Home
News
GRAND JUNCTION — Concerned citizens have 30 days from the Grand Junction City Council’s Sept. 17 ruling on zoning for Brady Trucking’s property at 27 1/2 and C 1/2 roads to gather 1,860 signatures on petitions asking the council to reconsider its decision or leave it up to voters to decide.
Western Colorado Congress of Mesa County members and supporters are circulating the petitions now. If they get enough signatures in time, the council’s decision to zone two of Brady Trucking’s riverfront parcels industrial office and the other light industrial would be suspended until the City Council can revisit the decision and/or put the issue to voters in a special or municipal election.
The city’s next municipal election is in April 2009. The issue would not go on the Nov. 4 general election ballot.
The council’s decision to give Brady Trucking light industrial zoning on one of its parcels was “so wrong,” said WCCMC member Janet Magoon. She’s circulating a petition because she worries Brady will bring pollution, noise and odor problems to neighbors across the Colorado River from the property if the company expands its truck hub at 356 27 1/2 Road, which borders the three parcels.
“Our concern is that the community has spent 25 years creating a vision of a green waterway,” Magoon said. “We decided immediately after the City Council’s decision on the 17th that we would take it to the people.”
Russ Justice, Brady Trucking’s Colorado division manager (the company also has a location in Vernal, Utah), said Grand Junction had few industrial properties to offer in 2006, when the company bought the property in order to expand their operation at 356 27 1/2 Road. The city attempted to find a piece of industrial land elsewhere in the city to perform a swap, but were unsuccessful.
The company bought the land when it was in Mesa County and zoned heavy industrial. They had to annex into the city in order to build on the land. After annexing, the council split 3-3 at a June 16 meeting over whether to zone the third parcel light industrial or industrial office. The tie broke Sept. 17 when Mayor Pro Tem Teresa Coons changed her no vote to a yes.
In the mean time, the business spent $200,000 on asbestos abatement and cleaning the site, which was once the location of a rendering plant. The company’s trucks carry sand used for oil and gas fracking, called silica, to and from the Great Lakes.
“There’s nothing hazardous about it,” Justice said at a press conference at Brady Trucking Wednesday morning, scooping up a palm of silica.
At the same conference, Brady Trucking’s vice president, Chuck Johnson, said the company isn’t necessarily worried about the zoning issue going to a public vote. Johnson confirmed the trucking company had hired a public relations firm, LC Marketing, as a cameraman filmed the press conference. Johnson said the company had not ruled out making a commercial if zoning became an election issue.
Mayor Gregg Palmer, who voted against the zoning twice, said Wednesday council members tend to move on once they’ve made a decision. But it’s the public’s right to petition.
“I don’t think it’s wise to have an election on every issue at every time. That would slow things down. But because it’s contentious, it’s appropriate that the community be heard,” Palmer said. “If the people want to ask, it’s the American way.”
Reach Emily Anderson at eanderson@gjfreepress.com.
Western Colorado Congress of Mesa County members and supporters are circulating the petitions now. If they get enough signatures in time, the council’s decision to zone two of Brady Trucking’s riverfront parcels industrial office and the other light industrial would be suspended until the City Council can revisit the decision and/or put the issue to voters in a special or municipal election.
The city’s next municipal election is in April 2009. The issue would not go on the Nov. 4 general election ballot.
The council’s decision to give Brady Trucking light industrial zoning on one of its parcels was “so wrong,” said WCCMC member Janet Magoon. She’s circulating a petition because she worries Brady will bring pollution, noise and odor problems to neighbors across the Colorado River from the property if the company expands its truck hub at 356 27 1/2 Road, which borders the three parcels.
“Our concern is that the community has spent 25 years creating a vision of a green waterway,” Magoon said. “We decided immediately after the City Council’s decision on the 17th that we would take it to the people.”
Russ Justice, Brady Trucking’s Colorado division manager (the company also has a location in Vernal, Utah), said Grand Junction had few industrial properties to offer in 2006, when the company bought the property in order to expand their operation at 356 27 1/2 Road. The city attempted to find a piece of industrial land elsewhere in the city to perform a swap, but were unsuccessful.
The company bought the land when it was in Mesa County and zoned heavy industrial. They had to annex into the city in order to build on the land. After annexing, the council split 3-3 at a June 16 meeting over whether to zone the third parcel light industrial or industrial office. The tie broke Sept. 17 when Mayor Pro Tem Teresa Coons changed her no vote to a yes.
In the mean time, the business spent $200,000 on asbestos abatement and cleaning the site, which was once the location of a rendering plant. The company’s trucks carry sand used for oil and gas fracking, called silica, to and from the Great Lakes.
“There’s nothing hazardous about it,” Justice said at a press conference at Brady Trucking Wednesday morning, scooping up a palm of silica.
At the same conference, Brady Trucking’s vice president, Chuck Johnson, said the company isn’t necessarily worried about the zoning issue going to a public vote. Johnson confirmed the trucking company had hired a public relations firm, LC Marketing, as a cameraman filmed the press conference. Johnson said the company had not ruled out making a commercial if zoning became an election issue.
Mayor Gregg Palmer, who voted against the zoning twice, said Wednesday council members tend to move on once they’ve made a decision. But it’s the public’s right to petition.
“I don’t think it’s wise to have an election on every issue at every time. That would slow things down. But because it’s contentious, it’s appropriate that the community be heard,” Palmer said. “If the people want to ask, it’s the American way.”
Reach Emily Anderson at eanderson@gjfreepress.com.
