 2020 Indian Head West and Rock & Rail Facility May 31, 2020 V 1 Indian Head West and Rock & Rail Facility February 1, 2020 Indian Head East and West May 27, 2020 R&R Concrete Plant June 9, 2020 Lro Plant Noise at Rock & Rail Facility (No locomotives on site, unless otherwise shown) Cole-Parmer Digi-Sense Model 20250-29 Recording Sound Level Meter Key Features Reliable measurements, guaranteed! Precalibrated to NIST-traceable standards Meets ANSI and IEC61672-1 Class 2 standards Four user -selectable ranges from 30 to 130 dB provide additional flexibility Expanded memory of up to 32,700 readings Included data logging software with graphical display for quick and easy analysis Programmable sample rates for a wide range of applications Tripod mountable —ideal for field use More About this Item The Digi-Sense data logging sound level meter provides precision sound decibel measurements for product noise certification and reduction applications. It conforms to IEC61672-1 Class 2 standards, making it ideal for OSHA and IEC surveys. Unit features A and C weighting capabilities for measuring noise levels from industrial machinery or equipment to residential/commercial environments ensuring noise level standards and compliance. The intuitive interface makes this sound meter easy to set up and use right out of the box. Use the included software to view your sound measurement data in graphical formats as well as record and download data, via USB connectivity, to your PC for further analysis. Additional features include Max/Min and Hold functions, over- and under -range indication, fast/slow response, analog AD/DC outputs, and USB connectivity. Automatic power -off conserves battery life. Plus the NIST-traceable precalibration means you get reliable measurements right out of the box, saving you time and money! gle Earth Pro dit View Tcols Add Help • CI': Primary Database {E3 Announcements Borders and Labels Places Photos =' Roads 3D Buildings_ Ocean Weather %' Gallery .. i Global Awareness More errain Line Path Polygon Cirde 30 path 3D polygon Measure the distance between t.!!o points on the ground Map Length: Ground Length: Heading: Mouse Navigation 448.05 Feet 448.25 130,38 degrees R&R Boundary Imagery Date: 7/17/2019. 2 anemometers were used to verify wind velocity was not greater than 5 mph before reporting noise data. Distance to first locomotive 881 feet Composite Baseline • The composite baseline will be seen on some graphs. • It is the average noise from 2 nights and mornings, 8/27/2019 and 4/27/2020, when there was no noticeable noise from the R&R facility. • The time interval is approximately 9:30 pm to 5:45 am. 65.00 60.00 Composite Baseline August 27, 2019 and April 27, 2020 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 in CO N rn r in rn N rn r in rn N rn r in rn N rn r in rn N rn r in rn N rn r in rn in N in N d- N d- N d- O M O M O rJ in N in fV ▪ N ▪ N O M O M O N in N Lf1 N .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. In- .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. � Ol M CO N I7- N Cc; O . - in CO M in N Cc; O In 0 � ro M I� N ro N V1 O � CO M I-i N M� O N M� O N M� in N N E in N N E In O N M In O N M In O N M� O N M .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . In- .. .. N N N N N N m m m m M O O O O N N N N N N N N M m m M lf1 lf1 In - IN N N N N N N N N N N Plant Noise June 28, 2019 Time is MST No train on site yilvoRoloiNt)valo I N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 M N lfl N O M N lfl N O M N Ln N O M N Ln N O M N Ln N O M N Ln N O M ti Ln N O M N Ln N O M N Ln N O M N Ln N O M N lfl N O M N Ln N O M N Ln N O M N Ln N O M N lfl N O M ti Ln N O M CO Ol N N Cc; CO O N M Vl Cc; CO O N M Cc; CO Ol N N Cc; n Ol O N Vl CO O N M Vl Cc; CO O N M Cc; CO Ol N N lD CO O N M Vl Cc; CO O - - Cc;CO Ol N N ▪ lD n Ol Ln Ln lfl in in • in 00 0 ▪ 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M ▪ lfl in in in in in 0 0 0 0 0 00 N N N N N • N N N N ▪ N N N M M M M M M ▪ lfl lfl lfl Li-)lfl lfl July 10, 2019 Plant Noise, no locomotives on site Time is MST 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 rn in ti n ro rn in ti n ro rn in ti n ro rn in ti n rn rn in ti n ro rn in ti n rn rn in ti n rn rn in ti n ro rn in ti n ro rn in ti n rn rn in ti n rn rn in ti n rn rn in ti n rn rn in ti n rn rn in ti n rn rn in ti n ro rn in ti o d- ry in m o d- ry in m o d- ry in m o d- ry in m o d- ry in m o d- ry in m o d- ry in m o d- ry in m o d- ry in m o d- ry in m o d- ry in m o ▪ ry in m o d- ry in m o d- ry in m o d- ry in m o d- ry in m o d- ry Cc; Co N M Cc; of N•I Cc;ro ro N d- n of N V1 n o N Cri0 Oci0 o M V1 Co N M Cc; Co N� Cc;ro ro N d- n of N in a O N 0 n o M V1 Co O M Cc; Co N M roCc; ro N d- Cc; of N in a of N 0 n o N V1 Co O M V1 Co N M Cc;ro ro N d- Cc; of ti ti ry ry ry ry m m m m�� in in in o 0 0 o ti ti ti ti ry N N ry m m m m�� in in in o 0 0 o ti ti ti ti ry ry ry ry m m m m�� in in in in o 0 o ti ti ti ti ry N N ry m m m m��d- d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 11 45.00 40.00 N O lD ▪ O N in o ti Ca N N O CO O M In CO M MMMM O M lf1 I� in in in in rn m m rn Plant Noise July 11, 2019, Early Morning No locomotives on site Time is MDT Legal limit is 50 dB(A) during this period M O r N CO V1 N O) lD M O I• N CO in N (7) lD M O I� N lf1 ti ▪ ti M 0 M lf1 N lf1 fV ▪ ti d- O M O rJ lf1 N lf1 c -I O N V1 I� O N lf1 n Ol N I� Ol N I� Ol N Cc; O) N Cc; 0 0 0 o ti ti ti ti ti ry N N ry M M M M ▪ in in in Plant Noise Baseline Sunrise 4:39 am MST CO in N Ol lD M O CO in N Ol LID M M O M lf1 N lf1 N ▪ ti d O M 0 N lf1 N 0f N Cc; c0 N M lD CO N M lD c0 N M in c0 o 0 0 o ti ti ti ti ry N N ry M M M M ▪ n n n n iri in in in in in in in iri iri in in CO in N Ol lD M ti M O M lf1 N lf1 N CO O M lf1 I� O N V1 n n n n o 0 0 in in CD CD CD 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 Plant Noise July 25, 2019 No train on site Time is MDT Data after 9:00 am not included due to local noise. O c0 N (0 O c0 N (0 O c0 N (0 O c0 N (0 O c0 N (0 O c0 N (0 O c0 N (0 O c0 N (0 O c0 N (0 O c0 N (0 O c0 N (0 O c0 N (0 O c0 N (0 O c0 N m in ti O m in ti d- O m in ti d- O m in ti d- O m in ti d- O m in ti O m in ti d- O m in ti d- O m in ti d- O m in ti d- O m in ti O m in ti d- O m in ti d- O m in ti d- Cc;Cc; Cc;Ol ti ni Cc; co ti ro ro c0 O M In c0 O N in n O N 0 n 0 N Ol ti�� co ti ro ro c0 O M In c0 O N in n O N 0 n 0 N Ol ti�� co ti ro ro c0 O M In c0 O N in n ti ti ti rl N N ry m m m m�� in in in in o 0 0 0 o ti ti ti ti ry ry ry ry m m m m�� in in in in o 0 0 0 o ti ti ti ti ry N N ry m m m m��d- in in in in CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co Plant Noise July 31, 2019 No trains on site Time is MDT 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 Moil 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 II 'di II I ry ti o rn co r` ro ry b o rn co r` ro ry b o rn co r` ro ry b o rn co r` ro ry b o rn co r` ro ry b o rn co r` ro ry b o rn co r` ti ro in o ry d- o ry d- o ry o ti ro in ti ro in ti ro in ti r.J d- o ry d- o ry o ry m in ti ro in ti ro in ti ro o r.J o ry o ry in ti ro in ti ro in ti ro in o r.J d- o r.J Cc; o M lCc;O M lCc;o M lCc;O M lCc;O M lCc;o M Cc; O-; l MCc; Ol l MCc; Ol l MCc; Ol l MCc; Ol l MCc; Ol l MCc; rn l ry Cc; Ol l NCc; rn l NCc; Ol l NCc; Ol l NCc; Ol ro in in r m�� in o 0 o ti ti ti v N N COM COM M�� in in in o 0 o ti ti ti ry N N ry COm COm m�� in in in o 0 o ti ti ti ry ry ry COm COm m�� in in in o 0 o ti ti ti ry CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; CZ; r, r, r, r, r, r, r, r, r, r, r, r, r, r, r, r, r, r, co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn o 0 0 0 0 0 0 ti ti ti ti ti ti ti 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 Plant Noise Baseline 35.00 Plant Noise, August 6, 2019, Early vs Baseline Time is MDT No train on site Ill 1\'Yf Sunrise is 6:01 am 30.00 o r ▪ ti co n ry rn m o r ▪ ti co n ry rn ▪ m o r ti co n ry rn m o r ▪ ti co n ry rn m o r ▪ ti co n ry (Dm m o r ▪ ti co n ry rn m o r ti co n ry (Dm m o r ti o ry n ry ti o rm o rm in r.J in ti ▪ ti m o rm o ry in ry ti o rm o m n ry n ti ti m o m o ry n ry ti m o m n ry n ti ti m o m o ry n ry ti m o rm in r.J in o ti ry in r co o ti m C r co o ti m C r rn o ti m ▪ r` rn o ry r:6 r rn o ry m n co rn o rvcri crim n co rn ti criry crim n co rn ti ry ▪ n r co rn ti zoo ▪ n r co o ti ry n 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ry ry ry ry ry ry ry m m m CO CO CO m.7.7 ▪ n n n n n n n o 0 0 0 0 0 o ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ry ry ry ry ry ry ry m m m m m m L.A 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 Loading truck Plant Noise August 26, 2019 Time is MDT No train on site Loading trucks 30.00 rn rn ti rn m rn rn rn rn ti m in (VI rrs rn rn rn ti m rn rn rn rn rn ti m n ti m rn rn rn m rn rn rn rn ti m in (VI rrs rn rn rn ti m rn rn rn rn rn ti m n ti m rn rn ti rn m rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn ti m in ti m in ti m in ti m in ti m in ti m in rn rn rn ti m rn rn rn rn rn ti m n ti m rn rn rn m rn rn rn rn ti m in (VI rrs rn rn rn ti m rn rn rn rn rn ti m n ti m rnO rn m 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 Plant Noise vs Baseline August 28-29, 2019, Early No train on site Time is MDT Plant Noise Baseline I Sunrise 6:24 am in N I� CO Ol in N I� rfl Ol in N I� rfl Ol In N I", rfl Ol in N I� rn Ol in N I� rn Ol in N I� rfl Ol in N I� rfl Ol in N I� rfl Ol in N I� rfl Ol in N I� rfl Ol in N I� rfl Ol in N I� rfl Ol in N I� rfl N N o o in in in M M M N N N N N O O in in in M M M N N N N N O O in in in M M M N N N N N O O in in in M M M N N N N N O O in in in . .. .. .. .. .. .. •.. •.. .. . .. .. .. .. .. M. .. .. .. .. •.. •. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. . •. •.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. •.. •.. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. •.. •.. Vl N Ol o N Ol Lb. M O I� in N o in.. N rl lD M O Cc; o O I-i � N ro Vl N Ol o M O I� r O n in N o in.. N rl Cc; M O in o N CO � N ro Vl N Ol o M O I� � N CO In N o Vl N rl Cc; � in in O N N N M�� in O O N N N M� in in O N N N M M� in in O N N N M�� in O O N N N M� in in O N N N M M� in in O N N N M�� in O O N N N M .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. M. M. M. M. M. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. N N N N N N N N N N N M m m m m m m m m O O O O O O O O O ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti N N N N N N N N N m m m m m m m m M lfl lfl lfl lfl lfl lfl N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 75.00 Plant Noise September 5, 2019 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 Time is MDT No train on site in d- m ry ti O rn co (0 in d- m ry ti O rn co (0 in d- m ry ti O rn co (0 in d- m ry ti O rn co (0 in d- m ry ti O rn co (0 in d- m ry ti O rn co (0 in d- m ry ti O rn co (0 in d- m N In N Lfl N Lfl fV d- N d- N d- c -I d- c -I d- c -I M O M O M O M O M O fV Lfl N Lfl N Lfl N Lfl N in c -I d- c -I d- c -I d- c -I d- ti d- O M O M O M O M O M in N in N in N in N in fV d- c -I d- c -I d- c -I d- 1 l l l l l 0 0 0 0 O O O • N n 00';N .7n 00';N a n 00';N d- n 00';N a n 0';N 0 n N CZ; 0'; N� CZ; 0'; N� CZ; 0'; N d- CZ; 0'; N in lCZ;0';O ▪ N CZ; 0'; N� Cc; CO N Cc;c0 N M Cc; c0 N M lCc;c0 M Cc; c0 o o O O N N N N N N N N M M M M�� d-lfl lfl lfl lfl 0 0 0 0 O N N N N N N N N M M M M� �� in in in in N N N N N N N N M M M M �� in 0 00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 Plant Noise Baseline M Ol l0 M Ol l0 N Ol lf1 N CO lf1 N CO lf1 N CO 4 N CO CO Lf1 L.n O N N N CO CO lf1 In O N N N CO CO lf1 In CO N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N rl rl CO N m O O m ti O IC O O O ti Plant Noise September 6, 2019, Early No train on site Time is MDT CO N lD O lf1 N O O Cc; M N N N ti ti ti ti Activity first noted. Spikes due to aggregate being loaded into trucks (0 O d- CO N l0 O CO N l0 O CO N N lf1 rJ O CO N N In NOM 0 d - M O l0 M In O O N N N M d In 00 M M M M lf1 lf1 O ti L.n M 0) rl i--I CrS Cri CO N L CO N 31 CO CO machinery noise L.0 O 4 CO ti N 31 lf1 � in in o LC Plant Noise September 27, 2019 No train on site Time is MDT 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 m ti rn n m ti rn h. in m ti rn n m ti rn n m ti rn n m ti rn n m ti rn n m ti rn n m ti rn n m ti rn n m ti rn n m ti rn n m ti rn n m ti rn n m ti rn n m ti co) N O M O M O N lf1 N lf1 N ▪ c -I c -I O M O M O N lf1 N lf1 N ▪ c -I ▪ c -I O M O M O N lf1 N lf1 N ▪ c -I N O M O M O N lf1 N lf1 N ▪ N ▪ N ▪ O M O M O N lf1 N lf1 N ▪ c -I c -I O iC rC rC IC IC rC IC IC ▪ IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC CO Ol N N ▪ V1 n CO Ol N N V1 n CO O N M ▪ lD I� Ol O N r;-; ▪ lD I� Ol O N r:/-; V1 lD CO Ol N N M V1 lD CO Ol N N V1 n CO O CO O N M lD I� Ol O N M V1 lD I� Ol O N M V1 lD CO Ol O N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M lf1 lf1 lf1 lf1 lf1 lf1 lf1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N ▪ N N N M M M M M M M ▪ lf1 lf1 lf1 lf1 lf1 lf1 lf1 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 i Sunrise 7:02 AM m o r` c0 iri iri iri iri ti co n ry O- ro N N N N N c -I O ro Cc; Ol N lf1 CO N O O O O ti ti ti N Cc; Cc; Cc; Cc; Cc; Cc; Lr Cc; r 0 0 0 - r N N CD CD co lf1 N O in in O N f co m m m m O (0 ro N r O lD lD lD lD m CrS CrS co f N Ol ry N N c -I Ol N co N in O 0 O O ti r r r r r m o r` ti ti O r O M N r r r CrS Plant Noise October 8, 2019 Time is MDT No train on site tico o Ol N N r r n ry O- L ro r o m L rn CO m r` r` r` r` r` r` m m Cri tico ry co r in o Oci r.J O) L ro o r N ti ti ti ti 0 r O M Cc; O N O ti ti ti ti N co co co co co co Cri Oci co lf1 N O LC) LC) lf1 co O M Cc; N M m m O (0 ro O N lf1 co m rl m Oci ti co n ry O- L ro or, ro N N N N N N N O Cc; Ol N V1 c0 N V1 O O O O ti ti ti N co m m m m m m m m m co lf1 N O LC) LC) lf1 Ol N f N N m m m O O m Ol Oci m m Plant Noise October 15, 2019 Time is MDT 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 *)4 m N N O 0l co r` (O DO d- m N b o rn co r` (O D0.7 DO N b o rn co r` (O in d- m N b o rn co r` in d- m N b o rn co r` (O DO d- m ry b o rn co r` (O D0.7 m N b o rn co r` (O DO d- m N b o rn co r` (O D0.7 DO N ti m m m m m m m m m m N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O O O O O O O O DO in in in in in in in in in d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- m m m m m m m m m m N N N N N N N N N . .. Cc; co O N Cc; CO O N Cc; CO O N Cc; CO O N Cc; CO O N Cc; CO O N Cc; CO O N Cc; CO O N Cc; CO O N m Vl I� Ol N m Vl I� Ol N m Vl I� Ol N m Vl I� Ol N m Vl I� Ol N m Vl I� Ol N m Vl I� Ol r-i r:,-; L l I� L l c -I N N N N N N m m m m m d- d- d- d- d- in in in in in 0 0 0 0 0 c -I r-i r -I r-i c -I N N N N N m m m m m lfl lfl lfl lfl lfl O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N m m m m m in DI DI DI DI r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` r` 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 Plant Noise October 19, 2019 Saturday Time is MDT No train on site Sunrise 7:14 am 40.00 ti ry ro in L r` co rn o ti r.J ro in L r` co rn o ti r.J ro in L r` co rn o ti r.J rn - in L r` co rn o ti r.J rn - in L r` co rn o ti r.J rn - in L r` co rn o ti r.J rn - in L r` co rn o ti r.J rn - in L r` co rn o ti ry ▪ c -I ▪ c -I ▪ c -I ▪ c -I ▪ N lf1 N lf1 N lf1 N lf1 N lf1 ro O M O M O M O M O ▪ r -I ▪ c -I ▪ c -I ▪ c -I ▪ c -I lf1 N lf1 N lf1 N lf1 N lf1 N O M O M O M O M O M N ▪ N ▪ N ▪ N ▪ N ▪ N lf1 N lf1 N lf1 N lf1 N in M O M N V1 I� O N V1 n O N V1 n O N V1 n O N V1 n O M V1 c0 O M V1 c0 O M V1 c0 O M Cr; c0 O M V1 c0 O M V1 co O M V1 c0 O M lD c0 N M lD c0 N M Cc; c0 N M Cc; c0 N M Cc; co N M lD c0 N M lD c0 N M Cc; c0 N ▪ lD i n i n i n n n n n m m m m n n n n m m m m n n n n m m m m n n n n 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 Plant Noise November 18, 2019 Time is MST No train on site 1 Li 4161 Lik L A I Steady buzzing noise, accompanied by occasional dumping of aggregate into trucks. Source of buzzing noise turned off. 40.00 in rn rn n ti in rn rn n ti in O rn n ti in rn rn n ti in rn rn n ti in rn rn n ti in rn rn n ti in rn rn n ti in rn rn n ti in rn rn n ti in rn rn n ti in rn rn n ti in rn rn n ti in rn rn n ti in rn rn n in ti d- o rn in ti d- o rn in ti d- o rn in ti d- o rn in ti d- o rn in ti d- o rn in ti d- o rn in ti d- o rn in ti d- o rn in ti d- o rn in ti d- o rn in ti d- o rn in d ▪ o rn in ti d- o rn in ti d- o n o d- In n rn N in n rn 0 0 Cc;0 0 N M Cc; c0 N M In c0 o m In n o d- In n rn N in n rn 0 0 Cc;0 0 N M Cc; c0 ti m In c0 o m In n o d- In n rn N in n rn o o Cc;o o N M Cc; c0 ti m In c0 o m m�� in in in in o 0 0 o ti ti ti ti ry ry ry ry m m m m�� in in in in o 0 0 o ti ti ti ti ry N N ry m m m m�� in in in in o 0 0 o ti ti ti ti ry ry ry ry m m Cc; Cc; Cc; Cc; Cc; Cc; Cc; Cc; Cc; Cc; n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn Plant Noise December 3, 2019 Time is MST No locomotives on site 85.00 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 Cr) O • lr1 lD c0 rl N N m ▪ co In IN 01 lD m o ry ▪ in ti m ▪ o IN m V1 r O N r Ol N m m m Lr1 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 r, .- ti co ry O) (Dm o r` ▪ ti co Ln ry O) (Dm o r` ▪ ti co Ln ry O) L m o r` ti co Ln ry 01 L m o r` ti co Ln ry 01 L m o r` ti co Ln ry 01 L rro r ti in ti m d- o N m in ti m d- o IN m in N IN ▪ O IN m in N IN ▪ O ti m in N IN ▪ O ti m In O N d- O ti m In O IN d- In ti m In O IN d- In ti m d- o IN d- In ti m m D CO O m V r O N D O N m V CO O N V N Ol N lD CO N m V1 N O N N Ol N M D CO O M in.. r O N D CO N m V CO O N r O N D CO O M.. V lf1 lf1 lf1 0 0 0 0 O N N N N N N N N m m m m m ▪ in in in lf1 0 0 0 0 O N N N N N N N N N m m m m d- in in in in in 0 0 0 0 c -I c -I c -I 01 01 01 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Plant Noise December 4, 2019 Time is MST No locomotives on site 85.00 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 m co m co m m m m lD O lD Ol N lf1 O O N N m m m m N lf1 L U CO N N N m m CO N d- n O m LID Ol in O O O ti ti ti ti CO N r O m lD N fV m m m 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 N in co ti ▪ lc O rm lD O) N Lf1 CO ti ▪ lc Oro N N fV m m m d- d- d- d- Lf1 in in O O O ti ti 01 N lf1 CO c -I n O m lD 01 N lf1 01 N lf1 CO c -I - in in in O O O c-i ti ti c-i rJ rJ rJ m m CO d- C.)-; 0 0 0 O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O c -I i--I i--I c -I i--I i--I c -I i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I ti rl Ol N 111 CO N ▪ N. O CO (D O) N V1 CO c-i d- n O m lD Ol N V1 CO N ▪ N. p m lD (7) N in CO c-i r-i N N fV m m m d- d- d- d- Lf1 in in O O O ti ti ti ti rJ N N m m m d- d- d- d- Lf1 in in O I-: O m lD Ol N V1 CO c-i n O m lD O m lD Ol N V1 CO N n O m lD Ol N V1 CO N n N d- inininIn O O O c-i c-i c-i N N N m m m m d- d- d- inininO O O O c-i c-i c-i RI N N m O O O O O c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I N N N N N N N N N N N c -I i--I i--I c -I i--I i--I c -I i--I i--I c -I i--I i--I c -I i--I i--I c -I i--I i--I c -I i--I i--I c -I i--I i--I c -I i--I i--I c -I i--I i--I c -I i--I i--I c -I i--I co m rl Plant Noise December 13, 2019 Time is MST No locomotives on site 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 r1 N M in o ,--I N M in o ,--I N M in o ,--I N M in o ,--I N M in o ,--I N M 7r. in o ,--I N M In o ,--I N M In o ,--I N M In o ,--I N M In o ,--I N M In o ,--I N M In o ,--I N CZ) CZ) CZ) CZ) CZ) I-i n n n n n co co co co co co rn rn rn rn rn rn o 0 0 0 0 o IN IN IN IN IN IN N N N N N N M M M M M M IN IN IN IN IN IN In In Ifl Ifl Ifl Ifl CD CD CD CD CD CD I� n n n n n OciIN OciIN Oci IN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 rn CrS ti 6:15:26 AM 6:16:33 AM 6:17:40 AM 6:18:47 AM 6:19:54 AM 6:21:01 AM 6:22:08 AM 6:23:15 AM 6:24:22 AM 6:25:29 AM 6:26:36 AM 6:27:43 AM 6:28:50 AM 6:29:57 AM 6:31:04 AM 6:32:11 AM 6:33:18 AM 6:34:25 AM 6:35:32 AM 6:36:39 AM 6:37:46 AM 6:38:53 AM 6:40:00 AM 6:41:07 AM Plant Noise April 27, 2020 Time is MDT No train on site 6:42:14 AM 6:43:21 AM 6:44:28 AM 6:45:35 AM 6:46:42 AM 6:47:49 AM 6:48:56 AM 6:50:03 AM 6:51:10 AM 6:52:17 AM 6:53:24 AM 6:54:31 AM 6:55:38 AM 6:56:45 AM 6:57:52 AM 6:58:59 AM 7:00:06 AM 7:01:13 AM 7:02:20 AM 7:03:27 AM 7:04:34 AM 7:05:41 AM 7:06:48 AM 7:07:55 AM 7:09:02 AM 7:10:09 AM 7:11:16 AM 7:12:23 AM 7:13:30 AM 7:14:37 AM 7:15:44 AM 7:16:51 AM 7:17:58 AM 7:19:05 AM 7:20:12 AM 7:21:19 AM 7:22:26 AM 7:23:33 AM 7:24:40 AM 7:25:47 AM 7:26:54 AM 7:28:01 AM 7:29:08 AM 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 Plant Noise April 30, 2020 Time is MDT No train on site Ln Ln Ln Ln Z CO ▪ O N lD CO O lD CO O N • lD CO ▪ • Cr; CO Ln O N lD CO O ▪ (.1: ▪ CO ▪ O N ▪ lD CO O N ▪ lD ▪ CO ▪ O ▪ N ▪ lLn D ▪ CO O N Ln lD CO O N ▪ lD CO O N •lD CO lf1 O O O O O N N N N N N N N N r,-)6 M M M M lf1 lf1 lf1 lf1 O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M lf1 • in • in • in • in IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 Plant Noise May 5, 2020 Time is MDT No train on site o rn co r` (0 in d- rn ry ti O rn co r` (0 in d- rn ry ti O rn co r` (0 in d- rn ry ti O rn co r` (0 in d- rn ry ti O rn co r` (0 in d- rn ry ti O rn co r` (0 in d- rn ry ti O rn co r` (0 in d- rn ry ti O rn co r` (0 in d- 0 rn ti in rn ti in rm ti in rm 0 d- ry O d- ry O d- ry O rm ti in rm ti in rm ti in rm 0 d- r.J O d- r.J O d- ry O rm ti in rm ti in rm ti in rm 0 d- r.J O d- r.J O d- ry O rm ti in rn ti in rm ti in rm 0 d- r.J O d- ry O O N N N M M in in Cc; n n co rn rn O N N N M M in in in iCc;n iCc;n n co co 0-;O O N N M 0 0 l in Cc;lCc;n n co rn rn O N N N M M i in n lCc;n n co 0-; rn O O N N N M l in Cc;lCc;n co co 0-;•I- �� •I- •I- •I- •I- •I- •I- •I- •I- •I- •I- •I- •I- linlinlinlinlinlinlinlinlinlf1 in linlinlinlinO 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ti ti N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Plant Noise May 12,2020 Time is MDT No locomotives on site m m iD (0— ry O) L m O O ti rn lf1 N N O) N M lf1 CO N N N N N rfl C m iD ti Ca in o ti m f r O m m m (D ry O) m In O N Cc; CO D D D D l m Cri in iD O") Lr m o n ti m in Cc; O) N M O O N N r` r` r` r` Ol Ol m m N 7 m m r r Ln CD m ti Ca in ti m .7 O rfl lf1 CO ✓ ` N. N. r▪ ` N Ol ry m O N in in r` r` m ti m ✓ O inin CO in N Ol ry m n ti ry Cc; CO O rn lf1 O O ti ti ti co co co co co m O N O N N DO — rfl m c0 N Ol O Cc; CD m m Lr m o r M f N N O N In r Ol Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca in co f N Ol lD M In O N Cc; CO N M In In O O rn rn Cri O) O r` O N CO O m ti O) Plant Noise May 13, 2020, Early Time is MDT No locomotives on site 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 ii O N lD CO O ▪ N O O N V1 CO O O O O O ti M M M M M m M ti m Ir( 1 N ti ti m Oci ti m m N m DO ti m m m DO O lD ▪ m ti n m • O rn V1 CO m m m rn m rn i fir• \I A\1 DO O N ▪ lD CO O N lD CO O N lD CO O N lD CO O N ▪ lD CO O ▪ N O ▪ M N lf1 M ti 0 N O 7 M N lf1 M ti 0 N O lf1 CO N M lD V1 CO O M Cc; CO n n ▪ n n o 0 ▪ o ti ti ti ti ry N N ry m m ▪ m m n n n n m m m m N DO ti in m ti ▪ O 0 0 o ti in in in in M N Do Cri m Oci N Lc) CO O N Lc) N lf1 M ti 0 N • • lD Ol N r m m m m , in in in in in in in in iri Do LP m N ti CO ti Do Ol rl m N N ti N Plant Noise May 14, 2020 Time is MDT 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 No locomotives on site co In ry rn lD rn o 1, ▪ ti co in r.J rn lD m o l� ▪ ti co In ry rn lD m o l� ▪ ti co In ry rn lD ro o l� ti co In ry rn lD rn o l",ti co In ry rn lD ro o l"'ti co In ry rn lD ro o l� ti co In "I rn lD rn o l' in ▪ ro do in ▪ r.J ,-Io d- DO r.J o in ▪ ro do in m ry ti in ▪ m ry o in ▪ r.J ,-Io d- DO ry ti in ▪ m ti o in m r.J ,-Io d- DO ry o in ▪ r.J d o in m ry ti in ▪ ro ti o in ▪ r.J ,-Io d- DO ry o in ▪ ro ti O N Cc; co rn N m In IO co o N d- In n rn N m in co o m In Ir:-.:o N Cc; co Ol N l m In Cc;Co o ry DO In n 01 N m d- Cc; co o N m I In n 0-;o o • N l m In Cc;Co o ry IN In IN 0-; N ry DO Cc; co ry ry ry ry ry ry m m m m m��d- in in in in In in o o 0 0 0 0 o o ti ti ti ti ti ti ry ry ry ry ry m m m m m m��d- in in in in in in o o 0 0 o 0 o 0 o o ti ti ti ti ti IN IN IN IN IN IN m m m m m Plant Noise May 15, 2020 Time is MDT No train on site 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 N 0 In N ti ti o o in in CO- lf1 r IT O lf1 lf1 lf1 In O O in I - CID CID CD O O CD CD CrS Hammering or pounding heard N N N 0 N In N m m ry ry ti ti o o in in CO O N ▪ CD CO O N m V1 O N N N N N N NCID CID CID CID CID CID CID CID CID CID N N ti ▪ ti ( ti m m ry ry ti rn ti m in rn N m m m m m L L L L L L ti o � ti ti ti o oo in N m V1 Cc; CO O N in in CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD N N N 0 N� N N N N N 0 N In m ry ry ti ti o o in o o in Cc; CO O N Cc; CO Ol N m V1 I� Ol N m V1 I� Ol N N lf1 lf1 N rJ N N N m m ti ti (ID ti in d- CO m ry .7 Cc; CO O N m m m N N 0 In N N 0 ti ti 0 0 In In lD CO ▪ In In ▪ In In IC n n n n n n N rn N N N 0 N In N � m m N N ti ti 0 0 In In ti m V O ti m V1 r CO O O O O O ti ti ti ti ti N Ol Plant Noise May 21, 2020 Time is MDT No train on site 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti in ▪ CO N ti 0 in ▪ m N ti 0 in ▪ m N ti 0 in ▪ m N ti 0 in ▪ m N ti 0 in ▪ m N ti 0 in ▪ m N ti 0 in ▪ m N ti 0 in ▪ m N ti 0 in ▪ m N ti 0 in ▪ m N ti 0 in ▪ m N ti 0 in ▪ m N ti o O M lD 01 N V1 r O M lD 01 N r O M lD O) r-i n O M lD CO r-i n O M V1 CO r-i n O N In Ca N n 01 N V1 CO r-i Cc; 01 N V1 CO N M Cc; 01 N V1 CO O M Cc; 01 N V1 r O M Cc; 01 N r O M Cc; 01 in in in in O O O N N N N fV N N M M M M ▪ in in in in O O O N N N N IN IN IN M M M M d- d- d- d- In In In O O O O ti ti ti fV fV fV fV M M M ▪ In In In O O O O ti ti ti fV fV fV fV V1 V1 V1 V1 CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD r n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol co 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 Plant Noise May 26, 2020 Time is MDT No locomotives on site O) lD ro o l� ti co in N rn lD ro o l� ti co in N rn lD ro o l� ti co in N rn lD ro o l� ▪ ti co in IN Ol lD ro o l� ti co in IN Ol lD ro o l� ▪ ti co in IN rn N CO ▪ in in o ti ti IN CO CO ▪ in o o ti N N CO ▪ in o ,--i i--I IN CO CO ▪ in in o ,--i N N CO ▪ d- In o o ,--I IN CO CO d- In In o ,--I i--I IN CO d- d- In o o ,--I IN IN CO In N o • N I-i M CO CO CO M CO M CO o Ol ▪ Ol IN 01 CO ci;CO O In o Crio o V1 O In O Cc;CO N Cc; N Cc;In i--I Cc; N n N IN N CO N I- N In M CO M CO M CO CO CO d- 01 In Ici;n 0 in 0 o N N N N CO M�� in in 0 o N N N N CO CO .f- in in 0 o N N N N CO M�� In In 0 0 ,--I ,--I N N CO M�� In In 0 0 ,--I ,--I N N CO M�� In In 00 n co co co co co co co co co co co co rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 Plant Noise June 1, 2020 Time is MDT No trains on site 1,,,ki,k,W ?filo r 700,s1/4 In In In In In In ti ▪ ti ti Lf1 I� O N n ✓ V1 O O o O O O) O O O) in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti V1 I� O N V1 n O N V1 r O N V1 r O N V1 r O N V1 r O N V1 r O N V1 r O N V1 r O N V1 r O N V1 r O N V1 r O N V1 r O N V1 r O N V1 r O N V1 r O N V1 r O N ii r O N lf1 lf1 O O O O c -I c -I c -I c -I N N N N m m m m•-•-•-Lf1 lf1 Lf1 lf1 O O O O c -I c -I c -I c -I N N N N m m m m d-d-d-d-Lf1 lf1 lf1 lf1 O O O O c -I c -I c -I c -I N N N N m m m m d - d- d- d- in Ill Plant Noise June 10, 2020 Time is MDT No train on site 90.00 80.00 70.00 60.00 50.00 40.00 30.00 ti CO Ltl N O In N co co m m m co in N Ol lD m ti n ▪ m ti o n Ol N Lr O c0 N O N N N N N m O N CO ▪ N N O d - In Ol m r O lf1 N Ol lD m co in N Ol lD m M N O In ▪ m N O ▪ lf1 m N N lf1 ▪ m CO N lf1 Ol m I� N CO N lD Ol r:/-; r In In O O O ti ti rJ N N m m m d-d- N Ol d - ti ▪ ti Ol Ol o ▪ ti co in ti n ▪ m ti o Ol N Lr O c0 N m m Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol N Ol (D m co in N O) lD lf1 m N N O m ▪ N o lf1 ▪ N N N lf1 Ol m r O CO N V1 Ol m I� in in in o o N N N N N N m m Ol Ol O) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N ▪ N N lD O O N N o � m m CD CD CD N N N 1 O Cri 90.00 80.00 70.00 60.00 50.00 40.00 30.00 Train Arrival and Plant Noise June 10-11, 2020 Time is MDT Train Arrites Loud noises coming from plant activi y r` o CO (0 O r.J in co ti r o m Lr rn r.J in co ti r o ro L rn r.J in co ti r o ro L rn r.J in co ti r o ro L rn r.J in co ti r o m MC) ry n co ti r o m ry o m ti n ry o n m ti n ry o in m ti o ry o in ro ti o ry ti in m ti o ry ti in ro r.J o d- ry ti in ro r.J o m ti in m ry o m ti in ry ry o co in m ti co � ry rn r ry o co m ti rn r ry o r m ti co ti rn r ry o co n m ti rn ry rn r` C m o co m ti rn r ry o r m m n n o ti N N M f f O N N M M f O O N N M f o N N N M f O N N N M f f O ti N N ro f O O N N M M f O N N N M ti ti ti ti ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry m m m m m m m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ry N N N N N N ry m m m m m m t;-; n n n n (A N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Plant Noise at Rock & Rail Facility Rail Noise Cole-Parmer Digi-Sense Model 20250-29 Recording Sound Level Meter Key Features Reliable measurements, guaranteed! Precalibrated to NIST-traceable standards Meets ANSI and IEC61672-1 Class 2 standards Four user -selectable ranges from 30 to 130 dB provide additional flexibility Expanded memory of up to 32,700 readings Included data logging software with graphical display for quick and easy analysis Programmable sample rates for a wide range of applications Tripod mountable —ideal for field use More About this Item The Digi-Sense data logging sound level meter provides precision sound decibel measurements for product noise certification and reduction applications. It conforms to IEC61672-1 Class 2 standards, making it ideal for OSHA and IEC surveys. Unit features A and C weighting capabilities for measuring noise levels from industrial machinery or equipment to residential/commercial environments ensuring noise level standards and compliance. The intuitive interface makes this sound meter easy to set up and use right out of the box. Use the included software to view your sound measurement data in graphical formats as well as record and download data, via USB connectivity, to your PC for further analysis. Additional features include Max/Min and Hold functions, over- and under -range indication, fast/slow response, analog AD/DC outputs, and USB connectivity. Automatic power -off conserves battery life. Plus the NIST-traceable precalibration means you get reliable measurements right out of the box, saving you time and money! gle Earth Pro dit View Tcols Add Help • CI': Primary Database {E3 Announcements Borders and Labels Places Photos =' Roads 3D Buildings_ Ocean Weather %' Gallery .. i Global Awareness More errain Line Path Polygon Cirde 30 path 3D polygon Measure the distance between t.!!o points on the ground Map Length: Ground Length: Heading: Mouse Navigation 448.05 Feet 448.25 130,38 degrees R&R Boundary Imagery Date: 7/17/2019. 2 anemometers were used to verify wind velocity was not greater than 5 mph before reporting noise data. Distance to first locomotive 881 feet Composite Baseline • The composite baseline will be seen on some graphs. • It is the average noise from 2 nights and mornings, 8/27/2019 and 4/27/2020, when there was no noticeable noise from the R&R facility. • The time interval is approximately 9:30 pm to 5:45 am. 65.00 60.00 Composite Baseline August 27, 2019 and April 27, 2020 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 in CO N rn r in rn N rn r in rn N rn r in rn N rn r in rn N rn r in rn N rn r in rn in N in N d- N d- N d- O M O M O rJ in N in fV ▪ N ▪ N O M O M O N in N Lf1 N .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. In- .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. � Ol M CO N I7- N Cc; O . - in CO M in N Cc; O In 0 � ro M I� N ro N V1 O � CO M I-i N M� O N M� O N M� in N N E in N N E In O N M In O N M In O N M� O N M .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . In- .. .. N N N N N N m m m m M O O O O N N N N N N N N M m m M lf1 lf1 In - IN N N N N N N N N N N 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 Train Arrival July 27, 2019 Time is MDT m m ti -(0 ,-I (0 ti(o ti(o ti� ti m m N N N N O O in in IC O M lD Ol N In CO N CO- CZ; CO in in in O 00 m m CO- m m CO- CO- m ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ▪ ti ▪ ti Ol ti ti ti ti ti ti m m N N N N O O lf1 N V1 CO N ▪ n O M lD CO N N N N N N M M M M ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ti N � - ti ▪ ti -(0 ,-I (0 ,-I (0 ,-I (0 ,-I (0 ,-I (0 ,-I (0 ti(0 ti(0 ti(0 ti(0 ti d- m m N N ti ti o o in in d - m m N N ti ti o o in in IC O rM lD Ol N In CO N M Lb. Ol N In CO N ▪ n O M lD CO N - in in in in o 0 o ti ti ti ti N N N rn rn rn d- d- d-.7 In d- d- d- Lfl in n n n n n n n n n n n n n n nin- ▪ d- ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti N N N N 0 N in N N N N ▪ N ti ti o o in in O M Cc; Ol N lf1 CO N M Cc; Ol N lf1 CO N d- in O O O O N N N N N N N m m m CC; CC; CC; CC; CC; iD CC; CC; CC; CC; CC; CC; CC; CC; CC; CC; ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti Train Departure August 4, 2019 Time is MDT 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 o CO in N (7) lD M o CO in N Ol lD M o CO in N (7) lD M o CO in N Ol lD M o CO in N Ol l0 M o CO in N Ol l0 M o CO cO N lf1 N O N lf1 M N N O M N 111 N O ▪ N 111 M N N o CO N 111 CO o'7 ▪ r•1 111 M N N O c -I LC) ▪ CO o ▪ N LC) M c -I LC) N o ▪ d N LC) CO o N o ro N ▪ lf1 N 0 o o o N o o o o lf1 oCc; Cc;o o CD CD 01 Ol O N N N N M lf1 Cc; Cc; I� n CD Ol Ol O O N N N M lf1 lf1 Cc; I� n CD CD Ol o o N N CO CO CO lf1 lf1 Cc;CO CO CCO1 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N CO CO COM CO CO CO CO CO CO CO COM CO CO CO CO CO 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 Locomotives arrive I rfl in ti rfl in ti rfl in ti rfl in ti rfl in ti rfl in ti rfl in ti rfl in ti m l oCc;N CO In N n in O m 00-; Lfl NCO d- N n O l mCc;O N 0-;O O ti N N m�d- in O o O ti ti r.,1 m md- in in O N N N N N N N N N N N N N m m m m m m m m m m 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Train Departure August 20-21,2019 Time is MDT m in ti rfl in ti rfl in ti rfl in ti rfl in ti rfl in O n m Ol Cc; N CO Lfl N r O Cc; m Ol in.. in O O ti ti t-.1 rfl rfl Lfl Lfl O N N N N rfl O c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I c -I N N N N N N Train departs ti m r ti m r ti m r ti m r ti m r ti m r ti m r ti m r ti m r ti m r ti m r ti CO ▪ N n m O Cc;N Ol Vl C N O l O n m OlCc;C N O Vl l N n OCc; m Ol Vl N CO lfl O O ti N N m m lfl lfl O N N N N m lfl O O N N N m m lfl lfl O N N N m m m m m m m m m m lfl lfl Cr; lfl lfl lfl lfl Cr; lfl lfl Cc; Cc; Train Arrival August 21, 2019 Time is MDT 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 in in in in in in In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In in i--I CO in i--I M in i--I M in i--I M in i--I M in i--I M in i--I M in i--I M in i--I M In i--I M in i--I M in i--I M in i--I M in i--I M in i--I M In i--I M in i--I M in i--I M in i--I M in i--I M in i--I M in i--I M in i--I M in i--I M In CD IC IC IC co co co rn rn rn o 0 o ti ti ti N N N M M M ▪ V V V D D D n n CO CO CO O O O O O O N N N N N N M M M V V V D D D n n CO CO ▪ ,i- _O Ol Ol Ol o 0 0 ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti N N N N N N N N N N N N N ▪ N ▪ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N m m m m m m m m m • m • m • m • m • m • m • mm m m m m m m m m m m m m m ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N • N • N • N • N • N • N • N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Train Departure September 7, 2019 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 O l0 N CO O LD N CO O LD N CO O LD N CO O LD N CO O LD N CO O LD N CO O c -I rfl d- O N CO Lf1 O N d- V1 c -I N d- O c -I CO d- O N CO lf1 O N d- in c -I N d- O c -I CO d- .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. O. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ,,,,,,, l0 Ii n n n CO CO CO Ol Ol Ol Ol O O O O N N N N N N N m m m m N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N rl IN IN rl IN IN rl IN IN rl IN IN rl IN IN rl IN IN rl IN IN rl IN IN rl IN IN rl IN IN rl IN IN rl N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N rl Time is MDT O l0 N CO d O l0 N CO d O l0 N CO d O l0 N CO d O l0 N CO d O l0 N CO d O l0 N CO d O l0 N CO d O l0 N CO C M lf1 O N lf1 N N d- O N M d- O N M lf1 O N lf1 N N d- O N M d- O N rfl lf1 O N lf1 N N d- O N M O r lf1 lf1 lf1 lf1 l0 l0 l0 N. n n n CO CO CO CO Ol Ol Ol Ol jr-_; O O N N N N N N N N M M M M DO- DO- DO- DO - IN N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO M r N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N r Train Arrival September 13, 2019 Time is MDT l Train Arrival l CO CD ti m ti M m O lD N CO ▪ O lD N CO d- 0 d- CO CO N N N c -I c -I O 00 Ol In ,--I IC CO- Ol In ,--I IC CO- Ol CO In In O O N N N CO CO N N N CO- M CO- CO- M CO- N N N N N N N N N N N M LII O LII CO - co CD LII N CO ▪ N O CD N N O O m CD m rl N CO ti o O CZ) O O o 0 CO ▪ O lD N V1 N n rn Ol N M CO N N N N N CO In In rl O D N CO N N N O • CO- Ol lf1 O N N N N N N N d - 0 lD N CO d- o lf1 in N n N Ca O lD CO CO ▪ In 00 N N N N N M M N CO CO N CO ti ti M M CD � N N N O N M M O lD N CO d- 0 lD N CO ▪ O lD N CO N ti ti 0 0 0 In lf1 ▪ CO CZ) N CO O Cc; N n M Ol V1 N n M Ol M ▪ In O O In M M M M .7 '7 '7 O D N CO N N N O f N • CO - 0 N N N In In lf1 lf1 Ol In In m In Train Departing September 21, 2019 Time is MDT 100.00 90.00 80.00 70.00 60.00 50.00 40.00 O N .7 l0 CO O N .7 l0 CO O N .7 l0 CO O N .7 l0 CO O N .7 l0 CO O N .7 l0 CO O N .7 l0 CO O N .7 l0 CO O N .7 l0 CO O N .7 l0 CO O N .7 l0 CO O N .7 l0 CO O N .7 l0 CO O N .7 l0 CO O N O N d - O N in c -I M lf1 c -I d- ON d - O M lf1 c -I M m N d - O N d - c -I M lf1 c -I M O N d - O N in c -I M lf1 c -I ▪ O N ▪ prom c -I M ul N d - O N ▪ c -I M lf1 c -I M O N d - O N in c -I M lf1 c -I ▪ O N N N M m m lf1 lf1 l0 l0 l0 n n n CO CO CO 01 01 O O O N N N N N m m r:,-; lf1 lf1 lf1 l0 l0 n n n CO CO CO 01 01 01 O O N N N N N N m m DO DO DO lf1 lf1 lf1 Cc; Cc; Cc; DO DO CO N N N N N N N ▪ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ▪ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD Train Arrival September 27, 2019 Time is MDT 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 o ti o ti co co • m rn rn M in L co Ol o N N M in L co Ol o N N M in L co Ol o N N M in L co Ol o N N M in L co Ol o N N M in L co Ol o N N M in L co rn M ▪ lf1 o N N ro lf1 o N N M ▪ lf1 o N N lf1 o N N M ▪ lf1 o N M ▪ lf1 o N N M ▪ lf1 o N M ▪ lf1 o N N M ▪ lf1 N N M ▪ lf1 o N N ro ▪ O N N M ▪ lf1 o N N M co co co c0 Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 Cc; Cc; Cc; Cc; Cc; Cc; r n n n r CO CO CO CO COin in in in Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol O O O O 0) 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 01 01 01 01 Train Unloading September 27, 2019 Time is MDT 90.00 85.00 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 co N � 7r 7r m rl i--I N N Ol O N N CO In lD n CO Ol O r -I o m in ti m in c -I m in c -I m O N in.. O in.. N lb. N n N • n m CO ▪ Ol in O O N N N IN m m Vl Vl c -I N N N N N N N • N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N m ▪ in lD I� CO Ol O ti rJ CO o rJ O N O m lfl c -I m O In- O Cc; N Cc; N n N CO N N N N m m in Lfl O m M. m m M. m M. m M. rn N N N N N N c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i N N m ▪ lf1 lD I� CO Ol O N N m ▪ lf1 lD I� CO Ol O N N m ▪ In lD N ▪ O N d O N d O m lfl ti m lfl ti m lfl ti m O N d O N CZ) N n N n m CO m Ol ▪ Ol Lfl O Lfl N Cc; N n N Ca m CO ▪ Ol ▪ O ▪ Lfl Lfl O O ti ti rJ rJ m m ▪ L l In O O ti ti N N m m ▪ In O n N ▪ N ▪ N ▪ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Ol O N N m lfl lD I� co Ol o c -I N m lf1 lD m lf1 ti m lf1 ti m lf1 ti m 0 N d o N d C m O ▪ Ol � O V1 O lD i--I n N n m o CO m Ol O N N N N m�� lfl In O O ti ti N N m m O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N m Train Departing October 15, 2019 Time is MDT 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 Sunrise 7:10 am Weld County Code noise limit is 50 dB during this period 45.00 40.00 rn O Lfl ti rm O Lfl rl l� r'm al Lfl rl l� rn al Lfl rl l� r'm al Lfl ti rn O Lfl ti rn O Lfl rl l� r'm al Lfl rl l� r'm al Lfl ti rn O Lfl ti rn O Lfl ti rn O Lfl ti rn O Lfl ti rn O Lfl ti rn O Lfl ti l� rm M Lfl O N d- V1 c -I N d- O c -I CO d- O N M Lfl O N d- V1 c -I N d- O N CO d- O N M Lfl O N d- V1 rl r'J O c -I CO d- 0 N M Lfl O fV d- Lfl c -I N d- O N CO d- O N M Lfl O N d- V1 c -I r'J ▪ O c -I CO d- O N M Lfl .. .. .. .. .. .. M. M. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. r-iLil c -I N N N N m m M �� Lf1 Lf1 Lf1 Lf1 Cc; Cc; Cc; Cc; n n n CO CO CO CO L l L l L l Ol O O O O N N N N N N N M m m M o o o o o o o o o o o n n n n o o o o o o o O O O O N N N N Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Lfl O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti Train Arrival October 17, 2019, Early Time is MDT 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 rn N ti o rn CO I� ( ▪ d- m N ti o rn CO r L ▪ rot -NJ N O lf1 r,1 lf1 r,1 lf1 c -I c -I c -I r -I c -I O M O M O M O M O M .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. CD I� Ol O N M V1 lD CO Ol N N o o o CO O N M lD I� Ol in in in in in in lf1 O O O O O O ti r -I c -I c -I N N N N O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O) CO ▪ N M N N ti ti ti lD lf1 - M N N O N in N lf1 N lf1 N lD I� Ol O N CO- DI - IN N N CO CO CO CO Ol CO I� lD lf1 d M N N O ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti ▪ ti Cc; CO Ol N N Cr; n Ca ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ▪ ti ti ti ti ▪ ti O) m ti CO CO - 0 CO n ti ti Ol ti M N N O Ol CO I� lD lf1 CO O CO O N lf1 N lf1 N O N M • Lf1 lD IC Ol O N O O O O O O O ti ti N N • N N N N N N M rl M N N lf1 L rl i--I N N ti o O) CO I� N lf1 N i--I CO Ol N N lf1 N N N N N N N N N N N N ti N CD ti m m ti CO - 0 -1 CO I� O CO O CO CO CO Train Departure October 18, 2019 Time is MDT 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 i \iq,,,\A„vviN1,11Ativioi,)4 in rn ti rn in rn ti rm in rn ti rn in r rn ti rn in r rn ti rn in r rn ti rn in r rn ti rn in lc o ti CO Ln r rn ti rn in r O ti rn in lc o ti CO Ln r O N O d- CO c -I in m c -I O N O d- m c -I in m c -I O d- ni O d- m c -I in m ti O d- ni O d- m ti in m ti O d- N O d- CO ti in m ti 0 d- N O 7r CO c -I in CO c -I .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. V1 CD CD I� CO CO Ol O N N N m m� Ln Ln lD n CO CO Ol O O N N N m o In In o o o o o o O N N N m In Cc; Cc; n CO Ol Ol O N N N m m in �� V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti m d- CID CID N CID CID Ltl N CD o rn o N CID CID ti rn in r o ti m ti n rm d o O O O ti N m N m m m m m CD CD CD CD CD CD ro m ▪ n in C r co rn m m m m m m m m m rn ti CO in r rn N O m N lf1 m Train Arrival October 20, 2019 Time is MDT 85.00 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 ▪ CO N l0 O d- ill ti d o CO 01 N N ▪ lf1 CD MO O O O O n co co co co co co ti CD co Ol co O o m N N ti ti M co co ti co co O m CO Ol ti ti co CO ti co M co O o m N CD co ti Ol CD CD O o m N M m m d - CO N l0 O d- CO N l0 O d- ill ti d o rm in d ▪ o rm di CD n Ol O N M l0 r CO co Ltl co co M Ltl co O � m in CO Ltl co CD co O o m O N 0 0 0-; m d - CO N N CC; O O o m m m O o m 0 0 m m Ol 0-; CO ti rl C7-1 N lD d N ti ti rnrn m m m co ti CD m Ol m O o m N N N rnrn M Ol CO ti Ol CrS Ol O o m CO Ol N rnrn Ol co ti Ol M Ol O o m m m rnrn 0-; CO N l0 O d- CO N l0 ti ▪ o rn in ti Ol O N M l0 r Ol m 0) 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 m Ltl m m CO Ltl M C7-1 0-; Train Arrival November 15, 2019 Time is MST 70.00 65.00 60.00 1\t‘11/14\100A. 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 i LmNkilwi Weld County Code noise limit is 50 dB during this period o in o if) o in o if) o in o if) o in o if) o in o if) o in o if) o in o if) o in o if) o in o if) o in o if) o in o if) o in o if) o in o if) o in o if) o in o if) o in o if) o in o if) o In o In o In o In N N N N m m d- d- in in o o N N N N M M in in o o N N N N M M d- d- in in o o N N N N M M ccN r'J M d- d- In In o o -I -I M cN r'J M CO -CO -CO -d- d- In In o o c -I -I M d- d- In In o o c -I c -I N N .. .. .. CO- CO- CO- CO- - ▪ .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. In- .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ▪ .. N N N N N N N N N N N N N ▪ N ▪ N ▪ N ▪ N ▪ N ▪ N N N ▪ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Train Departure November 17, 2019 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 Locomotives idling I Motion begins Train stops Horns lD O ▪ CO N lD O ▪ CO N lD O ▪ CO N lD O ▪ CO N lD O CO LIDO ▪ CO N lD O ▪ CO lD O ▪ CO N lD O ▪ CO N lD O CO N lD O ▪ CO N lD O ▪ CO N lD O ▪ CO N lD O CO N lD O ▪ CO N lf1 N ▪ O M Lf1 N ▪ O M lf1 N ▪ O M lf1 N ▪ O M lf1 N O M lf1 N ▪ O M lf1 N ▪ O M lf1 N ▪ O M lf1 N O ▪ O M lf1 N O M lf1 N ▪ O M lf1 N ▪ O M lf1 N ▪ O M lf1 N ▪ O M lf1 N O M IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC N M M V1 V1 lD lD lD I� n CO CO CO Ol Ol O O O N N N N N m m V1 V1 lD CC; LA I� n CO CO CO Ol Ol O N N N N N M M ▪ V1 V1 lD lD lD IC IC CO CO CO Ol Ol O O O N N N N IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC V1 V1 V1 V1 ▪ V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 O O O O O O O O O O ▪ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ti tiO ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ▪ ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti N N N N N N N • IC IC IC IC IC N N M N November 19, 2019, Early Time is MST 90.00 85.00 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 pliviiillolipitkoovilliolithiiiiiklits4veititaifilikAloilivilkipiv 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Train Departure December 19, 2019 Time is MST 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 I I I I I", o M (ID Ol N in co N ▪ I-no M lD Ol N in co Ol N in co N ,r I, o ro lD Ol N in co ti ,r I, o m l0 01 N in co ti ,r I, o m l0 0, N Lfl co ti • o rn L.0 rn N in co co l0 01 N in co ti O N N ▪ lf1 0 N M ▪ In N N M in 0 N N ▪ lf1 0 N M ▪ ▪ 0 N N M in 0 N M ▪ In N N M d- 0 N N ▪ lf1 0 N M ▪ In N N M in 0 N M ▪ In 0 N M d- 0 N N ▪ lf1 0 N M lf1 N N M in 0 N N ▪ lf1 0 N M . .. .. .. .. . . . . .. .. .. .▪ . 0 0 0 0 o N N N N N N N N N m m m m m in in in in in co co co co co Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol o 0 0 o N N N N N N N N N m m m m m ▪ in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in ▪ in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 .. .. N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M M M co- co- co- co- co- co- co- co.. co.. co.. co.. co.. co.. M M M M M co- co- co- co.. co.. M M M M M M M M dB(A) 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 Train Arrival March 6, 2020 Time is MST i l0 N CO d- O l0 N CO ▪ O l0 N CO d- O l0 N CO ▪ O l0 N CO d- O l0 N CO ▪ O l0 N CO d- O l0 N CO ▪ O l0 N CO d- O l0 N CO ▪ O l0 N CO d- O l0 N CO ▪ O l0 N CO d- O l0 N CO ▪ O l0 N CO d- O d- in in o c -I c -I N N M d- d- in in o c -I c -I N N M d- d- in in o c -I c -I N N M d- d- in in o c -I c -I N N M d- d- in in o c -I c -I N N M 7r. 7r. in in o c -I c -I N N M d- d- in in o c -I c -I N N M d- d- in in o c -I l0 l0 l0 I� n n n n n n n n n Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ca Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M d- d- m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- d- O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Train Arrival, April 27-28, 2020 Time is MDT 75.00 70.00 Nearest Approach 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 Baseline elevated due to idling of locomotives of in N l� rn of in N l� rf of in N l� rf of in N l� rn of in N l� rf of in N rn rn in N rn rn in N l� rf of in N l� rf of in N rn rn in N rn rn in N rn rn in N rn rn in N rn rn in N rn rn in N N d- O N r'n ▪ o rJ M in O fV d- in N r'J ▪ O N rM ▪ o rJ M in O fV d- in N r'J O N rM ▪ o rJ M in O fV d- in N r'J ▪ O N rM ▪ o rJ M in O fV d- in N r'J ▪ O N rM ▪ o rJ M in O fV d- in N rJ d- 0 .. CO- .. .. .. .. .. .. .. M. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. I� O o N CO in.. N I� M O Lb' N CO in.. N I� � O Cc; N Ol o N I-i � O Cc; N Ol in N o O Cc; M Ol in.. N in o O Cc; rn— rl In N CO in O n M Ol rl N ro O n r:,-; o Cc; N CO � N I� M Ol o N CO � N ro M O � in O O �--� �--� N M M � in in O O �--� N N M � � in in O �--� �--� N m m � � in O O �--� N N m m � in in O �--� �--� N N M � � in O O �--� �--� N M M � in in O O �--� N N M � � in in O �--� �--� N m m � in .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. M. .. M. M. .. .. .. .. M. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. N N N N N N N N N N N N m m m m m m m m m m O O O O O O O O O ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti N N N N N N N N N m m m m m m m m m m lf1 lf1 lf1 lf1 lf1 lf1 lf1 lf1 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Train Departure April 29, 2020 Time is MDT 90.00 Departure 80.00 70.00 60.00 50.00 40.00 30.00 O) O Ol N in CO n ti N m Ol lf1 O lf1 O O N N N N N N N N m L In CD N ▪ N m L O M Ol m m m m Ol N lf1 ▪ In m m m CO N ▪ n O M lD O) N In CO ti ▪ r", lf1 N N M lf1 o N N ▪ In O N m Ol V1 O V1 O lD N lD N lD N n N n In O r -I c -I N N M M 7r. 7r. In In O O m in in M lD Ol N lf1 O N N M In O M CO M CO M Ol N N N N m m in in in In In In m n ti N m Ol lf1 O lf1 In O N N ▪ (0 O) O M lD O) N in CO O N N M lf1 o ti M O 0 O V1 O CD M ro N CD O O N N N N M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ol m CD m Train Arrival May 1, 2020 Time is MDT 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o m o 0 o o o N N ro-o o o o In -o In -o o o o o co co o o O O ti ti N N m m In In I-i I-i co co rn rn O 6,-i ti N N m m IN IN In In CD CD n n co O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. In- , -I In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Train Arrival May 6, 2020 Time is MDT 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 I� l0 in M N N O 01 CO I� l0 in o N N m In O O N IN rM O r rn Ol V1 N r O Cc; N CO N IN M M In In O N N N N M M CO- M M M CO- O O O O O N N N N N N N N N O 01 N M M M Ol lf1 N In In O O O N N CD N O Ol CO I� lD O O N N M O I� M Ol lf1 N O O N N N M N N N N N N M N O N N O Cc; f In L In O CD CO- O N M M m LII CO - C7) CO IC l0 In d- M In O O N N M In O I� rM 0 l0 N CO O Cc; M In O N N N N M lf1 M N N O 01 N m m 61 In In O N N - In In In Cri CD L In o C.71 CD N M m N O Ol CO IC l0 In In O O N IN rM in in N I� M 01 V1 N IC in o o N N N m m N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N rfl m � N N CO- CO- Cri M N N N CO In Cri Train Departure May 18, 2020 Time is MDT 90.00 85.00 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 Train made 1 circuit around loop before departing (7) lD M o c0 in N Ol lD M o c0 in N Ol lD M o c0 in N Ol lD M o c0 in N Ol lD M o c0 in N Ol lD M o c0 in N Ol in in in lf1 M M M f4 N N N N N N 0 0 0 lf1 in in lf1 M M M fV fV fV rl N N N 0 0 0 lf1 in in lf1 M M M fV fV fV rl N N N 0 0 0 lf1 Cc; c0 I� Ol O N N M V1 lD I� c0 Ol O N N M V1 V1 lD I� c0 Ol O N N M V1 CD r: -:c0 Ol O N N M V1 CD I� c0 Ol O N N M V1 CD I� c0 Ol O N N M M lf1 in in in in in in in in in N N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 8:48:03 PM 8:48:22 PM 8:48:41 PM 8:49:00 PM 8:49:19 PM 8:49:38 PM 8:49:57 PM 8:50:16 PM 8:50:35 PM 8:50:54 PM 8:51:13 PM 8:51:32 PM 8:51:51 PM 8:52:10 PM 8:52:29 PM 8:52:48 PM 8:53:07 PM 8:53:26 PM 8:53:45 PM 8:54:04 PM 8:54:23 PM 8:54:42 PM 8:55:01 PM 8:55:20 PM 8:55:39 PM 8:55:58 PM 8:56:17 PM 8:56:36 PM 8:56:55 PM 8:57:14 PM 8:57:33 PM 8:57:52 PM 8:58:11 PM 8:58:30 PM Train Arrival May 19, 2020 Time is MDT 8:58:49 PM 8:59:08 PM 8:59:27 PM 8:59:46 PM 9:00:05 PM 9:00:24 PM 9:00:43 PM 9:01:02 PM 9:01:21 PM 9:01:40 PM 9:01:59 PM 9:02:18 PM 9:02:37 PM 9:02:56 PM 9:03:15 PM 9:03:34 PM 9:03:53 PM 9:04:12 PM 9:04:31 PM 9:04:50 PM 9:05:09 PM 9:05:28 PM 9:05:47 PM 9:06:06 PM 9:06:25 PM 9:06:44 PM 9:07:03 PM 9:07:22 PM 9:07:41 PM 9:08:00 PM 9:08:19 PM 9:08:38 PM 9:08:57 PM 9:09:16 PM 9:09:35 PM 9:09:54 PM 9:10:13 PM 9:10:32 PM 9:10:51 PM 9:11:10 PM 9:11:29 PM 9:11:48 PM 9:12:07 PM Train Arrival May 28, 2020 Time is MDT 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 in CO ti of lr in rm ti of l", in rm ti of l", in rm ti of l", in rm ti of lr in rm ti of lr in rm ti of lr in rm ti of lr in rm ti of lr in rm ti of lr in rm ti of lr in r'm N of M in c -I N ▪ O N d- In c -I M in c -I N ▪ O N ▪ in c -I M in c -I N ▪ O N ▪ in c -I M in c -I N ▪ O N ▪ in c -I M in c -I N d- O N d- In c -I M In c -I N ▪ O N ▪ In .. In- .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . In- .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. In- Vl lD lD lD Ii n n n CO CO CO Ol Ol Ol O O O O N N N N N N M m m M IN IN IN In In In lD lD lD lD n n n CO CO CO Ol Ol Ol Ol O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M m m m m m m m m M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Train Unloading June 1, 2020 Time is MDT 100.00 90.00 80.00 70.00 60.00 50.00 40.00 30.00 d- m N N o in M IN d o in m N N o in m N N o in M N N o in m N N o in m N N o in m N N o in m N N o in M N c -1 o in M N c -1 o in M IN d o in m N N o in . CO .. .. .. .. •.. . .. .. CO- .. •.. .. CO.. .. .. •.. .. . .. .. .. •.. .. .. CO.. .. •.. .. .. •.. .. .. . .. •.. .. .. .. . •.. .. .. .. . .. • .. .. .. .. .. •. .. .. .. .. .. •.. .. .. .. .. •.. . .. .. .. .. o o N C. 13 o M IN N lf1 Ol lD o in CO N C. 13 Ol M I-i N r.J Ol N lD o CO N lfl Ol o o N lf1 CO N Cc; o� ro N lf1 Ol M In N o o N Cc; o r n N in.. Ol M I� O in CO N Cc; o M I-i N r.J Ol M Cc; o CO N Cc; Ol 0 o ti ti N N N m m m�� in in in O O O N N N N N M M�� in in in O O N N N N N M M M�� in in O O O N N N N N M M M�� in in in O O N N N N N N M M�� in in in . .. .. .. .. •.. • M. M. M. M. M. • •.. • M. M. . . . . . . . . . . •. . •. . . .. .. .. .. •.. • .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. •.. •.. •.. .. .. .. N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M lfl lfl lfl lfl lfl lfl lfl lfl lfl lfl lfl lfl lfl lfl lfl lfl lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I rl i--I i--I 90.00 85.00 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 Train Unloading June 4, 2020 Time is MDT Thurder Locomotives in vicinity V1 N Ol lD CO lf1 N Ol lD M O I� N CO lf1 N Ol lD lf1 N Ol lD M O I� N CO lf1 N "la) N CO lf1 N :mm(7) lD M O I� N CO lf1 N Ol (so M O I� N CO lf1 N Ol lD M O I� N CO lf1 N M N N O N lf1 M O N lf1 M N Li") N O c -I lf1 M O N O M ti lf1 ,j0O O N if) M c -I N O M N lf1 O N lf1 M N N O M N lf1 M O N lf1 M N N (DM c-I lf1 M O N lf1 M N lf1 N O N lf1 M m rn o ti N co rn o D N m O o n ti N co rn o D N m co o n ti N co m rn in o ti m co o n r D N co m rn o ti m co rn N D N m O C9- 29. ti N co lf1 lf1 O N N N N M M lf1 O O ti ti N N M lf1 if) O O N N N M M lf1 lf1 O N N N N M M lf1 O O N N N N M lf1 lf1 O O N N N r00 - M lf1 lf1 O O N N N M M lf1 O O N N N N V1 V1 lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD I� n n n n n n n n n n CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N m m m m m m rl i--I i--I rl i--I rl Train Unloading June 6, 2020 Time is MDT 100.00 90.00 80.00 70.00 60.00 50.00 40.00 N DO .7 O lD N N N M M if; CO O N N N N N N lD N DO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO .7 O lD N CO d- O lD N CO O O O N N N M M lf1 O O N N N M M lf1 O O N N N M M lf1 O O N N N M M lf1 O O N N N M M lf1 O O N N N M M lf1 O O N N N M M lf1 O V1 I� Ol N M M if; CO O N if; CO Ol if; CO O N lD Ol N M V1 I� Ol N M V1 I� O N lD CO O N lD CO N M V1 IC Ol N M V1 N N N N N N N N M M M M lf1 L.n L.n lf1 lf1 O O O O O N N N N N N N N N M M M M M lf1 lf1 lf1 lf1 O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol 6666666666 O OCSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N rl Train Arrival June 6, 2020 Time is MDT 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 rl co In N Ol lD m o r", co In N Ol lD m co In N Ol lD m co In N Ol lD m co In N Ol lD m co In N Ol lD m co m o m lf1 N lf1 N d o m o N lf1 N m o m lf1 N lf1 N o m o N lf1 N m o m lf1 N lf1 N m o N lf1 N m N N N m m m In In CO CO CO Ol Ol O O N N N N N m m in in Cc; Cc; r n r co co Ol Ol O O N N N N N m m in in Cc; Cc; Cc; r r co co Ol Ol in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in in In o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 90.00 80.00 70.00 60.00 50.00 40.00 30.00 Train Arrival and Plant Noise June 10-11, 2020 Time is MDT Train Arrites Loud noises coming from plant activi y r` o CO (0 O r.J in co ti r o m Lr rn r.J in co ti r o ro L rn r.J in co ti r o ro L rn r.J in co ti r o ro L rn r.J in co ti r o m MC) ry n co ti r o m ry o m ti n ry o n m ti n ry o in m ti o ry o in ro ti o ry ti in m ti o ry ti in ro r.J o d- ry ti in ro r.J o m ti in m ry o m ti in ry ry o co in m ti co � ry rn r ry o co m ti rn r ry o r m ti co ti rn r ry o co n m ti rn ry rn r` C m o co m ti rn r ry o r m m n n o ti N N M f f O N N M M f O O N N M f o N N N M f O N N N M f f O ti N N ro f O O N N M M f O N N N M ti ti ti ti ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry m m m m m m m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ry N N N N N N ry m m m m m m t;-; n n n n (A N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N IRELAND STAPLETON VIA E-MAIL Angela Snyder Weld County Planner P.O. Box 758 1150 "O" Street Greeley, CO 80632 E-mail: asnvdlcrki,\A c1cI [.}v .corn EXHIBIT 93 June 12, 2020 Re: Weld County Rezoning Application COZ20-0004 Dear Ms. Snyder: JAMES R. SILVESTRO ATTORNEY AT LAW 303.628.3632 (direct) jsilvestro@irelandstapleton.com As you know, this fin -n represents the Indianhead West Homeowners Association, Inc., Rockin S Ranch LLC, John Cummings, David Kisker, Gary Oplinger, Wolfgang Dirks, and James Piraino (collectively, the "Neighborhood Defendants"), each of whom is a named Defendant in Rock & Rail LLC's ("Rock & Rail") ongoing federal lawsuit regarding the Highway 34 Facility. The Neighborhood Defendants live, work, and/or own property in the vicinity of the Highway 34 Facility and, as such, are interested parties with respect to Weld County Rezoning Application COZ20-0004 (the "Rezoning Application"). This letter follows our earlier letter to the County Attorney dated May 8, 2020 [PC Exhibit 23], which identified several legal issues that compel the County to deny the Rezoning Application and further identified a serious due process violation that the County has yet to address. The County never responded to that letter, and all of the issues identified in our May 8, 2020 letter remain unresolved and are expressly incorporated herein. The purpose of this letter is to specifically respond to (i) the Staff Report that you prepared regarding the Rezoning Application and (ii) the Planning Commission's Draft Resolution (which appears to largely incorporate the Staff Report verbatim), and to more generally explain the Neighborhood Defendants' continued vehement opposition to the Rezoning Application. Please confirm that this letter will be made a part of the administrative record for the Rezoning IRELAND STAPLETON PRYOR & PASCOE, PC Angela Snyder June 12, 2020 Page 2 Application' and that it will be provided to and reviewed by each of the Planning Commissioners and County Commissioners in advance of their respective hearings on the Rezoning Application. Contrary to the unsupported and predetermined reasoning set forth in both the Staff Report and the Draft Resolution, Rock & Rail cannot meet its burden to satisfy the criteria for rezoning under Weld County Code (W.C.C.) Sections 23-2-30.A and 23-2-40.B and the Rezoning Application must be denied. In particular, the proposed rezoning is: (1) inconsistent with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 22 of the County Code); and (2) incompatible with existing surrounding uses and land use designations. Moreover, if approved, the proposed rezoning will result in illegal spot zoning. Each of these fatal defects is addressed in turn below. 1. The Proposed Rezoning Is Inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. As a preliminary matter, both the Staff Report and the Draft Resolution impliedly confirm that the requested rezoning is not based upon a finding that the existing zoning is "faulty" or "that changing conditions in the area warrant a Change in Zone." Accordingly, the Planning Department's only available basis for finding that the first required element for a rezoning (under W.C.C. § 23-2-30.A.1 and W.C.C. § 23-2-40.B.1) has been satisfied is that the proposed rezoning must be "consistent with the policies of Chapter 22" of the Weld County Code (i.e., the Weld County Comprehensive Plan). Rather than examine the Rezoning Application for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan in its entirety, the Staff Report and the Draft Resolution instead review the rezoning request only for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan's "Industrial development Goals and Policies." W.C.C. § 22-2-80. This is impermissible. In effect, Planning Department staff has assumed that the subject property should be rezoned as industrial and then worked backwards through the Comprehensive Plan's policies and goals for industrial properties to justify the rezoning. This reasoning turns the rezoning process on its head and completely ignores that Rock & Rail has the burden to demonstrate that the subject property can be rezoned from agricultural to industrial in a manner that is fully consistent with the entire Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan contains numerous applicable provisions that have been flatly ignored by Planning Department staff. For example, under W.C.C. § 22-2-10.B, the County has recognized "the importance of maintaining large contiguous parcels of productive agricultural lands in nonurbanizing areas of the County to support the economies of scale required for large agricultural operations." Similarly, the Comprehensive Plan's "Agricultural goals and policies" 1 As discussed herein, the history of the Highway 34 Facility is critical to the County's understanding and evaluation of the Rezoning Application. Accordingly, the County must also include the full administrative record associated with USR15-0027 as part of the administrative record for this matter. Finally, in order to preserve all issues for a potential appeal, the County must include certified copies of Chapters 22 and 23 of the Weld County Code as well as any other County laws, ordinances, rules, or regulations that the County might rely upon or otherwise review as part of its consideration of the Rezoning Application. IRELAND STAPLETON PRYOR & PASCOE, PC 3270089.2 Angela Snyder June 12, 2020 Page 3 expressly recognize the importance of "[r]espect[ing] and encourage[ing] the continuation of agricultural land uses and agricultural operations for purposes which enhance the economic health and sustainability of agriculture." W.C.C. § 22-2-20.A. As the County knows, prior to Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.'s ("MMM") development of the Highway 34 Facility, the subject property was designated by the USDA as Prime farmland and had been used as productive farmland for at least the preceding 25 years to grow corn, wheat, and alfalfa.2 Although MMM and Rock & Rail have since destroyed this farmland through the development of the Highway 34 Facility, they did so under a USR permit that was subsequently determined to be unlawful by the Colorado Court of Appeals and then voluntarily abandoned by MMM. The Highway 34 Facility currently exists and operates at the subject property in violation of the Weld County Code and the subject property should never have been converted from its longstanding agricultural use. Beyond the subject property, the Comprehensive Plan also dictates that the County must consider the impact of the proposed rezoning on surrounding agricultural uses. The County's Zoning Map confirms that every parcel surrounding the subject parcel is currently zoned with the A (Agricultural) zone district (depicted in light green): 2 The history and status of the subject property prior to MMM's (ultimately unlawful) construction of the Highway 34 Facility was well documented within the administrative record for USR15-0027 that was previously certified to the Weld County District Court as part of Case No. 2015CV030776. Given the importance of this very recent history to the present Rezoning Application, the County must incorporate the administrative record for USR15-0027 as part of the administrative record for COZ20-0004. IRELAND STAPLETON PRYOR R PASCOE, PC 3270089.2 Angela Snyder June 12, 2020 Page 4 The Comprehensive Plan makes clear that these surrounding agricultural parcels' have a "Right to Farm" and that the County must take steps to "[r]educe potential conflicts between varying land uses in the conversion of agricultural lands to other land uses." W.C.C. §§ 22-2-20.I, .J. Despite these clearly articulated principles within the Comprehensive Plan, the County has thus far failed to consider the potential impact of the rezoning on surrounding agricultural users. If the Rezoning Application is approved, there will be nothing to limit the potential industrial uses of the site to the existing Highway 34 Facility and there will be nothing to stop incongruous industrial uses from generating industrial levels of noise, light, air, and water pollution to the immediate detriment of all surrounding land users. The Comprehensive Plan further provides that "[w]hen reviewing proposed industrial development, there should be a thorough examination of issues, such as compatibility with surrounding and regional uses ... and impacts on the natural environment." W.C.C. § 22-2-70.B. As discussed in more detail below, the proposed rezoning (which seeks to upzone the subject property to the most intense type of industrial land use within the County) is objectively incompatible with the existing surrounding agricultural and residential land uses. 2. Planning Department Staff Confirms that the Rezoning Will Be Incompatible with Existing Surrounding Uses. Both the Staff Report and the Proposed Resolution acknowledge that the proposed rezoning is incompatible with the existing residential subdivision to the immediate northeast of the subject property. Nevertheless, staff claims that this is somehow the fault of these longstanding residential homeowners and dismissively claims that the Indianhead Estates subdivision was "predestined to be surrounded by incompatibility." Staff makes this claim without acknowledging that the residential subdivision has been in place for more than ./arty nears without any significant industrial development in the area for almost all of that time.4 Indeed, as shown in the zoning map 3 Although two of the agricultural parcels adjacent to the subject property are currently subject to USRs, Planning Department staff recently confirmed in COZ20-0002 that USR's are "non- permanent" and thus cannot be used to establish that a new non -conforming use designation is compatible with otherwise incompatible surrounding zone designations. Moreover, all of the existing USRs within the vicinity of the subject property are required to meet the residential noise standard (i.e., a maximum of 55 dB during the day and 50 db at night) and cannot legally generate industrial levels of noise (unlike the subject property if the Rezoning Application is approved). 4 Without elaboration, Staff claims that the initial denial and then the subsequent approval of the Indian Estates subdivision in the 1970's "foreshadow[ed] decades of land use struggle." This unsupported claim ignores the fact that prior to 2015, there is no evidence that anyone ever suggested that the subject property, which is adjacent to a residential subdivision that has been in place for decades, would be an appropriate or desirable place to locate heavy industrial uses. IRELAND STAPLETON PRYOR & PASCOE, PC 3270089.2 Angela Snyder June 12, 2020 Page 5 included above, all of the properties that surround the subject property are still zoned entirely within the A (Agricultural) district.5 Rather than address the obvious incompatibility between the proposed industrial zoning and this long established residential subdivision, staff looks beyond the rezoning criteria and instead speculates regarding what potential land uses might come to pass in the future. Specifically, staff editorializes that "[i]t is likely that the Indianhead subdivision may be eventually surrounded by non-residential uses ...." Such idle and unsupported speculation cannot be used to justify a rezoning, which requires the applicant to demonstrate compatibility between the proposed rezoning and the existing surrounding uses. Beyond Indianhead Estates, staff also acknowledges that the subject property is surrounded by existing farms and a wedding/event center. Despite this recognition, staff makes no effort to explain how the most intensive industrial uses permitted within Weld County could be found to be compatible with these existing uses. Instead, the Staff Report and the Proposed Resolution rely upon the purported "mitigation" efforts at the Highway 34 Facility to claim that Rock & Rail has taken sufficient steps to ensure compatibility between these obviously incompatible uses. Staff s reliance upon these purported mitigation efforts is flawed for four reasons. First, the County previously found (as confirmed by the Colorado Court of Appeals) that industrial uses at the subject property can only be compatible with the surrounding residential uses if such industrial uses do not exceed the residential noise limit at all areas of the site that are adjacent to existing residential uses. Rock & Rail has never provided any evidence that the Highway 34 Facility can comply with this residential noise standard. Moreover, if the rezoning is approved, any subsequent industrial development at the subject site will only be required to comply with the industrial noise standard, which the County itself has confirmed is incompatible with surrounding residential uses. Second, despite the purported mitigation efforts, Rock & Rail has repeatedly claimed that it has no obligation to comply with the conditions of approval that MMM voluntarily accepted as part of the now -abandoned USR process. Accordingly, Rock & Rail claims that it has no obligation to maintain the site's berms and landscaping and, according to Rock & Rail, there is nothing that would require Rock & Rail to use the best available technology to reduce dust and other industrial pollution. Indeed, Rock & Rail has taken the position that all of its operations at the site are wholly exempt from any County land use laws or regulation. In the face of Rock & Rail's continued defiance, it is unreasonable for the County to nevertheless rely upon land use standards that Rock & Rail has repeatedly disavowed. 5 The County itself recently confirmed the incompatibility of industrial uses in this area when it denied COZ 15-0001, which would have changed the zoning of agricultural land to the north of the subject property to I-2. The County explicitly denied this rezoning because it found that industrial uses are incompatible with the existing uses and zone designations in this area. IRELAND STAPLETON PRYOR & PASCOE PC 3270089.2 Angela Snyder June 12, 2020 Page 6 Third, staffs reliance on future Site Plan Reviews to ensure sufficient mitigation through development standards and conditions of approval ignores the fact that the Highway 34 Facility is already operating as an illegal industrial operation. If the County approves the rezoning and thus retroactively legitimizes the Highway 34 Facility, Rock & Rail will continue to operate this heavy industrial facility without any further review, approval, or oversight. The County will not have a later opportunity to redress the incompatibility issues that currently exist with the Highway 34 Facility. Fourth, staffs reliance on the current status and operation of the subject property ignores the fact that the proposed rezoning seeks to create a vested right whereby Rock & Rail (or any successor in interest) can engage in any number of the highest possible intensity industrial land uses. Staff claims that compatibility issues with such future potential uses can be addressed through subsequent Site Plan Reviews, but this argument ignores the fact that the proposed rezoning will permanently change the zoning of the subject site from agriculture to high -intensity industrial. Moreover, any future Site Plan Reviews will be undertaken as an administrative process before the Planning Department and will not allow for public participation or final review by the Board of County Commissioners through a quasi-judicial process. If the rezoning is granted, then staffs unsupported prediction regarding the future industrial nature of this existing agricultural and residential corridor may very well become fait accompli. At that point, the neighboring residential and agricultural land users may be powerless to prevent any number of intense industrial land uses. The incompatibility of the proposed rezoning with the existing surrounding uses is confirmed by the referral comments from all surrounding jurisdictions —Windsor, Greeley, Johnstown, and Milliken —which oppose the proposed rezoning. In particular, Johnstown adopted Resolution No. 2020-13 to confirm its steadfast opposition to the proposed rezoning. This Resolution explains that "the heavy industrial uses permitted in an I-3 zone, including, but not limited to, operation of an asphalt plant, cement batch plant, aggregate processing facility, asphalt storage, cement storage and fuel storage, are wholly inconsistent with residential development" and that "heavy industrial uses on the Property, along with increased truck traffic, negatively impacts existing and future residential development by exposing residents to continuous industrial operations, forcing them to coexist with large, otherwise unplanned, industrial development and creating potential losses of property value, quiet enjoyment and quality of life." If the rezoning is approved, then the County will retroactively bless the unlawful Highway 34 Facility, which currently operates in open defiance of an opinion of the Colorado Court of Appeals and the Weld County Code's agricultural zoning at the site. If approved, neighboring residential and agricultural land users may well be powerless to push back against the increased train traffic, truck traffic (and corresponding road damage), industrial noise, fugitive dust, air pollution, water pollution, light pollution, visual impacts, reduced property values, and other public health and safety issues created by the Highway 34 Facility. Staff seeks to minimize the reality of these concerns by suggesting that the County has only received fourteen complaints regarding the Highway 34 Facility. This claim, however, lacks context and wholly ignores the undisputed history of the Highway 34 Facility. IRELAND STAPLETON PRYOR & PASCOE PC 3270089.2 Angela Snyder June 12, 2020 Page 7 Following the Neighborhood Defendants' successful challenge of the MMM USR before the Colorado Court of Appeals, MMM transferred the Highway 34 Facility to itself, through a wholly owned subsidiary, Rock & Rail. Rock & Rail then turned around and filed a lawsuit against the Neighborhood Defendants in September 2018 claiming that the Highway 34 Facility is completely exempt from any County land laws and seeking to prevent the Neighborhood Defendants from taking any efforts to limit Rock & Rail's operation of the Highway 34 Facility. Thereafter, Rock & Rail commenced its operation of the Highway 34 Facility in open defiance of County land use law. The Neighborhood Defendants, who have always disputed this claim, specifically asked the County in April 2018 to initiate an enforcement action against Rock & Rail for operating the Highway 34 Facility in contravention of the site's agricultural zoning. (Letter from M. Lacis to B. Barker dated Apr. 23, 2018 (attached hereto as Exhibit 1).) The County refused to respond to this initial request. The Neighborhood Defendants again reported this ongoing violation in January 2019 and again asked the County to initiate an enforcement action. (Letter from M. Lacis to B. Pascoe dated Jan. 25, 2019 (attached hereto as Exhibit 2).) Once again, the County ignored this request. Finally, after a third request dated March 26, 2019 (see Email from D. Kisker to S. James dated Mar. 26, 2019 (attached hereto as Exhibit 3)), the County responded that it would not consider any enforcement actions with respect to the Highway 34 Facility "until after the trial is concluded and judgment by the Federal District Court is issued." (Email from S. James to D. Kisker dated Apr. 17, 2019 (attached hereto as Exhibit 4).) The County repeatedly confirmed that it would ignore any complaints regarding the Highway 34 Facility such that it was pointless for the neighbors to continue making complaints. Given this history, it would be completely unfair for the County to now rely upon a perceived lack of complaints to claim that the Highway 34 Facility is compatible with surrounding uses. Contrary to the County's claims, the Highway 34 Facility has repeatedly upended the lives of the Neighborhood Defendants as well as others who live and work in the area. Not only have Rock & Rail and MMM created a situation whereby the Neighborhood Defendants have been forced to defend themselves against a publicly traded company with a market cap in excess of $11 billion in federal court, but the Neighborhood Defendants have been forced to live and work in the shadow of the Highway 34 Facility while Rock & Rail continues its illegal industrial operations without the necessary County land use approval. Ultimately, the County must be responsible for enforcing its land use rules and policing Rock & Rail's illegal industrial operation. Nevertheless, the Neighborhood Defendants have documented dozens of instances where the Highway 34 Facility has violated the residential noise standard (and at times even the industrial noise standard) as measured from adjacent residential properties. The noise and vibrations from the site have caused dishes to fall off of shelves and have resulted in countless sleepless nights. As measured from adjacent residential properties, the noise generated by the Highway 34 Facility regularly exceeds 70 dB and sometimes goes as high as even 90 dB. Beyond noise, the Highway 34 Facility regularly generates fugitive dust emissions that blow onto neighboring properties. The increased train traffic generated by the Highway 34 Facility has resulted in hours -long traffic jams. The increased truck traffic poses a public health and safety risk to all who regularly travel through the area. IRELAND STAPLETON PRYOR & PASCOE PC 3270089.2 Angela Snyder June 12, 2020 Page 8 Rock & Rail's operation of the Highway 34 Facility —and the disruption that it has caused to those who live and work in the area —is conclusive evidence of the incompatibility of the proposed rezoning to I-3. The objective incompatibility of high intensity industrial with the existing surrounding residential and agricultural uses and zone designations cannot be mitigated. Rock & Rail has failed to meet its burden, and the Rezoning Application must be denied. 3. The Rezoning Application Is a Blatant Request for Illegal Spot Zoning. Colorado law expressly forbids the reclassification of an isolated parcel of land for the narrow benefit of a single property owner when it is to the detriment of surrounding land owners and the uniformity of a comprehensive scheme of land use planning. Colorado's prohibition on spot zoning is rooted in the fundamental tenet that "unless a zoning line is drawn somewhere there can be no zoning at all." Clark v. City Boulder, 362 P.2d 160, 162 (Colo. 1961). In order to protect neighboring land owners and to ensure the stability and predictability of a holistic scheme of land use planning, an allegation of spot zoning examines "whether the change in question was made with the purpose of furthering a comprehensive zoning plan or [was] designed merely to relieve a particular property from the restrictions of the zoning regulations." Id. Colorado law prohibits unlawful spot zoning that "creates a small island of property with restrictions on its use different from those imposed on surrounding property." Whitelaw v. Denver City Council, 2017 COA 47, ¶ 63 (quoting Little v. Winborn, 518 N.W.2d 384, 387 (Iowa 1994)). As presented here, the Rezoning Application falls squarely within the prohibition on spot zoning as articulated in Clark v. Boulder. In that case, the Colorado Supreme Court rejected an attempt to rezone property from residential to commercial to permit the operation of a gas station adjacent to another business park, which also contained a gas station. 362 P.2d at 161, 163. In reversing the rezoning from residential to commercial, the Colorado Supreme Court refused to consider the fact that "the property may not be used as profitably for residential purposes as for commercial use" and instead focused on the neighbors' "right to rely on existing zoning regulations where there has been no material change in the character of the neighborhood which may require re -zoning in the public interest." Id. at 162. The Court further confirmed that such a change in the permissible land use would only be legitimate: [I]f the character and use of a district or the surrounding territory have become so changed since the original [zoning designation] was enacted that the public health, morals, safety and welfare would be promoted if a change were made in the boundaries or in the regulations prescribed for certain districts; but mere economic gain to the owner of a comparatively small area is not a sufficient cause to involve an exercise of this amending power for the benefit of such owner. Id. (quoting Leahy v. Inspector of Bldgs., 31 N.E.2d 436, 439 (Mass. 1941)). Consistent with this reasoning, the Clark Court reversed the rezoning from residential to commercial use on the grounds that "there is no indication that the [decision] was intended to further the comprehensive IRELAND STAPLETON PRYOR & PASCOE PC 3270089.2 Angela Snyder June 12, 2020 Page 9 general plan" and instead "has all the earmarks of a special act enabling the [applicant] to build" an incompatible land use. Id. at 161; see also Holly Development, Inc. v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs, 342 P.2d 1032, 1039 (Colo. 1959) (reversing a rezoning which "failed to take into consideration the need for reasonable stability in zoning regulations"). Here, the Rezoning Application also has "all the earmarks of a special act enabling" Rock & Rail to continue operating its incompatible land use. Rock & Rail has not made any showing that the area surrounding the subject property has significantly changed since the property was first zoned within the A (Agricultural) zone. The only thing that has changed is that the Colorado Court of Appeals reversed MMM's illegal USR after MMM had already proceeded at its own risk and at a cost of more than $60 million to construct the Highway 34 Facility while that appeal was still pending. Accordingly, Rock & Rail (as a wholly owned subsidiary of MMM) is pursuing this rezoning solely for its own narrow economic benefit. Moreover, if the rezoning is approved, it will result in an island of industrial zoned property surrounded by a sea of property zoned only for agricultural use. The history and context of Rock & Rail's Highway 34 Facility confirms that the Rezoning Application is merely an attempt to relieve the Highway 34 Facility from the restrictions of the A (Agricultural) zone. Accordingly, the County cannot approve the Rezoning Application without violating Colorado's prohibition on spot zoning, and the Rezoning Application must be denied. * * * Although MMM first commenced construction on the Highway 34 Facility at a time when it held a USR from the County, MMM expressly assumed the risk that the Neighborhood Defendants' ongoing appeal of that USR could result in the reversal of the USR and require MMM to remove its industrial improvements. Rather than accept that outcome, MMM instead transferred its $60 million facility to its wholly owned subsidiary, which has now operated this heavy industrial facility in open defiance of County land use law for almost two years and to the immediate detriment of the Neighborhood Defendants who have continued to live and work in the shadow of the Highway 34 Facility. At the same time, Rock & Rail initiated a federal lawsuit against the Neighborhood Defendants where it has steadfastly maintained that the County has absolutely no authority to regulate or otherwise mitigate its operations at the Highway 34 Facility. Now, against this backdrop, Rock & Rail asks the County to take the extraordinary step of rezoning this property to retroactively legalize its unlawful land use. But the County is under no obligation to help Rock & Rail fix MMM's imprudent assumption of the risk when it constructed the Highway 34 Facility while the appeal of the USR was still ongoing. Instead, the County must enforce the County Code as written. As explained above, Rock & Rail cannot possibly meet its burden of proof and the County must deny the Rezoning Application. IRELAND STAPLETON PRYOR & PASCOE PC 3270089.2 Angela Snyder June 12, 2020 Page 10 On behalf of the Neighborhood Defendants, we thank the County for its time and its careful consideration of these important issues. If the County has any questions regarding any of the foregoing, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, flies Silvestro cc: Tom Parko Jr. (tparko@weldgov.com) Bruce Barker, Esq. (bbarker@weldgov.com) Bob Choate, Esq. (bchoate@weldgov.com) Mark Lacis, Esq. 3270089.2 Exhibit 1 IRELAND STAPLETON April 23, 2018 SENT VIA EMAIL & US MAIL Bruce Barker Weld County Attorney 1150 O Street P.O. Box 758 Greeley, Colorado 80632-0758 bbarker(a co.wclt1.co.us Re: USR15-0027 Dear Mr. Barker: MARK E. LAOIS 303.628.3622 (direct) mlacis@irelandstapleton.com As you know, the Colorado Court of Appeals issued an Opinion dated November 22, 2017, in Case Number 2017CA463 (the "Opinion"). The Opinion holds that the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County (the "BOCC") violated the Weld County Code when it approved USR15-0027, that such "decision must be overturned," and that judgment should be entered in favor of the Plaintiffs. Following the issuance of the Opinion, Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. ("MMM") and the BOCC each filed Petitions for Rehearing, which were denied on March 15, 2018. The deadline for the BOCC and MMM to file Petitions for Certiorari to the Colorado Supreme Court was April 12, 2018. Both the BOCC and MMM elected not to file any Petition for Certiorari and therefore, waived further appeal. Consequently, the Opinion issued by the Colorado Court of Appeals is final and the issuance of a Mandate is imminent. By letter dated December 21, 2015, MMM expressly assumed the risk of proceeding with construction of its concrete and asphalt plant, notwithstanding the fact that the Plaintiffs were challenging the legality of such use through the courts. Specifically, counsel for MMM wrote: "Martin Marietta acknowledges that, in the event the litigation results in an invalidation of the approval of its Use by Special Review ("USR") permit for the Project, that it may have to cease activity, or remove improvements that have been installed pursuant to approved permits." A copy of MMM's December 21, 2015 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit A. The Court of Appeals' Opinion and the subsequent abandonment of any further appeal has now resulted in the "invalidation of the approval" of MMM's USR permit for the Project — which MMM expressly acknowledged in its "Acceptance of Risk" letter dated December 21, 2015. Ex. A. 2820643.1 IRELAND STAPLETON PRYOR & PASCOE,PC 717 17TH STREET, SUITE 2800, DENVER CO 80202 TEL 303.623.2700 FAX 303 623.2062 IRELANDSTAPLETON.COM April 23, 2018 Page 2 As a result of the invalidation of the USR permit, the real property at issue may only be used for those land uses which are "allowed by right" within the A (Agricultural) Zone District (see Weld County Code §§ 23-3-10, et seq.). The site can no longer be used for "mineral resource development facilities" (cf. id. § 23-3-40(A)) and the improvements built thereon must be removed. Accordingly, we respectfully request that the County: (1) enforce the existing zoning at the site located within the A (Agricultural) Zone District; and (2) compel MMM to immediately remove all improvements and return the site to the condition that existed before August 12, 2015, when USR15-0027 was initially approved. Please confirm by no later than Friday, April 27, 2018, that Weld County will immediately take all steps to require MMM to remove all improvements on the site. Because the continued unlawful activity on the site presents a public nuisance and a substantial risk of imminent harm to the surrounding landowners, this matter is of the utmost urgency. Sincerely, Mark E. Lacis cc: Mark Matthews, Esq. James R. Silvestro, Esq. 2820643.1 IRELAND STAPLETON PRYOR & PASCOE,PC Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck December 21, 2015 VIA ELECTRONIC AND REGULAR MAIL Bruce Barker Weld County Attorney 915 10th St P. O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 • 28 2015 Carolynne C. White Attorney at Law 303.223.1197 tel 303.223.0997 fax cwhite@bhfs.com RE: Weld LV, LLC & Gerrard Investments, LLC C/O Martin Marietta (USR15-0027), Acceptance of Risk, Development Processes Dear Bruce. As we have discussed, Martin Marietta Materials ("Martin Marietta") desires to continue to submit and process development approvals related to its asphalt plant, concrete plant and aggregate materials operation ("the Project") located off of County Road 13, south of State Highway 34 ("the Property"), approved by the County Commissioners on September 15, 2015, and challenged by opponents in the above captioned litigation. Based on our discussion of December 11, 2015, the County agrees that it can and will continue to review, process, and approve the various components of the Project according to the County's normal process and Code, so long as Martin Marietta acknowledges that such continued action is at its own risk. Martin Marietta acknowledges that, in the event the litigation results in an invalidation of the approval of its Use by Special Review ("USR") permit for the Project, that it may have to cease activity, or remove improvements that have been installed pursuant to approved permits. As was presented at the public hearing, however, the Project is critical to the development of northern Colorado and Martin Marietta's customers. As such, Martin Marietta nonetheless wishes to continue to pursue and implement the Project at the fastest reasonable pace. We thank you for your and the County's continued cooperation in this matter. Please let me know if you have questions or if we can provide further information. /ereIy, ; ' CarolynneZWhite 016276\00331295061 1 EXHIBIT A 410 Seventeenth Street, Suite 2200 Denver, CO 90202-4432 main 303.223.1100 bhfs,com Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP IRELAND STAPLETON Exhibit 2 January 25, 2019 SENT VIA CERTIFIED MAIL AND EMAIL Bethany Pascoe Zoning Compliance Officer Weld County Planning and Building Department 1555 N 17th Ave. Greeley, Colorado 80631 bpas,coc(a),co.weld.co.us MARK E. LAOIS 303.628.36622 (direct) mlacis@irelandstapleton.com Re: Report of Zoning Violation — Rock & Rail, LLC Industrial Site Dear Ms. Pascoe: This law firm represents individuals and businesses that own and use property in the vicinity of 27486 County Road 13 in unincorporated Weld County (the "Property"). The purpose of this letter is to report an ongoing zoning violation at the Property by its current occupant/tenant, Rock & Rail LLC ("Rock & Rail"). As detailed below, our clients have been injured and continue to suffer injury as a result of Rock & Rail's continued unlawful use of the Property in violation of the Weld County Code. Weld County's website lists you as the point of contact for reporting such zoning violations. The Property is zoned within Weld County's A (Agricultural) Zone District. Despite this zoning, the Property presently includes industrial improvements, including but not limited to a heavy -freight railroad spur and loop, an aggregate conveyor and processing system, and a batch concrete plant (the "Industrial Improvements"). As you may know, these Industrial Improvements were constructed by Rock & Rail's parent company and predecessor in interest, Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. ("Martin Marietta"), pursuant to what has since become an invalidated and —according to Martin Marietta —abandoned use by special review ("USR") permit. By virtue of applying for the USR permit, Rock & Rail's parent company previously conceded that these Industrial Improvements could not be constructed and operated in conformance with the agricultural zoning at the Property. Nevertheless, despite the subsequent invalidation of the USR, Rock & Rail has continued to maintain and operate the Industrial Improvements in violation of the agricultural zone designation. While we understand that Rock & Rail has represented to the County that its continued use of the Industrial Improvements is covered by federal law that preempts the County's land use authority, we are not aware of any similar determination from the County or a court of competent jurisdiction. Unless and until such a judicial determination has been made, it falls to the County 2976329.1 IRELAND STAPLETON PRYOR & PASCOE,PC 717 17TH STREET, SUITE 2800, DENVER CO 80202 TEL 303.623.2700 FAX 303 623.2062 IRELANDSTAPLETON.COM Bethany Pascoe January 25, 2019 Page 2 in the first instance to determine whether the continued existence and operation of the Industrial Improvements at the Property is consistent with the County's land use regulations and related authority. In particular, the County must consider to what extent any alleged federal preemption might possibly attach to Rock & Rail's non-transloading efforts, which are wholly divorced from railroad operations and instead relate to the manufacture of an entirely new, perishable product (concrete) from various raw materials, including but not limited to cement, sand, water, and aggregate, after an intensive industrial process. Borough of Riverdale Petition for Declaratory Order the New York Susquehanna & W. Ry. Corp., 4 S.T.B. 380, 1999 WL 715272, at *7 (1999) ("[I]t should be noted that manufacturing activities and facilities not integrally related to the provision of interstate rail service are not subject to [the STB's] jurisdiction or subject to federal preemption."); see also Town of Milford, MA -Petition for Declaratory Order, STB Finance Docket No. 34444, 2004 WL 1802301, at *2 (Aug. 11, 2004). Moreover, the County should investigate whether Rock & Rail's possession/use of the Property is merely a front for Martin Marietta's pre -planned industrial activities, which have nothing more than a superficial connection to "federal railroad policy." See Florida East Coast Ry. Co. v. City of West Palm Beach, 266 F.3d 1324, 1336 (11th Cir. 2001). Our clients (and your constituents) have been directly harmed by Rock & Rail's unlawful industrial operations at the Property. On numerous occasions, including within the past two weeks, Rock & Rail's manufacturing operations at the Property have generated noise of up to 75 dB at adjacent residential properties during the pre -dawn hours of the day. The industrial operations have also generated noxious dust clouds and have resulted in numerous traffic jams when trains entering the Property have come to a dead stop while crossing County roads. These traffic issues have raised serious concerns regarding the ability of emergency first responders to travel through the area during an emergency. Rock & Rail's unlawful industrial operations have directly impaired the quiet enjoyment of our clients in their use of their properties and have unquestionably reduced property values in the immediate vicinity of the Property. Under the Weld County Code, whenever an employee of the Weld County Department of Planning Services (such as yourself) has personal knowledge of a zoning code violation, the employee must provide the violator with written notice to correct the violation within no more than 30 days. W.C.C. §§ 23-10-20.C, 23-10-40.C. The Weld County Code provides that you "shall" do this and does not allow for any discretion in taking this initial enforcement action. Under the Weld County Code, a violator that refuses to comply with applicable zoning faces criminal penalties of up to $100 and up to 10 days in County jail for each day that a property remains in violation of the Weld County Code. W.C.C. § 23-10-20.A. Moreover, your Department is empowered to seek equitable relief in Court to require the removal of non -conforming structures and to assess civil penalties of up to $1,000 plus an additional $100 for each day that a property remains out of compliance. W.C.C. §§ 23-10-30, 23-10-40.A. 2976329.1 IRELAND STAPLETON PRYOR & PASCOE,PC Bethany Pascoe January 25, 2019 Page 3 Please confirm within 14 days of your receipt of this letter that your office will pursue this important enforcement matter. If your office concludes that Rock & Rail's continued industrial operations at the Property are not in violation of the Weld County Code, we respectfully request that your office provide a reasoned determination supporting this conclusion with respect to each of the industrial improvements and activities currently occurring at the Property. Given the high -profile nature of Rock & Rail's unlawful industrial use, the County must take affirmative steps to fully explain any decision not to enforce the Weld County Code. If the County refuses to take this basic step, it will open itself to charges of bias and unreasonable arbitrariness in the subjective enforcement of its land use regulations. If you have any questions or wish to discuss anything raised in this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Mark E. Lacis, Esq. cc: Bruce Barker, Weld County Attorney (bharkeraxo.wcld.co.us) James Silvestro 2976329.1 IRELAND STAPLETON PRYOR & PASCOE,PC Exhibit 3 Dave Kisker, Ph.D. 6681 Apache Road Johnstown, CO 80534 26 March 2019 Mr. Scott James Weld County Commissioner, District 2 1150 O Street P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Commissioner James: As the Commissioner from District 2 which includes the Indianhead Estates subdivision as well as the Rockin' S Ranch and other nearby farms and residential areas, I'm writing to ask for your help. More than two months ago, in a letter and email to Ms. Bethany Pascoe, dated January 25, 2019 (attached to this letter), I and my neighbors in Indianhead Estates West subdivision, through our legal counsel, called to the County's attention a major zoning violation that is occurring at the neighboring site to the southwest (27486 WCR 13), owned by Gerrard Construction and currently operated by Martin Marietta Materials (MMM) through their Rock & Rail subsidiary. In particular, MMM is operating a concrete manufacturing plant, essentially on a continuous basis, with daily activity, including on the weekends, and as early as 5AM and as late as 9PM. As we pointed out in that letter, because the Board's approval of USR 15-0027 was invalidated by the Colorado Court of Appeals, there is currently no valid permit process in place that would allow this use, the manufacture of concrete, in the agricultural zone under current Weld County Code. Therefore, this is a clear zoning violation, and this operation should have been shut down at the time of our original letter. We are aware that a Martin Marietta subsidiary, Rock and Rail, is claiming to be the current owner of the operation, and, as a railroad, claims that enforcement of County land use codes is preempted by the authority of the federal Surface Transportation Board. However, as we said in our 25 January letter, "...we are not aware of any similar determination from the County or a court of competent jurisdiction." In particular, current case law confirms that there is absolutely no federal preemption with regard to the concrete manufacturing plant and that such activity may only be conducted in accordance with the County Land Use Code. (See for example: Borough of Riverdale Petition for Declaratory Order the New York Susquehanna & W Ry. Corp., 4 S.T.B. 380, 1999 WL 715272, at *7 (1999) ("[I]t should be noted that manufacturing activities and facilities not integrally related to the provision of interstate rail service are not subject to [the STB's] jurisdiction or subject to federal preemption.").) Kisker, 3/26/2019 Given that there is currently no justification for simply ignoring the extensive and repeated zoning violations that are occurring at the MMM site, we again ask that Weld County take immediate action to terminate the activity until and unless a decision from a competent authority finally indicates that the manufacturing activities currently occurring on the site are acceptable under STB regulations. Please confirm within 14 days of your receipt of this letter that your office will pursue this important enforcement matter. If the County concludes that Rock & Rail's continued industrial operations at the MMM site are not in violation of the Weld County Code, we respectfully request that the County provide a reasoned determination supporting this conclusion with respect to each of the industrial improvements and activities currently occurring at the MMM site. Given the high -profile nature of Rock & Rail's unlawful industrial use, the County must take affirmative steps to fully explain any decision not to enforce the Weld County Code. If the County refuses to take this basic step, it will open itself to charges of bias and unreasonable arbitrariness in the subjective enforcement of its land use regulations. Regards, 4g..oWit'kleg4- David W. Kisker, President CLR-34 Neighborhoods Assn. Attachment: Letter from Mark Lacis, Esq. dated January 25, 2019 Cc: Weld County Board of County Commissioners Ms. Barbara Kirkmeyer, Chair Mr. Mike Freeman, Pro Tem Mr. Sean Conway Mr. Steve Moreno Mr. Bruce Barker, Weld County Attorney Ms. Bethany Pascoe, Weld County Code Enforcement Exhibit 4 From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Mr. Kisker, Scott James <sjames@weldgov.com> Wednesday, April 17, 2019 2:47 PM Dave Kisker Barbara Kirkmeyer; Mike Freeman; Steve Moreno; Sean Conway; Bruce Barker; Mark E. Lads; James Silvestro; Bethany Pascoe RE: Follow up to Lacis letter of 1/25/19 Please forgive my delayed response. Because of a couple over -lapping out -of -office schedules, my response took longer than is my usual standard of responding to constituent inquiries. The activity detailed in Mark Lacis' letter of January 25, 2019, is the subject of Federal Civil Action No.: 1:18-cv-02453- RBJ. The Scheduling Order in the case, approved by the Court on March 7, 2019, reveals the action is to obtain a judgment declaring that, under federal law, the activities conducted at the site (27486 WCR 13) by Rock & Rail LLC ("Rock & Rail") are not subject to land use regulation by Weld County. The case is set for trial to begin on May 11, 2020. Mr. Lacis' letter asks that a land use enforcement action be commenced by Weld County against Rock & Rail. Such enforcement action, if any, will not be considered until after the trial is concluded and judgment by the Federal District Court is issued. Again, please accept my apologies for a delayed response. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate in emailing. Thank you! skj Scott K. James Weld County Commissioner, District 2 1150 O Street, P.O. Box 758, Greeley, Colorado 80632 970.336-7204 (Office) 970.381.7496 (Cell) 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 Original Message From: Dave Kisker <dave.kisker@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2019 5:00 PM To: Scott James <sjames@weldgov.com> Cc: Barbara Kirkmeyer <bkirkmeyer@weldgov.com>; Mike Freeman <mfreeman@weldgov.com>; Steve Moreno <smoreno@weldgov.com>; Sean Conway <sconway@weldgov.com>; Bruce Barker <bbarker@weldgov.com>; Mark E. 1 Lacis <MLacis@irelandstapleton.com>; James Silvestro<JSilvestro@irelandstapleton.com>; Bethany Pascoe <bpascoe@weldgov.com> Subject: Follow up to Lacis letter of 1/25/19 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. Commissioner James: Please see the attached letter regarding the zoning violation that we reported on 1/25/19. We look forward to a response from Weld County. Regards, Dave Kisker, President CLR-34 Neighborhoods Assn. 2 27687 Hopi Trail Johnstown, CO 80534 14 June 2020 Re: Case COZ20-0004 Dear Ms. Snyder: EXHIBIT t s 94 As you may be aware from previous correspondence, The Rock & Rail facility near Kelim often emits dust and other particulate matter. Abundant evidence has been provided and is included in the record for this case. The prevailing winds in this area are from the north and west, which cause this material to be blown across the Indian Head subdivision. We have a number of residents in the neighborhood who have asthma or other respiratory ailments, two of whom have only recently been diagnosed. While I haven't done a complete survey of the entire neighborhood, 5 individuals have identified themselves as sufferers, 2 of whom have only recently been diagnosed. Of the 5 individuals, 4 live close to the Indian Head -Rock & Rail boundary. The attached map shows where they live. One of these sufferers is a physician who has done research on the airborne distribution of particles from cement and cement -related facilities, which is being provided for inclusion in the record. The Rock & Rail operation represents a significant health risk to all residents of the Indian Head subdivisions and the surrounding area. For this reason this facility should cease operation as soon as is practicable, and should not be rezoned to facilitate continued operation. Very truly yours, fil Gary Oplinger TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN NIH Public Access z g1 Author Manuscript HEP' Published in final edited form as: JAir Waste HanagAssoc. 2011 October ; 61(10): 1015-1025. EXHIBIT 95 Characterization of Spatial Impact of Particles Emitted from a Cement Material Production Facility on Outdoor Particle Deposition in the Surrounding Community Chang Ho Yu and Zhihua (Tina) Fan Exposure Science Division, Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, Piscataway, New Jersey, USA Elizabeth McCandlish Analytical Center, Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, Piscataway, New Jersey, USA Alan H. Stern Office of Science, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton, New Jersey, USA Paul J. Lioy Exposure Science Division, Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, Piscataway, New Jersey, USA Abstract The objective of this study was to estimate the contribution of a facility that processes steel production slag into raw material for cement production to local outdoor particle deposition in Camden, NJ. A dry deposition sampler that can house four 37 -mm quartz fiber filters was developed and used for the collection of atmospheric particle deposits. Two rounds of particle collection (3-4 weeks each) were conducted in 8-11 locations 200-800 m downwind of the facility. Background samples were concurrently collected in a remote area located —2 km upwind from the facility. In addition, duplicate surface wipe samples were collected side -by -side from each of the 13 locations within the same sampling area during the first deposition sampling period. One composite source material sample was also collected from a pile stored in the facility. Both the bulk of the source material and the <38 µm fraction subsample were analyzed to obtain the elemental source profile. The particle deposition flux in the study area was higher (24-83 mg/m2 day) than at the background sites (13-17 mg/m2•day). The concentration of Ca, a major element in the cement source production material, was found to exponentially decrease with increasing downwind distance from the facility (P < 0.05). The ratio of Ca/Al, an indicator of Ca enrichment due to anthropogenic sources in a given sample, showed a similar trend. These observations Copyright © 2006 Air & Waste Management AssociationCopyright © 2011 Air & Waste Management Association address correspondence to: Dr. Zhihua (Tina) Fan, Exposure Science Division, EOHSI, Room 316, 170 Frelinghuysen Road, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA; phone: 732-445-3194; fax: 732-445-0116; zfan@eohsi.rutgers.edu.. Publisher's Disclaimer: The following PDF article was originally published in the Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association and is fully protected under the copyright laws of the United States of America. The author of this article alone has been granted permission to copy and distribute this PDF. Additional uses of the PDF/article by the author(s) or recipients, including posting it on a Web site, are prohibited without the express consent of the Air & Waste Management Association. Yu et al. Page 2 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN suggest a significant contribution of the facility to the local particle deposition. The contribution of the facility to outdoor deposited particle mass was further estimated by three independent models using the measurements obtained from this study. The estimated contributions to particle deposition in the study area were 1.8-7.4% from the regression analysis of the Ca concentration in particle deposition samples against the distance from the facility, 0-11% from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) source -receptor model, and 7.6-13% from the EPA Industrial Source Complex Short Term (ISCST3) dispersion model using the particle -size -adjusted permit -based emissions estimates. INTRODUCTION Facilities that crush or grind raw materials have the potential to emit particles into the ambient air.1-3 The large particles may deposit on outdoor surfaces surrounding such facilities, and the fine particles may stay suspended in air for a longer period. Those smaller particles can be a concern for community health because fine particles (PM2 5, particulate matter smaller than 2.5 µm in diameter) can be inhaled and penetrate into the lung deep.4-' Indeed, numerous studies have shown strong associations of fine particles with cardiopulmonary health effects.6-9 In addition, the particles deposited on outdoor surfaces can be a source of exposure through hand-to-mouth activities and dermal adherence. Furthermore, dust deposition can negatively affect the quality of life for residents near such facilities, because it requires frequent cleaning and laundering, creates unsightly conditions, and lowers the value of residential property. However, the spatial impact of particle emission from such facilities on particle deposition in local communities has not been well characterized. Only a few studies investigated deposition rates10 and particle concentrations1 related to particle emission from cement facilities. Those studies reported that the deposition rate of Ca exponentially decreased with the increase in distance from the cement factories10 and demonstrated elevated total suspended particulate (TSP) concentrations in residences close to the cement plant.' This study was undertaken to investigate the contribution of particulate emissions from a cement material production facility to particulate deposition in a nearby residential neighborhood —the Waterfront South (WFS) area of Camden, New Jersey (NJ).11 The residents in WFS have had a longstanding concern with the dustiness of their environment, and anecdotally identified the target facility as a significant source of dust in their community. This facility receives steel production slag and grinds it for use in cement production. The cement material is subsequently transported from the facility by trucks to other areas. Thus, suspension of particles may occur due to wind blowing over raw cement material piles, grinding operation, transportation process, and fugitive emissions in the facility. In addition, WFS is subject to many other PM emission sources, including industrial and mobile sources in the area.11 Thus, identification of the contribution from a single source to local particle deposition is challenging. The objectives of this study are to (1) determine the spatial distribution of particle deposition in WFS and (2) estimate the contribution of particulate emissions from the facility to outdoor deposited particle mass in the neighborhood. To achieve these goals, we conducted JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 3 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN METHODS Study Area two spatial sampling campaigns with sampling durations of 3 and 4 weeks by deploying PM deposition samplers around the facility. We also conducted one-time surface wipe sampling of the dust around the facility to assess the impact of irregular particulate emissions as a discrete plume. On the basis of the measurements, we employed three independent methods to estimate the contribution from the facility to local deposited particle mass. The methods were (1) a regression analysis of Ca, a marker element for cement related activities; (2) the EPA -approved Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) source -receptor model; and (3) the EPA - approved Industrial Source Complex Short Term (ISCST3) dispersion model. Results obtained from the three independent modeling approaches can provide confidence in the estimates that were obtained from the measurements. The WFS neighborhood is located in south Camden, NJ (Figure 1). It has a population of approximately 1700 residents. Most of the residents in WFS are minority and low-income.12 The focus of this study (henceforth referred to as "the facility") is located approximately 200 m upwind of the WFS. The facility contains several stacks that perform the grinding operation and are potential sources of particulate emissions. In addition, the raw cement material (RCM) is stored uncovered in a pile approximately 9 m high in the yard of the facility. Although this material forms crusts that prevent large-scale emissions from the pile, fugitive emission of particles from the pile may, nonetheless, occur during windy weather and transport of the material. In addition to this facility, WFS is subject to various other particle emission sources, including a local sewage treatment plant, several metal processing and recycling plants, car scrapping and painting facilities, iron workshops, heavy diesel truck traffic, etc.' 1 Most of the WFS residents live within 200 m of stationary or mobile sources.11 Deposition Sampling Previous studies demonstrated that spatial sampling is a powerful approach to examine the impact of a local industrial facility on community air pollution.11,13 The PM mass and elemental concentration obtained from spatial sampling can be used to estimate the spatial impact of particulate emissions from the facility on the WFS air quality. To perform spatial sampling, a passive sampling system is often needed to allow samples to be collected from multiple locations simultaneously in the study area. This is because the passive samplers are less expensive than active samplers, easy to operate, and do not require a power supply.14 Prior to field sampling, we developed a dry deposition sampler for the study. Dry deposition is more relevant to our study purpose than wet deposition because wet deposition depends on the intensity and duration of precipitation.'° The dry deposition sampler was developed on the basis of consideration of particle deposition mechanisms of convective diffusion, inertial impaction, and gravitational settling on the collection substrate.4,15 To successfully collect samples for a duration of 1 month, weather conditions such as heavy rain and strong wind and the security of the sampler were considered in the design. The schematic diagram of the deposition sampler is presented in JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 4 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN Figure 2a. The sampler is plastic, with a conical hood to protect the filters from rain and wind during field sampling. The sampler is painted green to be inconspicuous. The sampler can house four 37 -mm quartz fiber filters (Pall Life Sciences, Ann Arbor, MI). In addition, all samplers were simultaneously deployed in open area so that solar radiation and thus temperature gradient did not vary dramatically by site. Prior to field sampling, we conducted field tests to (1) evaluate the precision of PM mass collection by the four filters placed in one hooded deposition sampler; (2) examine whether the hood may affect the particle collection via deposition by comparing the PM mass measured by the hooded deposition sampler and the co -located un-hooded deposition sampler; and (3) examine the TSP collection of the deposition sampler by comparing the PM mass collected by a dry deposition sampler and the co -located active sampler. The field evaluation tests were conducted at various locations (e.g., residential porch/terrace/backyard, bus stop, park shelter, etc) for a period of 1-3 weeks. Good precision (4-18% of relative standard deviation. RSD) was obtained for the PM mass measured for the four filters placed in each of the three deposition samplers. In addition, there was no significant difference in the mass collected by the hooded and un-hooded samplers (paired t test; P = 0.55; N = 6 tests) 6 tests). These results indicate that the over the deposition sampler did not affect PM collection by deposition. Therefore, the hooded deposition sampler was used for sampling in the study. To further evaluate the performance of the deposition sampler, the relative percent difference (RPD) of the average PM mass measured by the two co -located deposition samplers was determined during field study, and the results are reported in the QA/QC section. The PM mass collected by the deposition sampler was, however, approximately 40% (N = 3 tests) of that collected by the active sampler. The morphological analysis results (see Table 1) suggest that the lower PM mass collected by the deposition sampler might result from the low collection efficiency for large particles (particles > 35 µm). The potential impact of the low collection efficiency on the study results are discussed in Particle Size Distribution section. We would like to note that the deposition sampler developed in this study was a prototype. The modified version of the deposition sampler is being evaluated under various environmental conditions, such as wind speed, particle diameters, etc., and the results will be published in the future. Field Sampling Particle Deposition Sampling —The sites for particle deposition sampling in WFS were selected by assuming that the RCM piles stored at the facility were the main sources of PM emissions from the facility. Additionally, fugitive particulate emissions during transport of the material and resuspension of the aged particles by wind or other mechanical forces may contribute to the particle deposition levels in the study area. Using the approach of Hinds,4 we first estimated the travel distances of different sized RCM particles that may be suspended by wind blowing over the pile prior to deposit on the deposition sampler hung 2.5 m above the ground. The particles were assumed to originate from the middle (4.5 m above ground level) or top (9 m above ground level) of the RCM piles. The median wind velocity of 3.5 m/516 was used for the estimation. On the basis of the estimation, particles in the JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 5 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN range of 10-38 µm in diameter are likely to settle in the areas within a distance of 200-800 m downwind of the facility (i.e., the WFS residential area). Thus, 8-11 sites that were spatially distributed in WFS residential area and located 200-800 m downwind of the facility were selected for PM deposition sampling. Ideally, samplers would have been located precisely and with a greater spatial resolution on the major downwind (southwest) axis. However, given the practical considerations of finding suitable and secure locations in this densely populated area, this was not feasible. Nonetheless, all of the WFS sampling locations were close to this theoretical downwind axis (Figure 1). In addition to the appropriate distance from the facility, the selected sampling sites addressed unconfined space that would not interfere with particle deposition and accessibility by field personnel. Most of the sampling sites were located at locations in residential homes (such as balconies, terraces, porches, etc.) in order to make it more likely that the samplers would be secure against vandalism and tampering. Interferences from overhanging roofs and awnings were avoided by hanging the samplers at the corners of these structures. An example of a deposition sampler deployed in the field is shown in Figure 2b. One background site was selected in Gloucester City Park, which was located 2.2 km upwind (southwest) of the facility (Figure 1). We conducted two rounds of particle deposition samplings in WFS. The first round was conducted from July 5 to July 26, 2007. PM samples were simultaneously collected from the 11 locations in WFS and one location in the background site (Figure S1), and a duplicate sampler was placed at each of the 12 locations. However, the samplers from four sampling locations, including the samplers located at the background site, were lost during this first round. The second sampling was conducted from August 17 to September17, 2007, and two samplers were placed at each of the eight WFS locations and the two locations in the background area (Figure S2). All of the samplers were recovered after the 31 -day sampling period. Surface Wipe Sampling —During the first round of particle deposition sampling, surface wipe samples were collected from the 13 locations within 500 m downwind of the facility (Figure S3). The selected surfaces included tops of outdoor ledges/sills, air conditioners, and electrical boxes that were protected from the direct scavenging effect of wind. In addition, those surfaces were flat and relatively smooth so as not to impede wipe sampling. However, in this study, the mass of collected particle from open surfaces may be lower than those from surfaces with canopies such as trees. Zhang et al.17 reported lower deposition velocity for open surfaces than surfaces with forest canopies. The selected surfaces were visually inspected prior to wipe sampling. A moistened wipe, 13 x17.5 cm2 (Cliniguard Dry Washcloths; TENA, Waukegan, WI), was used for surface dust collection. The detailed descriptions of the sampling method can be found in our previous study.'$ Two wipe samples were collected side -by -side from each location. Besides the 13 sites in WFS, four wipe samples were concurrently collected from two locations at the background site. Collection of RCM from the Facility —The raw cement material used by the facility all came from a similar source and underwent only physical processing onsite. Thus, the JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 6 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN location and timing of obtaining the RCM source sample were not considered critical with respect to the potential variability of the physical and chemical composition of the material. Three 150-g RCM samples were collected from the top layer of the exposed material at three different spots on the pile. The three spots were at approximately 6 m above the ground. The samples were stored in wide -mouth bottles (0.5 L glass jar) and transported to the laboratory at EOHSI (Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute). The three samples were composited into one sample, and the composite sample was stored in a temperature - controlled (4 ± 1 °C) cold room at EOHSI until analysis. Sample Preparation and Analysis RCM Preparation —The RCM sample was dried in a Fisher Isotemp oven at 70 °C to remove moisture, and sieved to 250-, 75-, and 38 -µm -diameter factions using the U.S. Standard Test Sieves (Fisher Scientific, Pittsburgh, PA). QA/QC Elemental Analysis —All of the samples (i.e., the un-sieved bulk RCM, the <38 µm fraction of the RCM, the particle deposition samples, and the surface dust samples) were analyzed for elemental composition. Briefly, samples were extracted with 1 mL of concentrated high purity nitric acid by the microwave -oven -assisted digestion method (EPA method TO -3051). The digest was analyzed for elements by an inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (ICPMS: VG Elemental, Winsford, UK) according to the EPA method 200.8. Si was not measured in the study, because the digestion method does not quantitatively dissolve Si from the sample. Accuracy was measured against elemental standards (High Purity Standards, Inc., Charleston, SC) certified to 0.5%. Acceptable quality assurance checks were taken to be 100% ± 20% of the certified values. Microscopic Analysis —Three deposition samples collected from the locations close to the pile (distance <300 m) and one sieved RCM sample (<38 µm) were analyzed for morphology, size distribution, and elemental composition by MVA Scientific Consultants (Duluth, GA). Particle size and elemental composition were measured using a JEOL Model JSM-6500F field emission scanning electron microscope (SEM), operating in automated mode under the control of a Thermo Noran System SIX X-ray analysis system. The morphological examination was conducted by polarized light microscopy (PLM) analysis using an Olympus SZ-40 stereomicroscope at magnifications from 7x to 40x. To check the precision of the deposition sampling during the field study, the RSD of the particle mass collected by the four filters placed in one deposition sampler was calculated. In addition, the RPD of the average particle mass between the two co -located deposition samplers was also determined. The RSD was 13% ± 10% (N= 31 deposition samplers) and the RPD was 13% ± 11% (N = 13 pairs). Six (three laboratory blanks and three field trip blanks) for deposition sampling and six wipe blank samples were analyzed for elemental concentrations, and the results are reported in Tables 2 and 3, respectively. JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 7 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN Data Analyses Data from the two deposition sampling campaigns were combined into one data set for data analyses. For locations with duplicate samples, the arithmetic mean of the two samples was used for analysis. Specific analyses conducted in the study are described below. Particle Mass and Elemental Concentrations versus Distance from the Facility —Associations between particle mass/elemental concentrations and the distance from the facility were assessed using the Spearman correlation coefficient (rs). A negative correlation coefficient (P < 0.05) suggested a decrease in particle mass/elemental concentrations with increasing distance from the facility. Enrichment Factors for Elements and Ca/Al Ratios —The enrichment factor (EF) is a better indication of anthropogenic source contribution than gross elemental data.10 EF is defined as the ratio of an elemental concentration in a sample to the concentration in the crustal geologic material. In our study, we calculated enrichment factors for all the elements that we quantified. The enrichment factors were calculated by eq 1 using Ti as a reference element.19 Ti was chosen on the basis of the following criteria: (1) generally high concentrations in reference crustal material; (2) very low levels in pollution sources; (3) ease of determination by a number of analytical techniques; and (4) freedom from contamination during sampling. Es/Tis EFs= . (1) Er /Ti where EFs is the enrichment factor for element s; Es is an elemental concentration or loading for element s in the examined sample; Tis is a Ti concentration or loading in the examined sample; Er is an elemental concentration in reference crustal material; and Tir is a Ti concentration in reference crustal material. The value for Tir was obtained from average crustal materia1.20 If EF is greater than 5, it indicates the presence of an element that is significantly enriched in the sample relative to the reference material.10 Taking Ca and Al as the marker elements for cement and natural sources, respectively.10,19 Ca/A1 ratios were calculated for the sample collected from all the WFS sites. The ratio, another indicator of the contribution from the facility to particle deposition in the community, indicates relative Ca enrichment in the samples. Al was selected because (1) Al is one of the major crustal elements and (2) Al is not significantly affected by traffic emissions in urban and rural aerosols.19 Ca Regression Analysis —If particulate emission from the facility is the main source of particle deposition in the surrounding area, an exponential decrease of Ca, the most abundant element in cement material, is expected with distance from the facility. Thus, the Ca concentrations measured in the deposition samples were regressed against the distance from the facility. The resulting regression model was then used to predict the Ca concentrations at designated distances from the facility, and the predicted Ca concentrations JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 8 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN were divided by the Ca concentration in RCM (sieved <38 µm). The resulting value is an estimate of the percent contribution of the facility emission to deposited particle mass at the corresponding distance in WFS. Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) Model —The EPA CMB model (version 8.2)21 was used to estimate the contribution of the facility to the particle deposition in the local area. The CMB model uses the detailed source profiles from specific sources to estimate the contribution of each source to total PM mass at receptor locations. In this study, site -specific source profiles (other than those from the study facility) were not available. Therefore, source profiles from a well -characterized urban surrogate data set, the Portland Aerosol Characterization Study (PACS),22 were employed for modeling. The PACS source profiles are comprehensive, including typical PM sources, such as natural (e.g., marine aerosol and continental dust) and anthropogenic sources (e.g., automobile exhaust, oil combustion, and industrial emissions), in both fine (<2.5 µm) and coarse -size (<30 µm) fractions. Elemental concentrations in reference rock20 and soi123 were included in building the CMB source profile. Thus, the CMB source profiles for modeling were constructed with (1) the elemental composition <38 µm RCM fraction, (2) two elemental compositions in reference rock and soil, and (3) 16 PACS source profiles. The elemental concentrations for the 18 deposition samples collected from the two rounds of deposition samplings were used in the CMB estimation. We assumed a 10% uncertainty in the CMB input values for the mean of each element if the uncertainty could not otherwise be estimated.24 As discussed above, Si concentrations were not quantified for the RCM or particle deposition samples due to limitation of the extraction method employed in the study. Thus, Si was treated as a missing value in the CMB input. Industrial Source Complex Short -Term (ISCST3) Model —The airborne TSP concentrations emitted from the facility, including emissions from the stacks. RCM piles, and transport of RCM by trucks, were previously estimated by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) using the EPA's regulatory model—ISCST3 atmospheric dispersion model. The model is based on a steady-state gaussian plume algorithm, and is applicable for estimating ambient impacts (e.g., pollution concentration or deposition flux on receptors) from point, area, and volume sources out to a distance of about 50 km.25-27 The assumptions of the NJDEP modeling work were geared toward predicting emission under worst -case conditions rather than under average conditions. Specifically, the modeling assumed that the facility was operated 24 hours per day and 7 days per week. The modeling was conducted by the use of emission rates (g/sec) estimated for all PM sources related to the facility operation (e.g., RCM piles, stacks, conveyors, dust filters, etc.). In addition, the 5-yr average meteorological data in Camden, NJ, were used for modeling. We assumed that the particle emission from the facility during our study period was similar to that during the 5-yr reference period. JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 9 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN Particle Deposition, Surface Dust, and Spatial Distribution The particle mass (mg) measured for the deposition samples are summarized in Table 2. The particle mass ranged from 0.77 to 1.88 mg in the first deposition sampling and 0.80 to 1.60 mg in the second round. Those values correspond to a deposition flux of 34-83 and 24-48 mg/m2 day for the first and second sampling campaigns, respectively. A lower particle mass (0.5 ± 0.1 mg) and deposition flux (15 ± 2.8 mg/m2 day) was obtained at the two background sites during the second round of sampling (note: the deposition samples were lost at the background sites during the first sampling). In addition, an exponential decay of the deposition flux with increasing distance from the facility (R2 = 0.4599: P < 0.01) was observed (Figure 3). These observations suggested significant contribution of the facility to particle deposition in WFS. The particle mass (mg) and the corresponding loading (µg/cm2) of the surface wipe samples are presented in Table 3. Surface wipe samples showed a larger variability in loading and mass compared to the deposition samples. The mass and loading of the surface wipe samples ranged from 1.71 to 227 mg and from 8.5 to 379.4 µg/cm2, respectively. In contrast to the deposition data, no relationship was observed between the distance from the facility and the surface wipe mass or loading. It is suspected that the scavenging effects of rain and wind prevented accumulation of particles on surfaces and thus obscured spatial patterns of deposition. Particle Size Distribution The particle counts for the RCM and three deposition samples are tabulated in Table 1, and the frequency (count fraction) distribution by particle size is plotted in Figure 4. For the RCM (<38 µm fraction), most particles (86.4%) were concentrated in the fine PM size (<2.5 µm). The coarse particles (2.5-10 µm) accounted for 10.5% of the particle count. A similar particle size distribution was found in the three deposition samples, that is, 84-88% for fine particles and 11-16% for coarse fraction (2.5-10 µm). As discussed in the Deposition Sampling section, the collection efficiency for large particles (>10 µm in diameter) was low, which may underestimate the total particle deposition in WFS. Also, the low collection efficiency may obscure the spatial variation of particles and reduce the significance in calculation of exponential decay of deposition mass with the distance from the facility. This is because the particle size distribution may differ by site, that is, more large particles are expected to be in the sampling sites closer to the facility than those farther from the facility. Elemental Concentrations/Loadings and Spatial Distribution The elemental concentrations (ng/mg) for the RCM as well as the particle deposition samples are presented in Table 2, and the elemental loadings (ng/cm2) for the surface dust samples are provided in Table 3. The elemental distribution in the RCM was determined for two fractions: the bulk (un-sieved) RCM and sieved (<38 µm in fraction) RCM. In the bulk RCM. Ca was the most abundant element among those measured, accounting for 21% of the RCM mass (64% of the mass of measured elements), followed by Al (7%), Mg (4%), and Fe (0.3%). In the sieved RCM (<38 µm fraction), Ca accounted for 30% of the RCM mass JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 10 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN (87% of the measured elements), followed by Al (2%), Mg (1%), and Fe (1%). However, in the deposition samples. Ca accounted for only 5% of the mass of the deposition samples (45% of the mass of the measured elements), followed by Fe (3%), Al (1%), and Mg (1%). The low Ca percent for the deposition samples suggests that other contributing sources, besides the facility emission, are present in the deposition samples collected in the WFS area. The elemental concentrations/loadings for the particle deposition and surface dust samples against the distances from the facility were examined. The Ca concentration decreased with increasing distance from the facility (rs = —0.5641; P = 0.01), suggesting a contribution of the PM emitted from the facility to the WFS area. There was, however, no clear trend between the elements in the surface dust wipe samples and distances from the facility (P > 0.05 for all elements). Enrichment Factors (EF), Ca/Al Ratios, and Spatial Distribution Ca was enriched in the WFS deposition samples and the EF for Ca ranged from 5.6 to 12.2 in WFS. The higher enrichment values (>5) indicate a contribution from the facility to outdoor deposited particle mass in WFS area. However, EF higher than 5 was not found for other elements in the deposition samples. In addition, a negative association was found between the EF of Ca and the distance from the facility but this was not significant (I's = —0.0806; P = 0.75). The Ca/A1 ratios in deposition samples were also negatively associated with the distances from the facility (rs = —0.3915; P = 0.11). The lack of significance may be due to small number of samples (N = 18) or may reflect the associations were obscured by the low collection efficiency for large particles. Contribution of the Facility to Outdoor Particle Deposition Estimated by the Ca Regression Model On the basis of the significantly negative relationship between Ca concentration in the deposition samples and the distance from the facility, we estimated the contribution of the facility to the deposited particle mass in the surrounding area. In the model, the average Ca concentration obtained from the two background sites was subtracted from the Ca concentration at each of the 16 deposition sampling sites in WFS. For the five sites where Ca concentrations were lower than the average background Ca concentration, the average background concentration was used for the regression analysis. The background -corrected Ca concentrations were correlated with the distance from the facility (rs=-0.5575; P=0.03) and followed a logarithmic function (Figure 5). Ca Concentration= [13, 811 x In (D)] — 445.26 (R2=0.3459;P=0.02) ; (2) where D is the distance from the facility (km). The contribution of the facility to the WFS outdoor particle deposition was then estimated by the ratio of the predicted Ca concentration and the Ca concentration in the RCM (301,980 ng/mg; <38 µm fraction) using eq 3: JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 11 13,811 x ln(D) —445.26 % contribution= x 100. (3) 301, 980 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN Assuming that the Ca concentration in the individual deposition sample originated from the facility and varies as a constant function of distance from the facility, the contribution of the facility to the WFS outdoor particle deposition is estimated to be from 1.8% to 7.4% for the distances of 0.2 to 0.7 km from the facility. CMB-Model-Estimated RCM Contribution to Outdoor Particle Deposition The RCM contribution to the WFS deposited particle mass was obtained for each receptor location from a total of 18 sites using the CMB model. The model explained the observed elemental profile in the sample with R2=0.96 ± 0.02 and x2=1.61 ± 0.78, and reconstructed 106% ± 25% of the observed mass in the 18 deposition samples. The percent contribution of RCM to outdoor deposited particle mass was obtained from the ratio of the estimated RCM contribution to the sum of the estimates from all source contribution, and ranged from 5.6% to 19.9% in WFS and 8.9% in background sites. However, the background sites are located upwind of the facility and there should be no significant impact of the facility on the deposited particle mass at the background sites. Thus, the 8.9% of PM estimated for the background site indicated the background RCM -like sources. The actual contribution of the RCM to the deposited particle mass in WFS was corrected by subtracting the background contribution from the initial CMB-estimated contribution in WFS. The corrected % contribution ranged from 0% to 11%, which is comparable with the Ca regression estimates. ISCST3-Model-Estimated Facility Contribution to Outdoor Particle Deposition We attempted to estimate the contribution of the facility to the WFS deposited particle mass by comparing the deposition flux calculated from the ISCST3 predicted TSP concentrations against the deposition flux measured in this study. The estimated 24 -hr averaged ground - level TSP concentrations over a 5-yr period were 56.2, 27.0, and 16.7 µg/m3 for the distance of 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 km along the center plume line from the facility, respectively. The % contribution from the facility was calculated by eq 4: % contribution=DE x 100. D,,, (4) where De is the deposition flux calculated from the ISCST3-model-predicted TSP concentration and size -dependent deposition velocity for the distance of 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 km, and Dm is the deposition flux based on the field measurements at the distance of 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 km, respectively. The PM dry deposition flux is proportional to the airborne concentration and a size - dependent deposition velocity.28 We initially estimated the size -dependent deposition velocity (see Table 4) from a uniform particle diameter at each particle size shown in Table 1. (Note: The detailed procedures for calculating the size -dependent deposition velocity can be found in Lim et al.28) The estimated size -dependent deposition velocity was multiplied by the ISCST3-model-predicted TSP concentrations and corrected by the corresponding % JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 12 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN mass at each particle size provided in Table 1. The final calculated deposition flux (De) was 15, 7.2, and 4.5 mg/m2•day for the distance of 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 km, respectively (Table 4). On the basis of the deposition flux measured at each location reported in Table 2, the measured deposition flux (Dm) was estimated as 58.9, 37.8, and 30.1 mg/m2 day for the distance of 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 km, respectively. Equation 4 provided estimated contributions of the emissions from the entire facility to the outdoor TSP concentrations. They were 25.5%. 19.1%, and 14.8% for the distance of 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 km, respectively. The contribution, however, was likely to be overestimated by the above approach. This is because 62.2% of the particle mass fraction in deposition samples came from the particles with a size smaller than 10 µm (see Table 1), whereas the ISCST3 model predicted the concentration for TSP. Thus, the mass concentration of PM10 instead of TSP should be used for estimate. An average PM10/TSP ratio of 63% was obtained from the NJDEP data at the monitoring site in Pennsauken, NJ (2 miles NE from the facility), during the period of 19971998,29 and a value of 0.50.6 was recommended by the EPA3° to convert TSP to PM10. We assumed approximately 60% of TSP was PM10 in WFS area. On the basis of this factor, the deposition flux measured in WFS was corrected to represent PM10 only. The corrected deposition fluxes were 4.76, 2.28, and 1.41 mg/m2•day for De and 36.7, 23.5, and 18.7 mg/m2•day for Dm, respectively, for the distances of 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 km, respectively. The corrected contributions from the facility to deposited particle mass were 13%, 9.7%, and 7.6% at the distance of 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 km, respectively, based on the De and Dm calculated from PM10. These values are in reasonable agreement with the CMB and Ca regression estimates. CONCLUSIONS This study investigated the contribution of particulate emissions from a single facility to outdoor particle deposition in a residential area in Camden. NJ, where there are mixed particulate emission sources. On the basis of the particle spatial deposition sampling results, emissions from the cement material production facility were found to contribute partially to the outdoor deposited particle mass within 800 m downwind of the facility. The contribution of the facility to local PM deposition was estimated by three independent approaches, namely, (1) a Ca regression analysis, (2) the EPA's CMB model, and (3) the EPA's dispersion model (ISCST3). The three estimates agreed closely, that is, approximately 2- 13% of the total deposited PM mass in WFS came from the facility. The narrow range of estimates across the three modeling approaches gives confidence in the overall estimate. In addition, the study demonstrated that spatial sampling, coupled with multiple independent modeling approaches, is a useful and powerful tool to estimate the contribution of a single source to local particle deposition in an urban community with mixed sources of PM. Moreover, this study provided data on size -dependent deposition velocity and flux in an urban area. These data are useful for improving current dry deposition models by comparing them with the model -predicted data. However, the lack of emissions data for specific sources in the study area may result in uncertainty in the CMB model predictions. A comprehensive study to characterize different chemical species and source profiles would be needed to accurately determine the JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 13 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN contribution of the specific facility to the particle deposition in an area with mixed sources of particle deposition using the CMB approach alone. Likewise, the imprecise conditions in the ISCST3 model and the limited number of observations in the Ca regression analysis may result in uncertainties in the estimates derived from those approaches. However, the combination of these independent approaches provided confidence in the estimate from any single approach. Finally, improvement of the collection efficiency of large particles by the deposition sampler is needed to accurately assess the impact of total PM emitted from the facility on local air quality. Acknowledgments Biography The research has been funded by New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DOJ 90-5-2-1-08333). Drs. Fan and Lioy are also supported in part by the NIEHS sponsored UMDNJ Center for Environmental Exposures and Disease, grant no. NIEHS P30ES005022. The authors wish to thank Mr. John Greg (Division of Air Quality in NJDEP) for ISCST3-modeling results and Mr. Xiaogang Tang (Computational Chemodynamics Lab in EOHSI) for the production of study area figure. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the funding agencies. Chang Ho Yu is a staff scientist in the Exposure Science Division, Zhihua (Tina) Fan is an Associate Professor in the Exposure Science Division, and Elizabeth McCandlish is a staff scientist in the Analytical Center of EOHSI in Piscataway, NJ. Alan H. Stern is the Manager of the Risk Assessment and Toxicology section of the Office of Science of NJDEP, of Trenton, NJ. Paul J. Lioy is a Professor and the Director in Exposure Science Division of EOHSI in Piscataway, NJ. REFERENCES 1. Abdul-Wahab SA. Impact of Fugitive Dust Emissions from Cement Plants on nearby Communities. Ecol. Model. 2006; 195:338-348. 2. Kalafatoglu E, Ors N, Ozdemir SS, Munlafalioglu I. Trace Element Emissions from Some Cement Plants in Turkey. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2001; 129:91-100. 3. Mwaiselage J, Bratveit M, Moen B, Yost M. Variability in Dust Exposure in a Cement Factory in Tanzania. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 2005; 49:511-519. [PubMed: 15845607] 4. Hinds, W. Aerosol Technology: Properties, Behavior, and Measurement of Airborne Particles. 2nd ed.. Wiley-Interscience; New York: 1998. 5. Yu C, Diu C. Total and Regional Deposition of Inhaled Aerosols in Humans. J. Aerosol Sci. 1983; 14: 599-609. 6. Dockery DW, Pope CA. Acute Respiratory Effects of Particulate Air Pollution. Annu. Rev. Public Health. 1994; 15:107-132. [PubMed: 8054077] 7. Dockery DW, Pope CA, Xu X, Spengler JD, Ware JH, Fay ME, Ferris BG, Speizer FE. An Association between Air Pollution and Mortality in Six US Cities. N. Engl. J. Med. 1993; 329:1753-1759. [PubMed: 8179653] 8. Pope CA, Burnett RT, Thurston GD, Thun MJ, Calle EE, Krewski D, Godleski JJ. Cardiovascular Mortality and Long-term Exposure to Particulate Air Pollution Epidemiological Evidence of General Pathophysiological Pathways of Disease. Circulation. 2004; 109:71-77. [PubMed: 14676145] 9. Pope CA, Thun MJ, Namboodri MM, Dockery DW, Evans JS, Speizer FE, Heath CW. Particulate Air Pollution as a Predictor of Mortality in a Prospective Study of US Adults. Am. J. Respir. Clin. Care Med. 1995; 151:669-674. JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 14 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN 10. Adejumo JA, Obioh IB, Ogunsola OJ, Akeredolu FA, Olaniyi HB, Asubiojo OI, Oluwole AF, Akanle OA, Spyrou NM. The Atmospheric Deposition of Major, Minor and Trace Elements within and around Three Cement Factories. J. Radioanaly. Nuclear Chem. 1994; 179:195-204. 11. Zhu X, Fan Z, Wu X, Meng Q, Wang S, Tang X, Ohman-Strickland P. Spatial Variation of Volatile Organic Compounds in a "Hot Spot" for Air Pollution. Atmos. Environ. 2008; 42:7329- 7338. 12. Wu X, Fan Z, Ohman-Stickland P. Time -location Patterns of a Population Living in an Air Pollution Hotspot. J. Environ. Public Health. 2010 doi: 10.1155/2010/625461. 13. Stock T, Morandi M, Afshar M, Chung K. Evaluation of the Use of Diffusive Air Samplers for Determining Temporal and Spatial Variation of Volatile Organic Compounds in the Ambient Air of Urban Communities. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 2008; 58:1303-1310. doi: 10.3155/1047-3289.58.10.1303. 14. Fan Z, Jung KH, Lioy PJ. Development of a Passive Sampler to Measure Personal Exposure to Gaseous PAHs in Community Settings. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006; 40:6051-6057. [PubMed: 17051799] 15. Wagner J, Leith D. Passive Aerosol Sampler, Part I: Principle of Operation. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 2001; 34:186-192. 16. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). [(accessed November 24, 2010)] Controlled Local Climatological Data, Philadelphia International Airport (station ID 13739). http://cdo.ncdc.noaa.gov/qcicd/QCLCD?prior=N 17. Zhang L, Gong S, Padro J, Barrie L. A Size -Segregated Particle Dry Deposition Scheme for an Atmospheric Aerosol Module. Atmos. Environ. 2001; 35:549-560. 18. Ilacqua V, Freeman NCJ, Fagliano J, Lioy PJ. The Historical Record of Air Pollution as Defined by Attic Dust. Atmos. Environ. 2003; 37:2379-2389. 19. Rahn, KA. The Chemical Composition of the Atmospheric Aerosol, Technical Report. Graduate School of Oceanography, University of Rhode Island; Kingston, RI: 1976. 20. Mason, B. Principles of Geochemistry. John Wiley & Sons; New York: 1966. 21. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. [accessed November 24, 2010] Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) Model. http://www.epa.gov/scram001/receptor_cmb.htm 22. Watson, JG. Chemical Element Balance Receptor Model Methodology for Assessing the Sources of Fine and Total Particulate Matter in Portland, Oregon. Oregon Graduate Center; Beaverton: 1979. 23. Bowen, H. Trace Elements in Biochemistry. Academic Press; London, New York: 1966. 24. Vega E, Mugica V, Carmona R, Valencia E. Hydrocarbon Source Apportionment in Mexico City using the Chemical Mass Balance Receptor Model. Atmos. Environ. 2000; 34:4121-4129. 25. Elbir T. Application of an ISCST3 Model for Predicting Urban Air Pollution in the Izmir Metropolitan Area. Int. J. Environ. Pollut. 2002; 18:498-507. 26. Kumar A, Bellam N, Sud A. Performance of an Industrial Source Complex Model: Predicting Long Term Concentrations in an Urban Area. Environ. Prog. 1999; 18:93-100. 27. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. [accessed November 24, 2010] ISCST3 (Industrial Source Complex Short Term) Model. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/dispersion_alt.htm#isc3 28. Lim JH, Sabin LD, Schiff KC, Stolzenbach KD. Concentration, Size Distribution, and Dry Deposition Rate of Particle -associated Metals in the Los Angeles Region. Atmos. Environ. 2006; 40:7810-7823. 29. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP). [accessed February 27, 2011] Air Quality Report. http://www.njaginow.net/ 30. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Second Addendum to Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter and Sulfur Dioxides (1982): Assessment of Newly Available Health Effects Information. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment; Washington, DC: 1986. EPA/600/8-86/020F JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 15 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN IMPLICATIONS This study developed a practical approach, i.e., spatial sampling with a deposition sampler coupled with three modeling estimation methods, to examine the impact of a local industrial facility on particle deposition in an urban community with multiple emission sources of particles. The close agreement among the three independent model estimations suggests that the approach is feasible and reliable to estimate the contribution of a single source to outdoor particle deposition using the method employed in the study. JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 16 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN Figure 1. The aerial photo of the study area. Note: A circle shows the neighborhood of Waterfront South (WFS), Camden, NJ. A wind rose plot (upper left corner) provides the wind direction and intensity in the study area during the period of 07/01/2007 to 09/30/02007 obtained from the meteorological data at the Philadelphia International Airport Weather Station (source: NOAA, National Climatic Data Center). A dashed arrow indicates the hypothetical downwind route for particulate emissions from the facility to the WFS perimeter in the prevailing wind direction (i.e., southwest). JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 17 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN Epoxy resin to ,old the Vranded v.re furrr el as we) tc' a a a,a,ao prevent ram Polyprepylene powder fimrehnitM1 lop diameter of 147 rnm. diameter of mm.ara ere„n1o3a aaocateo quaame) _..__ of 100 mrn heig, of 15 rnm Ground lbcrn 7.- 05,11 Figure 2. The schematic representation of the deposition sampler (a) and the deposition sampler deployed in the field (b). JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 18 Particle Deposition Flux vs. Distance to the RCM Pile Located Inside the Facility TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN c ocis o , Q.E QU _m g co E o. 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 • • y = 2.1179x-0-4859 • • R2 = 0.4599 • ••• • • 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Distance to the RCM Pile (km) 2.5 Figure 3. Measured particle deposition flux versus distance from the RCM pile at the facility. JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 19 Frequency Distribution Curve (Count Fraction vs. Particle Size) TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN 1.20 - 1.00 _ 0 0.80 _ g 0.60 _ LL 0.40 _ 0.20 _ 0.00 - 0 -- -■- -- RCM <38pm + Deposition Samples 2 4 6 8 10 Particle Diameter (µm) Figure 4. Frequency distribution by particle size for RCM (sieved <38 µm) sample collected at the yard of the cement facility and the deposition samples collected in the vicinity around the facility in Camden, NJ. JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 20 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 Background -corrected Ca Conc. vs. Distance to the RCM Pile Located inside the Facility • y = —13811 Ln(x) — 445.26 • R2 = 0.3459 • • • • 0 t I 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Distance to the RCM Pile (km) Figure 5. Background -subtracted Ca concentration measured in deposition samples versus distance to the RCM pile. JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Yu et al. Page 21 Table 1 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN The particle size distribution (percent) for the RCM (sieved <38 µm in diameter), the particle deposition samples in Camden, NJ, and the averaged number count/mass percent for the three deposition samples for each particle size. Particle Size (µm) Particle Diameter" (µm) RCMb Number Count Deposition Samples Particle Number Count Location 1 Location 2 Location 3 Avg. Number Count Avg. Masse 0.5-1.0 1.0-2.5 2.5-5.0 5.0-7.5 7.5-10 >10 Particle size range Particle number counted 0.75 56.0% 36.5% 4.4% 26.8% 1.75 30.4% 51.6% 79.6% 58.4% 3.75 6.5% 8.3% 15.9% 10.7% 6.25 2.4% 1.5% 0.0% 2.1% 8.75 1.6% 0.7% 0.1% 0.7% 10.0 3.1% 1.5% 0.0% 1.4% 0.5-30.2 0.8-27.5 0.6-10.9 0.8-34.1 950 1206 889 2000 22.6% 0.4% 63.2% 13.3% 11.6% 24.0% 1.2% 11.5% 0.5% 13.1% 1.0% 37.8% 0.6-34.1 NA 1365 NA Notes: aThe particle diameter was calculated as a middle point of two values in each range, except 10 µm for particles >10 µm. bThe RCM sample was sieved to particles <38 µm in diameter. cThe averaged particle mass percent was estimated from the assumption of a uniform particle diameter in each range. JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Tduosnuej aoynny Vd-HIN Tduosnuej aoynny Vd-HIN Tduosnuej ao nny Vd-HIN osnueuz iocllny oossy SultriAl pt; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Table 2 Particle mass and elemental concentrations (ng/mg) by two deposition samplings in the study. Round Location Avg. PM Mass (mg) Deposition Flux (mg/m2-day) Distance" (km) AI Ca Cd Cr Cu Fe Mg Mn Pb Ti V Zn Bulk RCM RCM <38um AC BC Dd Ed Fc Gc lc Ld II lc 2c 3 4d 5 6 7 8d BGe BGe TBf NA NA 1.542 1.880 1.422 0.912 1.098 1.427 0.768 0.966 1.604 1.230 1.216 0.796 1.600 1.062 1.072 0.904 0.447 0.555 NA NA 0.00 69,042 213,961 DLb 17 3 3450 43,090 2168 DLb 1669 15 29 NA 0.00 18,991 301,988 DLb 34 58 7801 14,595 877 10 1006 10 148 68 83 63 40 49 63 34 43 48 37 37 24 48 32 32 27 13 17 NA 0.23 12,155 56,249 4 66 214 23,636 11,492 626 319 721 48 2144 0.37 7751 40,169 4 62 328 22,903 9665 426 521 439 41 12,335 0.36 8854 35,961 3 74 260 26,232 9049 422 420 545 33 1820 0.50 4472 24,436 3 43 157 13,763 4611 239 239 276 23 1740 0.66 7376 37,653 10 131 304 34,015 8167 484 512 437 40 3152 0.65 9265 34,463 5 80 275 24,125 8351 428 477 578 43 4454 0.55 18,176 49,015 7 313 356 46,407 14,202 759 772 1065 85 8676 0.45 14,684 61,438 11 177 335 43,196 14,876 787 730 780 66 4421 0.19 13,942 71,856 2 79 169 24,652 13,114 738 319 1065 54 2328 0.29 10,340 48,680 3 135 173 24,406 10,641 586 504 819 53 2397 0.27 11,351 61,266 DLb 80 220 24,996 11,796 624 336 824 55 2517 0.35 11,910 67,100 4 104 349 38,475 14,795 660 615 826 65 2990 0.38 11,814 45,126 7 112 327 29,939 11,098 681 620 663 63 3576 0.61 12,598 45,770 11 710 251 51,364 14,189 813 550 497 65 5797 0.55 11,844 57,500 6 216 296 33,578 14,213 684 565 572 73 4328 0.45 11,954 50,493 5 106 307 29,661 16,773 621 359 690 138 5105 2.38 7284 33,202 6 124 186 20,249 8404 392 330 427 40 2118 2.20 11,121 47,845 5 140 238 28,185 17,027 522 265 808 123 4848 NA 18 64 0.1 1 1 62 10 1 0 2 0 5 Notes: TduosnueJ aoynny Vd-HIN TduosnueJ aoynny Vd-HIN TduosnueJ ao nny Vd-HIN osnueuz iocllny oossy SultriAl pt; available in PMC 2014 May 06. aDistance was obtained from the sampling site to the RCM pile located inside the facility. bDL = below the method detection limit. More than two samples were analyzed and the average values were reported here. dTwo types of samplers (hooded and un-hooded) were deployed, and the result of hooded sampler was reported here. °Locations are at the background site, Gloucester City Park (9 and 10 in Figure S2, respectively). fAverage concentration (ng/mg) in three trip blank samples. Tduosnuej aoynny Vd-HIN Tduosnuej aoynny Vd-HIN Tduosnuej ao nny Vd-HIN osnueuz iocllny oossy SultriAl pt; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Table 3 Surface dust mass/loading and elemental loadings (ng/cm2) by wipe sampling in the study. Location Avg. Mass (mg) Avg. Loading (µg/cm2) Distances (km) Al Ca Cd Cr Cu Fe Mg Mn Pb Ti V Zn A B Cb Db E F G H Ib K L M BGd BGd TB° 50.06 36.08 48.69 17.09 112.10 79.43 71.96 31.06 32.43 18.30 32.40 15.52 26.18 12.87 168.77 NA NA 40.4 0.24 3908 1022 0.2 34 20 2274 184 23 40 34 4 5882 19.4 0.24 361 361 0.3 1 3 561 94 7 5 1 1 26 79.4 0.27 937 1954 0.1 24 10 3604 1643 31 27 1 4 121 33.6 0.29 1137 667 0.4 8 6 1656 1179 14 19 2 3 31 182.8 0.27 1083 3565 0.1 16 14 3575 399 26 9 1 3 60 237.5 0.31 2499 23,251 0.5 22 32 12,275 2602 113 80 DL° 9 716 213.3 0.32 7708 10,067 656.8 78 224 96,808 2611 271 1142 16 84 10,299 69.7 0.34 1398 4255 0.3 23 26 10,452 872 71 53 1 7 95 46.9 0.32 1005 1210 2.9 7 14 3651 376 23 233 53 5 98 33.4 0.50 1302 2021 0.5 8 16 4109 616 37 44 2 5 100 129.4 0.43 5451 14,474 1.1 58 131 24,297 4234 176 296 7 24 700 34.1 0.43 1386 2547 0.3 23 24 5731 806 45 44 2 6 258 60.5 0.37 1832 5596 0.1 15 20 7086 1451 38 104 DLe 9 489 13.6 2.01 236 344 0.0 4 3 605 121 6 6 DL° 2 37 187.5 2.01 2828 2230 0.1 29 42 7063 837 51 45 9 15 80 NA 900 187 0.0 1.1 0.2 22 64 0.2 0.0 0.8 0.4 5.3 Notes: °Distance was obtained from the sampling site to the RCM pile located inside the facility. bMore than hvo samples were analyzed and the average values were reported here. CDL = concentration below the method detection limit. dLocations are at the background site, Gloucester City Park (N and 0, respectively). eAverage concentration (µg/mg) in three trip blank samples. Yu et al. Page 25 Table 4 TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN TdiaosnueJ Joy}ny Vd-HIN The size -dependent deposition velocity/flux calculated from particle number count and the corrected deposition flux by particle mass percent for each size range. Deposition Flux (mg/m2 day) Corrected Deposition Flux" (mg/m2-day) Particle Diameter (µm) Deposition Velocity (m/day) 200 m 500 m 800 m 200 m 500 m 800 m 0.75 1.75 3.75 6.75 8.75 10.0 Total 3.22 0.18 0.09 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.6 0.88 0.42 0.26 0.12 0.06 0.03 68.9 3.87 1.86 1.15 0.93 0.45 0.28 187 10.5 5.05 3.13 1.21 0.58 0.36 364 20.5 9.81 6.08 2.68 1.29 0.80 475 26.7 12.8 7.92 10.1 4.84 3.00 15.01 7.20 4.46 Note: aThe deposition flux was corrected by averaged mass percent for each particle range reported in Table 1. JAir Waste Manag Assoc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 May 06. Residential Real Estate Market Analysis Prepared By: Andrew Abrams In the Matter of Weld County Planning Case File No. COZ20-0004 EXHIBIT i96 This report analyzes changes in residential real estate values surrounding the property that is the subject of the above -referenced land use application (27486 County Road 13), both in absolute terms and relative to all of Weld County, from 2015 to 2019. The purpose of this evaluation is to determine whether the construction and commencement of operation of the transloading facility on the above -referenced property resulted in any material changes in the local real estate market surrounding the property. As described below, my conclusion is that the construction and commencement of operation of the subject facility has not resulted in any deterioration in house values, and in fact, house values have increased more quickly in the study area than in Weld County as a whole. Methodology My biography is attached here as Exhibit 1. When analyzing the properties in the study area (which is depicted on the attached Exhibit 2), I evaluated metrics such as days on market, average sales price, median sales price, percent of original list price to close price and months of inventory. These metrics are industry standards for evaluating the overall performance of the residential real estate market. The data source I used to obtain this information was Infosparks on IRES, which is the multiple listing service used by residential real estate brokers in Northern Colorado. I considered data from January 2015 to May 2020 in conducting my analysis. Additional charts are attached as Exhibit 3, showing the data that I analyzed. Note that, because the study area is relatively small, individual home sales may create more substantial changes in median and average data. My analysis attempts to balance out these changes to ensure that those aberrations do not skew the overall data. Description of Residential Properties in the Study Area There is a residential, urban -scale subdivision containing approximately 100 single- family homes called Indianhead Estates, located to the northeast of the property, at the intersection of U.S. Highway 34 and County Road 15. Other homes in the area are largely rural residential properties, and include a few single-family homes along County Road 56 to the south and east of the property, and a few single-family homes along County Roads 13 and 15 to the south and east of the subject property. 1 Data Analysis and Summary of Findings Based on the available data, there are several conclusions that can be drawn about how the area surrounding the subject property has changed since 2015, both in absolute terms and relative to Weld County as a whole. Based upon median sales price alone, the study area has appreciated by 41% from 2015 to 2019 (there was no data available yet for early 2020). During the same period, Weld County as a whole appreciated by 36%. Generally speaking, for -sale properties in Weld County sold faster and closer to list price than the subject area, however, the months of inventory metric for the study area decreased from an average of 3.88 in 2015 to 2.583 in 2019, while Weld County generally saw an increase of .285. Months of inventory is closely correlated with the sales prices. When evaluating an area, supply of and demand for for -sale homes have the biggest impact on overall sales price. Although Weld County homes sold more quickly and closer to list price than those in study area through the period from January 2015 through December 2019, they did not appreciate at the same rate. This is understandable, considering that the average price in Weld County was considerably less than the subject area, and there are normally more buyers at a lower price point than at higher price points. This fact translates into properties at lower price points selling more quickly and closer to list price, whereas at higher price points, houses sell more slowly and generally see more price negotiation. In this circumstance, even though the study area saw increases in median days on market and the list price -to - close price had a bigger gap in the subject area, the study area appreciated more. We would normally expect to see these types of increases in median days on market and changes in list price -to -close price as a result of appreciation and the generally high sales prices of homes in the study area. The appreciation in the study area is most likely due to a relative lack of inventory. Months of inventory is normally directly correlated to sales price as it reflects the relationship of supply and demand. In this instance, it is not surprising that with the average months of inventory for the study area decreasing by 1.297 from 2015 to 2019, that median sales prices during that time had proportionally increased. Median Days on Market. Median days on market is simply the median, across all home sales, of the number of days each home is on the market, from listing for sale to closing. Infosparks reports this data on a month -to -month basis. Across the twelve months of calendar year 2015, Weld County's average for median days on market was 57, while the subject area was 88. In 2019, Weld County's twelve-month average for median days on market was 51.41, a 5.59 decrease from 2015, while the median days on market in the study area increased to 95.57. 2 Months of Inventory. Months of inventory measures how fast all the existing homes on the market are selling. The National Association of Realtors considers a balanced market as four to six months of inventory. Essentially, months of inventory describes how long it would take, at current sales pace, for for -sale inventory to run out if no one puts a house on the market. Months of inventory is measured monthly. In 2015, the average months of inventory for Weld County was 1.79, meaning that in less than two months, if no one put their house on the market, there would be no more houses to sell or buy. The study area during that time had an average of 3.88 months of inventory. By 2019, the demand for the study area outpaced Weld County. The 2019 average number of months of inventory was 2.075 for Weld County, and 2.583 for the subject area, meaning that whereas the County had a slight increase over the four-year period, the study area decreased by 1.297. Median Sales Price. Median sales price is simply the median of all home sales prices, which Infosparks measures on a monthly basis. The twelve-month average median sales price for Weld County was $262,540.33 in 2015, while the same figure was $478,866.66 in the study area. In 2019, the twelve-month average of the median sales price for Weld County was $356,871.25, and the same figure for the study area was $677,070. Thus, the Weld County median sales price had increased by 35.9% or $94,330, while the study area had increased 41.39% or $198,203.34. Median List Price -to -Close Price. Median list price -to -close price measures the median difference, among all home sales in a given month, between the original listing price of the home and the eventual sales price. This metric is measured in percentage terms, with the percentage representing the sale price as a percentage of the original list price. The median list price -to -close price for Weld County went from 99.9% in 2015 to 99.3% in 2019. That was a slight decrease of .6%. The subject area in 2015 had a list price to close price of 96.1%. In 2019, the list price to close price was 93.8%. That was a decrease of 2.3%. Conclusion In summary, I conclude that the study area saw significant increases in house prices between January 2015 and the end of 2019. Data showing reductions in months of inventory are consistent with this conclusion. Data showing increases in median days on market and changes in list price -to -close price are also consistent with a higher -end residential real market, with higher house values. Thus, it does not appear that the presence of the transloading facility that is the subject of the current land use application has had any negative impact on real estate values in the surrounding area. 3 Exhibit 1 Biography of Andrew Abrams Andrew Abrams is a licensed Realtor in the State of Colorado. He is the employing broker of A - Squared Real Estate and has been licensed since 2010. He is a past chair of the Denver Metro Association of Realtors' Government Affairs Committee, has served on Denver's Blueprint Denver Task Force, Affordable Housing Task Force, and he currently sits on Denver's Planning Board. He is the current vice -chair of DMAR's Market Trends Committee and frequently teaches the association's market trends class. He has been extensively interviewed and quoted discussing the residential real estate market, including by media outlets such as KDVR/FOX 31 Denver, the Denver Post, the Denver Business Journal, and Inman, a news journal for real estate brokers. Andrew Abrams ER.100030726 A -Squared Real Estate 303-981-6723 andrew(aasquaredre.com Exhibit 2 Map of Study Area Your local housing market defined by you. Pick a predefined area on the left or type a location (address, city, landmark, ZIP code, etc.). Use the X polygon or circle tools to draw custom shapes on the map. Connect first and last points to finish a shape. Restart, save and trash areas with ease! Entire MLS Boulder County Larimer County i c. Kel irT1 u Type a location... Stats Homes along RD 56, 3z r L �e (https://maps.g tertomArnap ?104t4M3A42EG 1 1213 t riigk on o 01:7 II9a tent -dpi �1!12b1?sod alzi'7S nle Exhibit 3 Data Charts Andrew Abrams A -Squared Real Estate Average Days on Market 400 300 200 100 0 _ Office: 9703720627 Fax: 3033334080 andrew@asquaredre.com Weld County — Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15 CGoloProperty.com® IRES9A/b. 1-2015 1-2016 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 Weld County& Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15* Each data point is one month of activity. Data is from June 12, 2020. * User -defined area. All data from IRES. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. InfoSparks © 2020 ShowingTime. Andrew Abrams A -Squared Real Estate Office: 9703720627 Fax: 3033334080 andrew@asquaredre.com Average Percent of Original List Price vs Sold Weld County — Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15 105.0% 100.0% 95.0% 90.0% 85.0% 80.0% 75.0% 70.0% 1-2015 CGoloProperty.com® IRES9A/b. 1-2016 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 Weld County& Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15*: RES-Detached Each data point is one month of activity. Data is from June 12, 2020. * User -defined area. All data from IRES. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. InfoSparks © 2020 ShowingTime. Andrew Abrams A -Squared Real Estate Average Sales Price $1.4M $1.2M $1.0M $0.8M $0.6M $0.4M $0.2M _ Office: 9703720627 Fax: 3033334080 andrew@asquaredre.com Weld County — Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15 CGoloProperty.com® IRES9A/b. 1-2015 1-2016 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 Weld County& Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15*: RES-Detached Each data point is one month of activity. Data is from June 12, 2020. * User -defined area. All data from IRES. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. InfoSparks © 2020 ShowingTime. Andrew Abrams A -Squared Real Estate Median Days on Market 400 300 200 100 0 _ Office: 9703720627 Fax: 3033334080 andrew@asquaredre.com Weld County — Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15 CGoloProperty.com® IRES9A/b. 1-2015 1-2016 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 Weld County& Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15* Each data point is one month of activity. Data is from June 12, 2020. * User -defined area. All data from IRES. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. InfoSparks © 2020 ShowingTime. Andrew Abrams A -Squared Real Estate Office: 9703720627 Fax: 3033334080 andrew@asquaredre.com Median Percent of Original List Price vs Sold Weld County — Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15 105.0% CGoloProperty.com® IRES9A/b. 70.0% _ 1-2015 1-2016 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 Weld County& Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15*: RES-Detached Each data point is one month of activity. Data is from June 12, 2020. * User -defined area. All data from IRES. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. InfoSparks © 2020 ShowingTime. Andrew Abrams A -Squared Real Estate Median Sales Price $1.4M $1.2M $1.0M $0.8M $0.6M $0.4M $0.2M 1-2015 Office: 9703720627 Fax: 3033334080 andrew@asquaredre.com Weld County — Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15 CGoloProperty.com® IRES9A/b. 1-2016 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 Weld County& Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15* Each data point is one month of activity. Data is from June 12, 2020. * User -defined area. All data from IRES. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. InfoSparks © 2020 ShowingTime. Andrew Abrams A -Squared Real Estate Months Supply of Inventory 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0 _ Office: 9703720627 Fax: 3033334080 andrew@asquaredre.com Weld County — Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15 CGoloProperty.com® IRES9A/b. 1-2015 1-2016 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 Weld County& Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15* Each data point is one month of activity. Data is from June 12, 2020. * User -defined area. All data from IRES. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. InfoSparks © 2020 ShowingTime. Median Days on Market Jan -15 72 Nov -19 55 Average over 5 years Average of 2015 Average of 2019 Difference of DOM from 2015 to 201 1/15/2020+A13A10:A1A10:A15 Nov -19 Average over 5 years Average of 2015 Average of 2019 Difference of DOM from 2015 to 201 52.33 57 51.41 5.59 Average Days on Market 95 55 69.53 75.83 66.5 9.33 Months of Inventory Feb -15 May -20 Average over 5 years Average of 2015 Average of 2019 Difference of DOM from 2015 to 201 Median Sales Price Jan -15 Nov -19 Average over 5 years $ Average of 2015 $ Average of 2019 $ Difference of Sales Price from 2015 tc $ Percentage of increase since 2015 to 1.6 1.3 1.85 1.79 2.075 -0.285 241625 359601 318,658.12 262,540.33 356,871.25 94,330.92 1.359300683 Average Sales Price Jan -15 Nov -19 Average over 5 years Average of 2015 Average of 2019 Difference of Sales Price from 2015 tc Percentage of increase since 2015 to Average of 2015 Average of 2019 270293 396742 344,145.34 286,629.50 386,645.25 100,015.75 1.348937391 Median List Price to Close Jan -15 99.60% Nov -19 99.00% 99.90% 99.30% 60 54 82.81 88 95.57 -7.57 60 54 84.9 88.8 104.28 -15.48 0.7 2 2.536 3.88 2.583 1.297 390000 586000 $ 540,830.00 $ 478,866.66 $ 677,070.00 $ 198,203.34 1.413900897 390000 586000 $ 540,764.33 $ 478,866.67 $ 682,070.00 $ 203,203.33 1.424342187 97.70% 96.90% 96.10% 93.80% Metric: Median Days on Market Time Calculation: Monthly Data from: 6/12/2020 Segments: Weld County Homes along RD 56 Filters Weld County: Homes along RD 56 34 road 13 and 15*: Date Weld County Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15 Jan -15 72 60 Feb -15 70 Mar -15 55 137 Apr -15 53 57 May -15 53 90 Jun -15 51 Jul -15 47 Aug -15 51 Sep -15 52 Oct -15 52 128 Nov -15 64 61 Dec -15 64 Jan -16 68 Feb -16 60 80 Mar -16 55 354 Apr -16 50 May -16 50 35 Jun -16 50 45 Jul -16 48 Aug -16 50 Sep -16 55 91 Oct -16 53 Nov -16 63 Dec -16 62 Jan -17 63 Feb -17 57 78 Mar -17 53 56 Apr -17 46 9 May -17 46 Jun -17 47 56 2 Jul -17 43 12 Aug -17 47 1 Sep -17 49 140 Oct -17 51 Nov -17 50 59 Dec -17 51 61 Jan -18 55 Feb -18 56 Mar -18 45 84 Apr -18 44 May -18 43 59 Jun -18 43 21 Jul -18 47 Aug -18 46 54 Sep -18 49 Oct -18 47 124 Nov -18 50 Dec -18 53 112 Jan -19 58 Feb -19 51 154 Mar -19 52 175 Apr -19 46 118 May -19 46 67 Jun -19 47 29 Jul -19 47 Aug -19 51 Sep -19 53 72 Oct -19 54 Nov -19 55 54 Dec -19 57 Jan -20 65 Feb -20 50 Mar -20 49 Apr -20 44 May -20 48 52.33846154 82.81818182 * - user defined area. 52.33 82.81 3 All data from IRES. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. InfoSparks —© 2020 ShowingTime.> > > 4 Metric: Average Days on Market Time Calculation: Monthly Data from: 6/12/2020 Segments: Weld County Homes along RD 56 Filters Weld County: Homes along RD 56 34 road 13 and 15*: Date Weld County Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15 Jan -15 95 60 Feb -15 98 Mar -15 78 137 Apr -15 76 57 May -15 75 90 Jun -15 69 Jul -15 58 Aug -15 64 Sep -15 67 Oct -15 68 128 Nov -15 83 61 Dec -15 79 Jan -16 84 Feb -16 83 80 Mar -16 76 354 Apr -16 71 May -16 64 35 Jun -16 64 53 Jul -16 61 Aug -16 63 Sep -16 66 91 Oct -16 66 Nov -16 80 Dec -16 83 Jan -17 81 Feb -17 77 78 Mar -17 75 56 Apr -17 68 9 May -17 60 Jun -17 55 56 Jul -17 54 12 Aug -17 60 1 Sep -17 61 140 Oct -17 69 Nov -17 72 59 Dec -17 74 61 Jan -18 68 Feb -18 84 Mar -18 68 84 Apr -18 62 May -18 61 59 Jun -18 62 21 Jul -18 65 Aug -18 66 54 Sep -18 65 Oct -18 62 124 Nov -18 65 Dec -18 71 112 Jan -19 72 Feb -19 72 154 Mar -19 69 175 Apr -19 65 118 May -19 62 67 Jun -19 60 90 Jul -19 59 Aug -19 64 Sep -19 67 72 Oct -19 67 Nov -19 69 54 Dec -19 72 Jan -20 76 Feb -20 75 Mar -20 73 Apr -20 62 May -20 60 69.53846154 84.90909091 * - user defined area. 69.53 84.9 All data from IRES. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. InfoSparks —© 2020 ShowingTime.> > > Metric: Months Supply of Inventory Time Calculation: Monthly Data from: 6/12/2020 Segments: Weld County Homes along RD 56 Filters Weld County: RES-Detached Homes along RD 56 34 road 13 and 15*: Date Weld County Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15 Jan -15 2.1 Feb -15 1.6 0.7 Mar -15 1.2 3 Apr -15 1.2 2 May -15 1.3 Jun -15 1.4 Jul -15 1.7 Aug -15 1.8 6 Sep -15 2.2 8 Oct -15 2.2 6 Nov -15 2.3 Dec -15 2.5 1.5 Jan -16 1.6 Feb -16 1.4 1 Mar -16 1.1 Apr -16 1.2 0.5 May -16 1.4 2 Jun -16 1.5 Jul -16 1.6 2 Aug -16 1.8 Sep -16 1.8 Oct -16 1.8 Nov -16 2.2 Dec -16 1.8 Jan -17 1.5 1 Feb -17 1.4 Mar -17 1.3 3 Apr -17 1.3 3 May -17 1.4 2 Jun -17 1.8 3 Jul -17 1.9 4 Aug -17 1.8 8 Sep -17 2.8 2 Oct -17 1.9 1 Nov -17 2.3 Dec -17 2.7 Jan -18 1.6 1 Feb -18 1.5 Mar -18 1.2 1 Apr -18 1.2 2 May -18 1.4 1 Jun -18 1.7 Jul -18 1.7 3 Aug -18 2.2 Sep -18 2.4 2.5 Oct -18 2.4 Nov -18 2.8 4 Dec -18 2.9 Jan -19 1.8 Feb -19 1.8 4 Mar -19 1.7 4 Apr -19 1.4 4 May -19 1.9 1 Jun -19 1.9 Jul -19 2.2 Aug -19 2.1 1.5 Sep -19 2.5 Oct -19 2.3 1 Nov -19 2.6 Dec -19 2.7 Jan -20 1.7 Feb -20 1.8 Mar -20 2 Apr -20 3.2 May -20 1.3 2 1.856923077 2.536363636 * - user defined area. 1.85 2.536 9 All data from IRES. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. InfoSparks —© 2020 ShowingTime.> > > 10 Metric: Median Sales Price Time Calculation: Monthly Data from: 6/12/2020 Segments: Weld County Homes along RD 56 Filters Weld County: RES-Detached Homes along RD 56 34 road 13 and 15*: Date Weld County Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15 Jan -15 241625 390000 Feb -15 255000 Mar -15 252000 462500 Apr -15 260000 555500 May -15 265000 561450 Jun -15 270250 Jul -15 272750 Aug -15 265000 Sep -15 264234 Oct -15 260000 495000 Nov -15 272547 408750 Dec -15 272078 Jan -16 270000 Feb -16 276868 389000 Mar -16 276200 417700 Apr -16 284850 May -16 292574 397500 Jun -16 290101 520000 Jul -16 300000 Aug -16 300000 Sep -16 290000 370000 Oct -16 287435 Nov -16 298788 Dec -16 295000 Jan -17 290000 Feb -17 307500 439000 Mar -17 305000 468000 Apr -17 325000 490500 May -17 335000 Jun -17 330000 585000 Jul -17 329000 520000 Aug -17 332500 389000 Sep -17 330000 599000 Oct -17 325000 Nov -17 332543 672500 Dec -17 334975 610000 Jan -18 321500 Feb -18 330000 Mar -18 340721 480000 Apr -18 336367 May -18 351000 542500 Jun -18 348245 745000 Jul -18 340625 Aug -18 347000 455000 Sep -18 339500 Oct -18 345000 595000 Nov -18 346137 Dec -18 344989 550000 Jan -19 345875 Feb -19 343000 329490 Mar -19 349083 725000 Apr -19 359000 750000 May -19 359925 625000 Jun -19 360000 503000 Jul -19 359000 Aug -19 365604 Sep -19 366000 1221000 Oct -19 358000 Nov -19 359601 586000 Dec -19 Jan -20 Feb -20 Mar -20 Apr -20 May -20 * - user defined area. 357367 357500 362630 375000 385000 370291 $ 318,658.12 $ 318658.12 540,830.00 540830 All data from IRES. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. InfoSparks —© 2020 ShowingTime.> > > 13 Metric: Average Sales Price Time Calculation: Monthly Data from: 6/12/2020 Segments: Weld County Homes along RD 56 Filters Weld County: RES-Detached Homes along RD 56 34 road 13 and 15*: Date Weld County Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15 Jan -15 270293 390000 Feb -15 282397 Mar -15 279698 462500 Apr -15 290247 555500 May -15 284323 561450 Jun -15 289673 Jul -15 287593 Aug -15 288601 Sep -15 285246 Oct -15 285405 495000 Nov -15 298542 408750 Dec -15 297536 Jan -16 288164 Feb -16 298230 389000 Mar -16 303610 417700 Apr -16 306842 May -16 318824 397500 Jun -16 307083 482833 Jul -16 320793 Aug -16 326570 Sep -16 309701 370000 Oct -16 304156 Nov -16 320060 Dec -16 315030 Jan -17 322541 Feb -17 314607 439000 Mar -17 333064 468000 Apr -17 339436 490500 May -17 351417 Jun -17 352354 585000 Jul -17 347856 520000 Aug -17 355301 389000 Sep -17 360361 599000 Oct -17 349027 Nov -17 356059 672500 Dec -17 357227 610000 Jan -18 343485 Feb -18 361017 Mar -18 380056 480000 Apr -18 368324 May -18 380172 542500 Jun -18 371378 745000 Jul -18 370548 Aug -18 369718 455000 Sep -18 372087 Oct -18 366336 595000 Nov -18 387531 Dec -18 368940 550000 Jan -19 372281 Feb -19 370747 329490 Mar -19 371232 725000 Apr -19 380607 750000 May -19 392758 625000 Jun -19 391733 538000 Jul -19 395884 Aug -19 398093 Sep -19 394459 1221000 Oct -19 385213 Nov -19 396742 586000 Dec -19 389994 Jan -20 390508 Feb -20 385432 Mar -20 396687 Apr -20 408105 May -20 411513 $ 344,145.34 $ 540,764.33 * - user defined area. 344145.34 540764.33 All data from IRES. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. InfoSparks —© 2020 ShowingTime.> > > Metric: Median Percent of Original List Price vs Sold Time Calculation: Monthly Data from: 6/12/2020 Segments: Weld County Homes along RD 56 Filters Weld County: RES-Detached Homes along RD 56 34 road 13 and 15*: Date Weld County Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15 Jan -15 0.996 0.977 Feb -15 1 Mar -15 1 0.945 Apr -15 1 0.994 May -15 1 0.998 Jun -15 1 Jul -15 1 Aug -15 1 Sep -15 1 Oct -15 1 0.934 Nov -15 0.998 0.918 Dec -15 0.994 Jan -16 0.993 Feb -16 1 0.972 Mar -16 1 0.844 Apr -16 1 May -16 1 0.995 Jun -16 1 0.95 Jul -16 1 Aug -16 1 Sep -16 1 0.822 Oct -16 1 Nov -16 1 Dec -16 1 Jan -17 1 Feb -17 1 0.924 Mar -17 1 0.975 Apr -17 1 1.001 May -17 1 Jun -17 1 0.996 Jul -17 1 1 Aug -17 1 0.985 Sep -17 1 0.974 Oct -17 0.998 Nov -17 1 0.998 Dec -17 0.998 0.993 17 Jan -18 0.998 Feb -18 1 Mar -18 1 1 Apr -18 1 May -18 1 0.986 Jun -18 1 1 Jul -18 1 Aug -18 1 0.989 Sep -18 1 Oct -18 1 0.975 Nov -18 0.997 Dec -18 0.983 0.94 Jan -19 0.99 Feb -19 0.986 1.005 Mar -19 0.992 0.736 Apr -19 1 0.938 May -19 1 0.977 Jun -19 1 0.979 Jul -19 1 Aug -19 0.997 Sep -19 0.992 0.962 Oct -19 0.992 Nov -19 0.99 0.969 Dec -19 0.988 Jan -20 0.986 Feb -20 0.993 Mar -20 1 Apr -20 1 May -20 1 * - user defined area. All data from IRES. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. InfoSparks ,© 2020 ShowingTime.> 18 Metric: Average Percent of Original List Price vs Sold Time Calculation: Monthly Data from: 6/12/2020 Segments: Weld County Homes along RD 56 Filters Weld County: RES-Detached Homes along RD 56 34 road 13 and 15*: Date Weld County Homes along RD 56, 34, road 13 and 15 Jan -20 0.984 0.977 Feb -20 0.989 Mar -20 0.997 0.945 Apr -20 0.996 0.994 May -20 1 0.998 Jun -20 1.001 Jul -20 1.001 Aug -20 0.994 Sep -20 0.99 Oct -20 0.987 0.934 Nov -20 0.985 0.918 Dec -20 0.984 Jan -20 0.983 Feb -20 0.99 0.972 Mar -20 0.996 0.844 Apr -20 1 May -20 0.999 0.995 Jun -20 1.001 0.945 Jul -20 0.997 Aug -20 0.996 Sep -20 0.997 0.822 Oct -20 0.997 Nov -20 0.987 Dec -20 0.99 Jan -20 0.984 Feb -20 0.991 0.924 Mar -20 0.991 0.975 Apr -20 0.996 1.001 May -20 1.006 Jun -20 1.001 0.996 Jul -20 1.002 1 Aug -20 0.994 0.985 Sep -20 0.985 0.974 Oct -20 0.985 Nov -20 0.987 0.998 Dec -20 0.99 0.993 19 Jan -20 0.988 Feb -20 0.991 Mar -20 0.998 1 Apr -20 0.998 May -20 1.002 0.986 Jun -20 1.002 1 Jul -20 0.997 Aug -20 0.997 0.989 Sep -20 0.99 Oct -20 0.988 0.975 Nov -20 0.989 Dec -20 0.976 0.94 Jan -20 0.985 Feb -20 0.979 1.005 Mar -20 0.985 0.736 Apr -20 0.993 0.938 May -20 0.997 0.977 Jun -20 0.993 0.954 Jul -20 0.989 Aug -20 0.988 Sep -20 0.985 0.962 Oct -20 0.988 Nov -20 0.981 0.969 Dec -20 0.982 Jan -20 0.977 Feb -20 0.985 Mar -20 0.994 Apr -20 0.991 May -20 0.987 * - user defined area. 20 All data from IRES. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. InfoSparks,© 2020 ShowingTime. 21 EXHIBIT 97 s The Big Picture Key milestones, important context Rezo Property Rights Limitations/Enforcement Conditions Mitigation requirements Change procedure Compatibility Requirements • g ----,W USR Vested Property Right Applies ONLY to the approved uses Other uses would be a permit violation Conditions of Approval Development Standards Amendments Termination by Applicant Revocation by BOCC Imposed by application of Development Standards CLR-34 Neighborhoods Assn. Certain Property Right Applies to ANY allowed use in the zone district; Any attempt at restriction would violate vested rights Conditions of Approval None Rezoning None. Compatibility is assumed as part of the approval process 12 Scale/size (land usage, building size) Noise Emissions (dust, pollutants, odors) Traffic Hours of Activity Visual Blight Medium to Large Small to medium Minimal, with Minimal Occasional Light Daytime, summer Minimal Minimal Light Weekends, Minimal Limited Small to Large Minimal to Minimal Light to Daytime Limited to Moderate to very large Moderate to excessive (80dB) Moderate to excessive Moderate to excessive Up to 24/7 Moderate to excessive Degree of Compatibility co 4, cu cc Commercial Light Industrial Heavy Indusrial Residential 0 Commercial 0 Light Industrial 0 Heavy Industrial I 0 0: Always compatible : Not compatible, mitigation not possible Legend Windsor Employment Zone LUAM Future Land Use Description Agriculture Commercial Industrial Mixed Use Open Space Public Residential Transition World Street Map ROCK AND RAIL IMPACT OF I-3 ZONING ON WATER QUALITY 2B"8 Vexc2l Ima ing us. In , I V.f.e.l.cl County GIS I USDA FSA �I 3 Lune Path Polygon Circle 3D path 3D polygon Measure the dreomference or area of a circle on the ground ! r Slaa Rackq Moun[ain-Hoigr&=E iipnlcnt 66 55 50 45 46 35 30 Composite Baseline August 27, 2019 and April 27, 2020 This plot, or a portion of it, represents typical weekday night and morning noise levels when the Rock & Rail plant is not operating. It may appear on the following graphs for reference purposes. N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N • N • N • N N O O N • N M O O ❑ ▪ O .ti .ti ti ti ti N ti N N o ,,N N Plant Noise July 11, 2019, Early Morning No locomotives on site 70.00 65.00 60.00 Start: 3:38 AM Stop: 6:05 AM • 55.00 50.00 T=' 414 45.00 40.00 m Co Ln rl Lr1 CY m m Ln Ln Co N m N L n Ln 00 m Co. d1 Lf} L!1 m m rn O d rr1 Co dti N N Ln N ti O Co ri N N Time is MDT L n co • d N 0 m 0 4 +--I ▪ N rl Ln Co N Ln mm r,r m . � ■ �.I u 11111ia1 Legal limit is 50 dB(A) during this period Lf} rV Lf} C1 Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln m m O Ln Ln Ln Sunrise 4:39 am MST 00 d o rn tin C ry n Co ' N m Ln N Ln N O m 0. d d IC ri CO r-1 al 0 H Co 0 rr1 Co • N r} r 1 rn d- Lfl Ln Lrl Ln Ln Ln Ln Lrl Ln Lr1 Ln Ln Ln Ln L1l Ln o m N Lf} o ▪ a LQ Co 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 x50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 Plant Noise vs Baseline August 28-29, 2019, Early No train on site Time is MDT Start: 9:45 PM Stop: 5:36 AM Plant Noise Baseline Sunrise 6:24 am ti N m 05 N .H 5- rh m ✓1 .H N M d1 Un ti I` m c+ in I- m Gl N 5- m m US US N en 0 Ln I- m Min 5- m m vl en f— en m US N en G, us 5- m Min 0 N. m m US N en ▪ 0 0 Lr1 in in US C nl Cn m NJ ry m 0 0 ul US ul C C n1 rn Cn N ry ti 0 0 Ln Lp. Hp C a In en Cn N ry ti 0 0 ✓1 Ln Ln 7 7 m In en N 5- ti 0 O in in u1 7 US Ln N Qt l7 N Ql LO SS O r U W ✓1 fv Gi Lb rn O C m O N 7 m [0 Un N Cl l0 ti O N 7 O 5- a CO us N dt U? 515 O N 4 ti CC 7 ti co US N G5 CD en O N 4 ..-i 00 L+l N 90 ti N ▪ Ln in O rl N N m u, 0 0 m N N M u, Ln O N m M Ln Le, O N N m Ln 00 0 N N m Ln in O H N m M ifl u, O N N M d- Le, O O N N m ▪ ti N N N N N N N N m A.S. r'n m m m M m m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rl N rl N N N N rl N N N N N N N N N m M M In m en— en— m m US US US US US US US US Ln CS US L.'S in in NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 950.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 Start: 21:40 PM Stop: 6:12 AM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o co m e r.i ry m Nao I CO N ,1 CO a ta, ao ao N o CO a s n �n o ., m v N N o N a .n m a o NNNNNNNNN ry ry N NN N NN NN ry NNO r, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Plant Noise September 6, 2019, Early No train on site Time is MDT Activity first noted. Spikes due to aggregate being loaded into trucks ustained machinery noise N No m w . o a a N u o a w N.1 o a a N. o N w �o o v a N w o m w . o N a N. o a w N 0 o a m o a a N o .� a o v o o a m o a N a N . NO. G- io m N N N m �n co �n CO N .NI CO m .. r n a o ry NO, m o. 01, CO �o N N N ci c a o o e a 1n o o N c v o o N m a a Cr,o o r+ a Cr,Ln o ,� ,� I, 4-1 ry N NN NNN NN m m m m m m m m rn a a a a a a a a,, Ln N N N N 1.01 N 100.00 90.00 80.00 70.00 C) 0 60.00 60.00 40.00 30.00 Start: 10:09 PM Stop: 6:34 AM Plant Noise May 19-20, 2020 Time is MDT Locomotives on site, idling 0O m o v vN N m o N Lot N m O o a ,� V C ✓1 O 0 Cr1 C 01 0 0 m w N 0 ,� v o m. m �n COOI v n o m Q, Orm ,-I v n rn �n G-10 w a r o m N O,r.i OO, a r o m u N r� .. v �' ., a ry ry o m o c 00 m o c ai io ri ai m .. a ao ,� a is n v o ry m v o rvi o io ri m �n r-i ci �n ry O,r-i w 0 0 co a ; i w a o o v �n ,� m, a a y o o rn a o c o aulo o,, 75.00 70.00 55.00 50.00 9 55.00 5D. _ 45.00 40.00 on c n a 00 0 m in Start: 5: 48 AM Stop: 9: 25 AM Plant Noise May 21, 2020 Time is MDT No train on site h `I' o o a a h `, °1 , o O, a h "' o v a a h "' G'. a n "' °' m o o a s "' c'. o a v " of °', m o v h" GO �. h, ", ^' m� hMM o i5 a.�o�c 0. of 0, DO a C 0, un ry ooa fh om vi C 0, a�om .. �:,mh�n00 0 0 0 •—• a u-, h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h o0 00 00 00 00 00 00 o] W o] 00 W 00 00 N 00 00 00 ] 00 00 Qi 0, O, 0, 0, 0, 0, v 90.00 80.00 70.00 50.00 50.00 40.00 30.00 Train Arrival and Plant Noise June 10-11, 2020 Time is MDT Start: 9: 34 PM Stop: 5:33 AM Loud noises coming from plant r o M LL, C N L/1 00 ti N o m m N Ln CO N G m lb m N vl W N O m ,ch N u, CO ry N o LD m ti Ln o0 ry f� o m t0 m ry c. N O CO N G 63 lJ m m N C N C N C .� 07 o co Ln m ti L1 C a N G) m N LI C C9 l) 'N N m I) a N C r N m m N Ln C ti N N M Ln Ln N n C 7 ✓1 G ti N M Ln O N N M a ul ✓1 C N N 7 N C C N M M Ln C N /+Y ry N nl N N N N N N m M m m m C C C C C C C C ti ti ti .� ti ti ti N N N4444.774 a Ln N N N N N N N N N N N ^1 N N N N N N N N N 20 If the use is permitted within the zone, then it is impossible to not be in harmony. Western Paving Co. v. Board of County Commissioners, Colorado Supreme Court, 1973 The Indianhead Subdivision is a residential island with tremendous views of the mountains and yet pre- destined to be surrounded by incompatibility. Staff Recommendation If the Indian Head subdivisions and their surroundings are all in the Agricultural Zone, then how can they be "surrounded by incompatibility"? Imagery Date: 6/111,2014 4023'36.05"N 104"55'31.00" W See 4043 11 await 14106 11 O Rpcknkric Ii 51' k I] Is k ti ii 1 I 4 1 I ,-,, AF, W). I f S >; M Mignillarillit was' DENY L rnd Use Table 71x6'2q This table is for reference only_ Please refer to Ordinance 2029-02 for the actual requlitions_ Use 79 Asphalt or concrete batch plant, permanent So Aspha t or concrrgtrirtrptart7TE-Wettiff Si Asphalt or concrete batch plant associated with a MINING USR I-1 I-2 1-3 USR* S PR * S PR U BR '' UBR SPR * UBR ERR USR* USR USR Legend Windsor Employment Zone LUAM Future Land Use Description Agriculture Commercial Industrial Mixed Use Open Space Public Residential Transition World Street Map Weld County Property Information (970) 400-3650 PROPERTY PORTAL Technical Support (970) 400-4357 Overview Installation Network Connection Specifications Acoustic Standards IEC 81872-2:2002 Class 2 ANSI S1.4 Type 2 Frequency Range 20Hz to 20KHz Measuring Range 30 to 120 dB Deviation ± D.5 dB Frequency Weighting "A" Time Weighting Fast Noiseeters LiveNoise R=: a�[=• Fsma C;rt=:t Noise Report �r:alloi=_a 44E7CCC 44E7CCC ✓ No; l'trs Day 'I c.r,. NoiEe arar1ete:a NoiseMeters LiveNoise -- Ett-;= Noise Report _•:aN_ =_a 4=7CCC as=:ccc -, Day 3AM Plant noise V I'; . . ;;1t:1='It..s: [::• `.1 Lid j4' • IL.Ili iu uiI rr P f.I 1bi 1u Lr:i.. '1' r' • OIL] 1,iII'd W_irrior PIDygraund9 0 Le C L A Map data :.2020 Uri-ed States Terms Send Teedbaok100 m:... — I: r: A EXHIBIT i 98 HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission June 16, 2020 Applicant: AgProfessionals Owner: Gerrard Investments LLC Lessee: Rock & Rail, LLC Legal Representative: Otten Johnson Robinson Neff + Ragonetti, P.C. REQUEST Change of zone from A — Agricultural to 1-3 — Heavy Industrial HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 PRESENTATION OUTLINE • INTRODUCTION — Team — Project Intent — Federal Law Issues • BACKGROUND — Who Is Rock & Rail? — What does Rock & Rail do at this property? — Why is this project important to the County and regional economies? • SITE ORIENTATION AND SURROUNDING USES • APPROVAL CRITERIA • QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 3 /A�� ok &ali PROJECT TEAM Owner Gerrard Investments, LLC Lessee Rock & Rail, LLC Planning AgProfessionals Legal Counsel Otten Johnson Robinson Neff + Ragonetti, P.C. HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 4 INTENT • Consistency with good planning principles • 133 -acre site served by mainline (Union Pacific) railroad • Close proximity to major highways and short -line railroads • Currently developed with rail spur, transload yard, concrete mixing • Comprehensive plan supports industrial uses in this location • Align zoning with site's actual use • Federal government regulates railroad operations • Rock & Rail can voluntarily place some operations under local control • County's 2019 code amendments encourage zoning of industrial uses in industrial zones HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 5 FEDERAL PREEMPTION • Railroads: regulated by the federal Surface Transportation Board (STB) under the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act (ICCTA) • ICCTA: "transportation" is "movement of passengers or property, or both, by rail" and "services related to that movement, including receipt, delivery, elevation, transfer in transit, .. . storage, handling, and interchange of passengers and property 49 U.S.C. § 1O1O2(9)(A)-(B) • Transloading is "transportation": Judge Jackson of the federal district court • ICCTA preempts local regulation of rail transportation • Weld County Code does not regulate railroads or other rail operations • Railroads can voluntarily agree to place some operations under local regulation —or can continue to operate with no local regulation Federal Regulation • Trackage • Railyard • Rail operations • Train movements • Transloading • Conveyors Local Regulation (as proposed) • Concrete plant • Future site buildout • Public improve- ments • Development standards (i.e. building heights, setbacks, etc.) HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 6 WHO IS ROCK & RAIL? Class Ill, federally -regulated common rail carrier • Serving Colorado since 1998 • Interchange with UPRR and BNSF • Provide logistics, transloading, and car storage service to all industries. • Commodities handled include: Aggregate, mineral, magchloride, chemicals, cement, quarried stone, pipe and machinery, building materials Rock and Rail providing unit train cement service to a customer in southern Colorado Rock and Rail providing unit train rock service to the Parkdale Quarry, Southern Colorado HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 7 dock t5hitLid CD X w WHAT DOES ROCK & RAIL DO AT THE HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL? Asphalt Mixing Commodity Transloading Aggregate Transloading Concrete Mixing HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 8 rdti t5htLid THOUGHTFUL PLANNING TO SERVE CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS • Consolidation of uses on single parcel of property at transportation node • Advantages of rail -served concrete or asphalt mixing • Each train removes 400 trucks from roadways along with attendant traffic and environmental impacts • Materials transported and mixed at this site are essential in all construction • Nearly every building or infrastructure project uses a combination of stone, concrete, and asphalt • Supports essential construction industry • Construction industry is a major part of county and regional economy especially during the current pandemic HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 9 dts: t2liejLid COMMUNITY PROJECTS SUPPORTED BY HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL Liiih itt Provided material to 22 Agricultural projects - R70 Ranch Dam Provided material to 128 Residential projects - Eagle Brook Meadows - City Center Apartments %lirProvided material to 15 Education projects - Weld Central HS Provided material to 23 Retail projects - Johnstown Plaza Provided material to 53 Industry projects - Windsor Yard 7 Provided materials to 84 Energy projects - Cummings 18-19 HZ - O'Conner Gas Plant Provided materials to 43 Roads and Highway projects - CDOT Weld County Road 39 Provided material to 15 Governmental and Other projects - Weld County Jail Expansion - COVID-19 Hospital - Johnstown Recreation Center - Greeley Fire Station HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 10 COMMUNITY PROJECTS SUPPORTED BY HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL City Center Apartments Greeley Weld Central High School Retail - Johnstown Plaza Industry — Windsor Yard Energy — Oxy Cummings 18-19HZ unip IRoads and Highways — 83rd Greeley Energy — O'Conner Gas Plant Governmental — COVID- 19 Hospital Governmental — Weld North Jail Expansion HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 11 REGIONAL PLANNING DESIGNATIONS am -j, WELD COUNTY MIRE ONLINE MAN'I'INCI Cooperative Planning Areas & Growth Management Areas WGS 1984 Web Mercator Auxiliary_Sphere © Weld County Colorado THIS MAP IS NOT TO 8E USED FOR NAVIGATION 17,873.9 8,938 93 17.8739 Feet Greeley Annexation Area Windsor Annexation Area Johnstown GMA Greeley -Windsor Cooperative Planning Area Primary CLUA (Windsor -Greeley IGA) Secondary CLUA (Windsor -Greeley IGA) Notes HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 12 REGIONAL PLANNING DESIGNATIONS IPIP WELD COUNTY ONLINE Surrounding Uses MAPPING) 8,936.9 4,46845 8.9369 Feet WGS 1984 Wel, Mercator Aurdary_Sphere Weld County Colorado THIS MAP IS NOT TO 6E 95EO FOR NAVIGATION F ,.. `a Legend Parcels Highway Road Road Highway Ei County Boundary Furore Employment Turnout (Greeley Comprehensive Plan) Future Commercial DIstriol Nohnslown Comprehensive Plan) Future Commercial Toed Use Astncl IJohnslown Comprehensive Plan) Future Employment OI5Ihct (Johnslown Comprehensive Plan) Notes HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 13 NEARBY INFRASTRUCTURE HWY 34 Terminal - Infrastructure Legend Little Thompson --- Water District Waterlines }N{H.H. Railroad Major - Highway - Intersiale I� it Hwy 34 Fa.ilily Rou-d re Valley Rural Electric A s5o Gid tips, Inc. Boundary M1i A Scaleiroiy 0.2 0.4 0.5 14 HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 rcl> EXISTING LAND USES HWY 34 Terminal - Surrounding Land Uses Legend 4+01.4* Railroad P+1 aj or Highway Interstate Oil and Gas Property H.yy 34 Facility Land Use Commercial Industrial' Extraction Residential PhD - Mixed Use N A Scd lei rru 1 -3 0.2 0.4 0.8 15 HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 APPROVAL STANDARDS 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. 4. That STREET/ROAD or highway facilities providing access to the property are adequate in size to meet the requirements of the proposed zone district. 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 prior to DEVELOPMENT of the property. HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 16 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Section 22-2-70 — 80 Industrial development "[E]stablish industrial areas where a balanced, diversified economy can be encouraged in an effort to maintain and enhance the quality of life of Weld County citizens. These Goals and Policies intend to assure desirable local employment opportunities and to strengthen and stabilize the economy" • A.I. Goal 1. Promote the location of industrial uses ... along railroad infrastructure or where adequate services are currently available or reasonably attainable. • 1. I. Policy 1.1. Ensure that adequate industrial level of services and facilities are currently available or reasonably obtainable to serve the industrial development or district. • D.I.Goal 4. All new industrial development should pay its own way. • E.I.Goal 5. New industrial uses or expansion of existing industrial uses should meet existing federal, state and local policies and legislation. HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 17 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Section 22-2-20 Agriculture Goals and Policies A. Goal 7. County land use regulations should protect the individual property owner's right to request a land use change. • A.Policy 7.2. Conversion of agricultural land to nonurban residential, commercial and industrial uses should be accommodated when the subject site is in an area that can support such development, and should attempt to be compatible with the region. • A.Policy 7.3. Conversion of agricultural land to urban residential, commercial and industrial uses should be considered when the subject site is located inside an Intergovernmental Agreement area, Urban Growth Boundary area, Regional Urbanization Area or Urban Development Nodes, or where adequate services are currently available or reasonably obtainable. A municipality's adopted comprehensive plan should be considered, but should not determine the appropriateness of such conversion. HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 18 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Section 22-4-20 — Water • F.WA.Goal 6. Development should occur in areas where adequate water quantity and quality is currently available or reasonably obtainable. Section 22-4-50 — Air • A.AIR.Goal 1. Maintain National Air Quality Standards and, where practicable, improve air quality in the County. Section 22-4-70 — Noise • A.N.Goal 1. Minimize the impact of noise on County residents. • 1.N.Policy 1.1. Land use applications should be evaluated by the Department of Public Health and Environment for compliance with federal, state and County statutes, regulations and ordinances. HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 19 /4� tireid k COMPATIBILITY HWY 34 Terminal - Surrounding Land Uses Legend 4+01.4* Railroad PA ajor Highway Interstate Oil and Gas Property Hwy 34 Facility Land Use Commercial Industrial' Extraction Residential PhD - Mixed Use N A Scd lei rru 1 -3 0.2 0.4 0.8 20 HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 /4� trceid k COMPATIBILITY • Compatibility is a function of both use and development and operational measures taken • 1-3 uses are made compatible by: • Federal and state law, County code • Site characteristics • Site planning and operational characteristics HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 21 /A�� tiPe'Lli k MITIGATION MEASURES Agricultural-themed architecture Berming, buffering, and landscaping Truck underpass Dust mitigation Separation from residential uses HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 22 APPROVAL STANDARDS 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. 4. That STREET/ROAD or highway facilities providing access to the property are adequate in size to meet the requirements of the proposed zone district. 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 prior to DEVELOPMENT of the property. HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 23 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ,�- HIGHWAY 34 TERMINAL / CHANGE OF ZONE Weld County Planning Commission — June 16, 2020 24 450 S. Parish Ave. Johnstown, CO 80534 June 15, 2020 P: 970-587-4664 F: 970-587-0141 Weld County Planning Commission Weld County Board of County Commissioners Re: Rock and Rail Application #COZ20-0004 Dear Commissioners, Johnstown The purpose of this letter is to provide you with additional information related to the letter from Gary Gerrard dated May 14, 2020 that was provided to you as part the quasi-judicial process in evaluating Mr. Gerrard and Rock and Rail's application for rezoning (#COZ20-0004). On April 20, 2020, the Town Council of Johnstown held a regular Town Council meeting. During the portion of the meeting titled Mayor and Council Reports, the Council briefly discussed receipt of an email from a resident living near the subject property. The resident's email requested that Council consider taking a position related to the rezoning application. Although Town Staff had not seen the email request, it was inferred from the meeting that Town Council may not be receptive to this rezoning application. The rezoning request was similar to a request by the applicant, or a predecessor to the applicant, for a Use By Special Review to allow heavy industrial uses in the agricultural zone, which request was considered by Weld County in 2015. As evidenced by Town of Johnstown Resolution 2015-07 attached to this letter, Town Council was strongly opposed to the prior request. Accordingly, it makes sense that the Town Council might take a similar approach to the request for rezoning 5 years later, today in 2020. In Mr. Gerrard's letter, he attempts to muddy the waters on the situation in an attempt to establish doubt regarding who makes what decisions in the Town of Johnstown. Let it be clear, the Town Manager does not establish policy or positions regarding policy. The Manager only serves to carry out the policy established by Town Council. To that end, my initial engagement with Mr. Gerrard on April 24, 2020, was merely an exploratory mission to see if he had any interest in annexing the property into Johnstown so that I could relay his response to Town Council. During that conversation, I was abundantly clear to Mr. Gerrard that, given Town Council's discussion at the recent Council meeting (April 20th) and its prior position, Town Council may be inclined to maintain the position previously taken in 2015. I even encouraged Mr. Gerrard to watch the video from the April 20, 2020 meeting to gauge the position of the Council for himself As a result, my interest was only to determine if there was an interest to annex into Johnstown and then ask if the Town Council might also have an interest in annexing the property to control it from an aesthetic standpoint. Following the meeting, I conveyed my conversation with Mr. Gerrard to Town Council. After conferral and consideration, just as I had cautioned, Town Council declined to pursue annexation EXHIBIT of property containing a heavy industrial use. As thereafter set forth in Resolution 2020-13, Town Council firmly stands by the position that the subject property, which is in the Town of Johnstown's 3 -mile Growth Management Area, does not conform with the future land use plans of the Town. The Resolution was provided to the Planning Commission and the Weld County Commissioners as a statement of the Town's position and mirrors the previous, current, and future position related to this property. Regards, { ....---C att Le er Town Manager I Enclosures TOWN OF JOHNSTOWN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 2015-07 OPPOSING MARTIN MARIETTA'S APPLICATION FOR USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW (WELD COUNTY CASE NUMBER: USR 15-0027) WHEREAS, Martin Marietta submitted a use by special review application to Weld County on or about March 24, 2015, proposing to construct a plant site approximately z/2 mile south of U.S. Highway 34 on Weld County Road 13 and Larimer County 1; and WHEREAS, the proposed uses include an asphalt plant, cement batch plant, aggregate processing facility, asphalt storage, cement storage, fuel storage and construction of a rail spur and bridge around the property; and WHEREAS, Weld County referred the matter to the Town of Johnstown (the "Town") for review and recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Town has adopted the "Johnstown Area Comprehensive Plan," a copy of which may be viewed at www.towno.C9ohnstown.cor/DocumentCentei/Home/View/l 92 ("Comprehensive Plan"); and WHEREAS, the proposed facility is within the Growth Management Area contemplated in the Comprehensive Plan, an area into which urban development and annexation is anticipated to occur in the future; and WHEREAS, the Town designated the area that is the subject of the proposed facility for low -density, single-family residential homes; and WHEREAS, the proposed uses, being industrial in operation and impact, are inconsistent with the residential development and thus inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, in addition to contemplated residential development, the proposed facility abuts the existing Indianhead residential subdivision and is in close proximity to anticipated residential development within the current Town. boundaries; and WHEREAS, the proposed facility would negatively impact the nearby Indianhead residential subdivision by exposing the homes to continuous industrial operations, forcing them to coexist with large, otherwise unplanned, industrial development and creating potential losses of property value, quiet enjoyment and quality of life; and WHEREAS, on a broader scale, the Town envisions growth along the U.S. Highway 34 corridor to include commercial, residential and mixed use development, consistent and harmonious with the current development; and WHEREAS, the proposed facility is not only inconsistent with the Town's vision of the growth along the U.S. Highway 34, but has considerable potential to lead to an expanded and unplanned heavy industrial presence along the U.S. Highway 34 corridor; and WHEREAS, the applicant forecasts a significant increase in the generation of traffic along U.S. Highway 34 and County Road 13 arising from its operations, with the potential to negatively impact residents of the area and drivers along the roadways; and WHEREAS, the primary access to the proposed facility is along County Road 13 and the intersection of County Road 13 at U.S. Highway 34 is not adequate to handle the increase in traffic flow without improvements, including a traffic signal; and WHEREAS, the proposed uses also include an increase in the use of the railroad line across County Road 17, which presently has only a rural crossing that may not be adequate to address safety and delay concerns arising from the increased traffic; and WHEREAS, after careful review and consideration, the Town finds that the proposed uses, if permitted, would create undesirable, offensive and harmful consequences, inconsistent with the Town's long-range planning and inconsistent with the best growth and development along the U.S. Highway 34 corridor; and WHEREAS, construction of the proposed facility is not in the best interests of the Town or the citizens of the Town and surrounding areas. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF JOHNSTOWN, COLORADO, THAT: 1. The Town Council strongly opposes Martin Marietta's use by special review application for construction of the Martin Marietta Project. 2. The Town Council respectfully requests that Weld County deny Martin Marietta's use by special review application. PASSED, SIGNED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 15th day of June, 2015. 1.-..',.•ATTESTkv .c ode, Town Clerk TOWN OF JOHNSTOWN, COLORADO By: Mark Romanowski, Mayor TOWN OF JOHNSTOWN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 2020-13 OPPOSING ROCK & RAIL, LLC'S APPLICATION FOR A CHANGE OF ZONE (WELD COUNTY CASE NO. COZ20-004) WHEREAS, after multiple efforts to obtain the right to use the subject property for substantial industrial uses that are wholly incompatible with existing and anticipated land use in the surrounding area, Rock & Rail, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company and/or Gerrard Investments, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, submitted an application for a change of zone from A (Agriculture) to I-3 (Heavy Industrial) for a 133 -acre tract of land located at 27486 CR 13 & 6433 County Road 56, known by legal description as Lot B of RE -2803 & PPT SW4, County of Weld of Weld, State of Colorado, and located approximately %2 mile south of U.S. Highway 34 on Weld County Road 13 and east of Weld County Road 56 ("Property"), designated as Weld County Case No. COZ20-004 ("Application"); and WHEREAS, being in close proximity to and within three miles of the boundaries of the Town of Johnstown ("Town"), Weld County referred the Application to the Town for review and recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Town has adopted the "Johnstown Area Comprehensive Plan," a copy of which may be viewed at www•.townotjohnstown.com/ Doc Lull ent.Conter/Hoino/View/1.92 ("Comprehensive Plan"), illustrating the Town's anticipated land uses within the Town's boundaries and within the Town's Growth Management Area; and WHEREAS, the Property is within the Growth Management Area contemplated in the Comprehensive Plan, an area into which urban development and annexation is anticipated to occur in the future; and WHEREAS, as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan, the Town anticipates the development of low -density, single-family residential homes in the area surrounding the Property; and WHEREAS, in addition to the Town's contemplated residential development, the proposed facility abuts the existing Indianhead residential subdivision; and WHEREAS, the heavy industrial uses permitted in an I-3 zone, including, but not limited to, operation of an asphalt plant, cement batch plant, aggregate processing facility, asphalt storage, cement storage and fuel storage, are wholly inconsistent with residential development and with the Town's Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, heavy industrial uses on the Property, along with increased truck traffic, negatively impact existing and future residential development by exposing residents to continuous industrial operations, forcing them to coexist with large, otherwise unplanned, industrial development and creating potential losses of property value, quiet enjoyment and quality of life; and WHEREAS, on a broader scale, the Town envisions growth along the U.S. Highway 34 corridor to include commercial, residential and mixed use development, consistent and harmonious with the current development; and WHEREAS, an I-3 zone is not only inconsistent with the Town's vision of the growth along the U.S. Highway 34, but has considerable potential to lead to an expanded and unplanned heavy industrial presence along the U.S. Highway 34 corridor and is, simply put, misplaced in that location; and WHEREAS, even if certain industrial uses were compatible in the area, an I-3 zone, the most significant and impactful of all the industrial zones, is far too intense and far beyond the type of use the Town desires near its municipal boundary; and WHEREAS, after careful review and consideration, the Town finds that a change of zone of the Property from A (Agriculture) to I-3 (Heavy Industrial) would create undesirable, offensive and harmful consequences, inconsistent with the Town's long-range planning and inconsistent with the best growth and development along the U.S. Highway 34 corridor. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF JOHNSTOWN, COLORADO, THAT: 1. The Town Council strongly opposes Rock & Rail, LLC's application for change of zone of the Property from A (Agriculture) to I-3 (Heavy Industrial). 2. The Town Council respectfully requests that the Weld County Board of County Commissioners deny Rock & Rail, LLC's application, designated as Weld County Case No. COZ20-004. PAQ, SIGNED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this j / day of May, 2020. f l J3yN Q: EST,: "{Ra Seele, Town Clerk TOWN OF JOHNSTOWN, COLORADO By` Gary Lebs i ayor Achziger Christine Balich Rob Balich Ling Bickling Mel Bickling Lindfa Buchmeier Mark Collins Sharon Dirks Wolfgang Dougherty Vickie Eastman Harriette Eastman Lester Fenton Scott Holtslag Gertie Hopkins Daniel Hopkins Alyssa Hopp Ann Hopp Doug Kroeger Jeff Kroeger Mary Liggon Linda Lunt Marcella Lunt Cory Markus Paul Markus Sharon Martinez Rod Meusch Bob Meusch Renata Newell Howard Nisly Jason Novak Linda Orr Randy Orr Lynn Overholt Jay Peters Randy Peters Peggy Powis Bill Powis Sharon Quam Bill Quam Kathleen Robertson Barry Robertson Sandy Rochester Dan Rochester Natalie Schwalm Lloyd Schwalm Shirley Seter Janet Seter Marc Straub Susan Straub Pete Tennal Dave von Loh Rhonda Wallace John Wallace Olga EXHIBIT c ZzO I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. rrjG Signature and Date L 64Z/E016 ct Z7 669 _c ;); r , ) Address liY 7tWf 1c //3/ /70 a° Signature and Date Z7 6$ /7,,p Address Printed Name (c) S 03 —3 y /' 4 ( 'f. L% r'l 4 L76. f Printed Name Signature and Date Printed Name Address Signature and Date Printed Name Address I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. Signature and Date %511 of-txallf 0 Address Printed Name rLarrs�6G��!..Co7 Signature and Date 7/1 /pc/ 64 e_ Address Signature and Date T Address Signature and Date Address Printed Name Printed Name Printed Name � �r1 n � 01,. N (r\(-fct.Y) I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. Vii 31,202o ScA t);- S -hc .r Signature and Date Printed Name '\uu\5on Ave, LavdL1lc), CO gO3S' Address res 14;719 Le.ko-1-6- , LovdaAct, CO 'r) s 3 LI a r c Signature and Date /y C� r� L'(,:v\s, -.�-. 3 l f inCx [li:aCi n VE' LG'VY.�t ✓ cl , ( 0 3 113 7S Address ( 7r� ri L��U-}�, 6 . ,Lc veAc \, Co C)5.31C)5.31..)S� e.,i.o' C Printed Name Signature and Date Printed Name Address Signature and Date Printed Name Address I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquish* g 3 minutes of speaking time to them. e") / • Signature nd Date Prin1#ted Name /, J- () Address SiA K2,L gnature and Date Printed Name �carnn Cjvm 1,p66 i Lcti_k f CA" Address Signature and Date Printed Name —13- 4_©`10 Address Signature and Date Printed Name Address I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. C_LirV 6 Signature and Date Printed Name r Cr:7.3/ LM / (/,/-- n.s huh, Address Signature and Date Printed Name 46757-E' A E59-7i-AAAJ Address Signature and Date Printed Name Address Signature and Date Printed Name Address I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. (/4J,L&- s C'--- --) v etd-cH Co ? - Sign tune and Date L 3 D--o•°)___c) Address Printed Name /(/ , �?n Signature and Date Pri ted Name La �'- ��' Y3 @�tcu-r Address Signature and Date Printed Name Address 1 I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. Si mature aid Date ll '�j'IL 1/ - printed Name -1\,'(7x1 L5114/v/ [�`K�►N O r� 1---" c' -1--L (� - L! t' kits/ Nail Cr'' (''V Address L ',- /,/ Sig nature and Date Printed Name (7)Crgo (i) to goS351 Address b4/90,a Signature and Date Painted Name, Ntia !I6 KOCIVCr(- Address Signature and Date Printed Name Address am opposed to COZ2C-0 --, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezon ng before the Weld C.olJ,rt y Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on Jure i6y 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by r6i,nr fishing 3 mires of s a!kng time to them. . 2/ Address \ l qA. SA r o /VI r44t..5 77 // ag(Gtc ,oc+ 41. J01� nS TV7 J�-1 .3 Address I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. Zzv Signature and Date 75≤7 fiat• 7 4- uG FOS"3 Printed Name Address Signature and Date. Address 5 gryature and Date Address Signature an Address L /(,/n/ 1) 1) LA//FL- Printed Name --S -1\c,- (-1 ft 1',4u` Printed Name 1.O ve C6 S- (*,S`3cf 0 ),..)/)(0) Date 6-14A4-1 C.t _re:2 _LA, Printed Name/ CL_O S0531 1 I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. £ //z/2o IC, De . Lam.. (Tc Signature and Date Printed Name 2-7W27 flap j -1-v1 LC,,e(0.,(0� Address Signature and Date Printed Name ) Co Z262:7 H°, fir Address 1 Signature and Date Printed Name Address Signature and Date Printed Name Address I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. Signature an Date Printed Name of1L4`"7 1-`i^pt c. Address (24(,1 a:16_, Lila -1 ?-Zn I K a Z i- eis Signature and Date Printed Name 1 6_,L 7 1-16ilL- zc_a' Address Signature and Date Printed Name Address Signature and Date Printed Name Address I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. • r_ 0110e/7/0- 1-5 LA Signature and Date Printed Name m 3 rreA. ; e CrY SI) 5 5 Address Signature and Date Address q1L Printed Name cL or; —f/,2c ° (k. Signature and Date Printed Name Address Signature and Date Printed Name Address I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. (Q -I Z-ZO mo,r 4- ( H P. Ss rgm b Signature and Date Printed Name 3 Hod; `Try► I 7-a. C o E05.3 �1 Address (420.41--)c-Y LL) G -/A '. � .5 CAS an l= 5i-ra. b Signature and Date y:. ct7793 /7/6.?... --77;c1; r).5k n Address Printed Name V SI❑ -. 4 Signature and Date Printed Name Address Signature and Date Printed Name Address I am apposed to C0Z2t1 4, the proposed rezoning of tine Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR.34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning g before the Weld County Planning Commission and the weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 14 204. By my signature below, I authorize CLit• 34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. :iF,,aturaacid NAB 'Address signature end Date Printed Name Printed Name JJ tliW r, r --. �°� ^.d .. h4 �1 'ilitl _r !'J Y•��'i li + 1 �,�r hddresi Si$IFiture Ar d Pet Address Printed Nance Signature arid (nate Printed Marne Address I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. i‘./kA- 4, ct.(0.,..7,2_4, 0 —I6 ^LcA4 Signature and Date 0--) 6,5-7 CA C(�r-&)1 D c> --D Printed Name Address G--tb -Lto O1_4A LAC L c� Signature and Date Printed Name (, 6.7 LA-CI(=1 Address Signature and Date Printed Name 7 7 V <i , �1 Address . 1 Signature and Date (70),),))-)4(L44 dike r7{---. . Address Ld4 L 6 Printed Name Signature and Date Printed Name } C' /4I 4 r ) F I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. Address Arwe Hopp Signature and Date 7570 /(op, 1 far I Address Signature and Date 21.5 70 Address • Printed Name (odc LF, o s -0fl C L41-(Df77 Printed Name O2( Lr'1L).L.AftiiN e) Baca Signature and Date Printed Name Address pciAa 161 fo C(dc“/ I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. Signre and Date t:Z7o ( -“efi Address (2-7\.."2 Printed Name LC, \ct v\C� Signature and Date oJ Address (Siure and Date .?a )v� 1),Q)Vi Address Signature and Date p, 61io 000 fiKtzLc eO --EPA f Printed Name Vioa5c7-q C`_6 ZFeLP Printed Name r2_0-( �In , c USf34 27g''o Address Printed Name yo/b/70 a KO Address I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. Signature and Date Address Signature and Date Aroq\ -17, Kho 6-46 4.07,Moir Printed Name Printed Name LeAl 7 e_Y__704- Cd LU\J.L t\C ce ) r 7 Address Signature and Date .--)Aa2-4 ROC # TP Printed Name 6-1 APOcHNi , C0 )3Li Address I) cA) fto i,) . Pow Signature and Date Printed Name IJ Jahn5 oL, a C` 5 P"(-1 I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. io Signatureiand ate r��IAh 5 1 W1S- �,7L a i H rei r I Jci•wratvili Po6o3 Printed Name Address 7 d . c /��f I= f `"_ 7 S 11 iJ 1-- /e !. .7 L.' I) G(,ir'r.' I "-Ai Signature arfd Date Printed Warne i f it) )'‘')(1-.) r ') O /al. 1)-) Y 1 Y: 1-0 (..:?‘-) Address x by -Li Signature and Date �/ ✓ Printed �Name DC/ /`. Address _ Signature and Date SP/ 9 I�/�J?� ,,k_ e- f �l Address ! L ] Printed Name I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates.. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. Signature and Date Printed Name Address 4�.4.s. rr,_ Signature and Date Printed Name f Address r Signature and Date Printed Name Address Signature and Date Printed Name Address I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. pd,.144/ Signature and DatePrinted Name ‘57 60'74 Address Signature and Date Printed Name Address Signature and Date Printed Name Address Signature and Date Printed Name Address I am opposed to COZ20-0004, the proposed rezoning of the Rock & Rail property to the west of Indian Head Estates. I support the efforts of CLR-34 and neighborhood representatives to oppose this rezoning before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission hearing on June 16, 2020. By my signature below, I authorize CLR-34 and its speakers to represent me at this hearing by relinquishing 3 minutes of speaking time to them. J Signature and Date ` Printed Name Address /i/oar7'77161 4 Fo53 L-ga,79 ,{ge,F0 6 Signature and Date Printed Name Address ,v,s, Signature and Date Printed Name Address Signature and Date Printed Name Address Washington University in St. Lou is •u• Physicians 10 u. / QQ . -1(0-(,\ YY).L .<31(0e a(441 .414;;e,�/o , 0\,1144 i_t-n/Y)rr) Lvvtr L2A 0O-ecu-t, a78-8 'a"9 http://WUPhysicians.wustl.edu Hello