What is happening?
Jefferson Orchards is requesting that the zoning for 194 acres on Northport Avenue (across the road from Rockwool) be changed. The land is currently in SmartCode zoning and portions of the land are zoned as natural zone, rural zone, general urban zone and urban center zone. The latter two of these zones support the development of mixed used residential, businesses, shopping, and parks, and the first two preserve open space, agriculture, and natural areas as buffers to the land in the county zoned rural agricultural. Jefferson Orchards is proposing removing the entire 194 acres of land from SmartCode zoning and rezoning it as “industrial.” The industrial zoning designation would allow all types of industrial development including heavy industrial development of this land.
While the rezoning request or application states several times that the current owner (Jefferson Orchards) does not wish to develop the land into heavy industry, there is nothing to stop a future owner from doing so if the current plan is approved. Likewise, the current request gives several examples of how the land may be developed that seem benign, however there is nothing holding the owners (or future owners) to these example plans.
How did we get here?
On July 7, 2017 Jefferson Orchards entered into a purchase agreement with Rockwool to sell Rockwool a portion of Jefferson Orchards’ original orchard land. As a condition of this sale, Rockwool required that Jefferson Orchards place restrictions on the future development of the remainder of the land and Jefferson Orchards future land purchases. These restrictions were later recorded as a deed restriction (October 2017).
On July 17, 2017 Jefferson Orchards submitted a rezoning request to Ranson for its land. Despite knowing that it had entered into this agreement limiting the further development of its land, Jefferson Orchards requested that the zoning on the remaining land Rockwool did not buy (the land with the restriction). Jefferson Orchards requested that the remaining land remain in mixed use residential (T4 General Urban and T5 Urban Center), which did not match the restrictions already accepted as part of the purchase agreement with Rockwool. It is unknown why Jefferson Orchards did not change the zoning at that time to match the restrictions previously agreed to.
UPDATE!
June 27, 2023
On June 27 at the Ranson City Council meeting the city manager announced that Jefferson Orchards had officially suspended its zoning map amendment request that would have rezoned 194 acres in the heart of Jefferson County to allow industrial development including heavy industrial development. This decision was likely influenced by the Ranson Planning Commission’s unanimous decision to “not recommend” the zoning map amendment to the City Council. This decision itself by the planning commission was undoubtably influenced by the written public testimony submitted in advance and the public testimony presentations given during the June 5 public hearing prior to the vote.
Educate yourself and others
Read the detailed information on our website and share with others. Knowledge is power.
- The Background on Zoning in Ranson
- Karst Hydrogeology Concerns
- Heavy Industry Near Schools
- Negative Effects On Local Economy
Donate to support our efforts
If you are able to, please support our ongoing legal efforts with a fully tax deductible donation.
The following text was taken from the deed restriction dated October 25, 2017 between Rockwool and Jefferson Orchards.
General Restrictions. The following uses (“General Restrictions”) shall be prohibited on the entirety of the Restricted Property:
a. Residential development;
b. Inpatient medical treatment facilities;
c. Hospice; nursing or retirement facilities, and other related care facilities;
d. Residential shelters; or
e. Churches or religious centers.
Limited Restrictions. The following uses (“Limited Restrictions”) shall be prohibited from any tract within 1,000 feet of the boundary line on the eastern portion of the Property, as identified on Exhibit “A”:
a. Lodging, including, for example, hotels or motels;
b. Childcare;
c. Outpatient medical treatment facilities;
d. Educational facilities dedicated to the education of minors ( e.g., elementary, middle and high schools);
e. Food preparation businesses (not including restaurant facilities with the primary purpose of providing on-site food and related products to employees of Roxul or employees of business enterprises located on the Restricted Property);
f. Life science research facilities;
g. Consumer retail establishments, except for establishments with the primary purpose of serving employees of Roxul or employees of business enterprises located on the Restricted Property (e.g., convenience stores and gas stations);
h. Public community or recreation centers; and Administrative or professional offices or office buildings, other than offices or office buildings which are directly ancillary and supportive of a permitted use. For example, an office or office building within or near an industrial facility which is used to provide administrative or professional support to such industrial facility, would not be prohibited. The restriction provided by this Subparagraph (i) to Paragraph 3 of this Agreement shall not apply, among other things, to offices or office buildings used primarily for (x) nonmanagement or non-professional services, and (y) telephonic or data services (e.g., call or data centers and colocation facilities).
How will this be decided?
Usually, the planning and zoning staff determine if an application is complete. In this case Ranson does not currently have anyone in the position of planning due to its staffing issues. Ranson has hired an outside firm to fill this void (Kimley Horn). The Ranson Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on June 5, 2023 at 7pm at Ranson City Hall. Then the Ranson Planning Commission will consider if the rezoning is in accordance with the comprehensive plan, and they may take action to recommend to the City Council that the request is or is not in accordance with the comprehensive plan. Then Ranson will take up the rezoning ordinance and it will have two readings and public hearing. The dates of these are not yet known.
What are the risks?
If Ranson rezones this parcel of land Industrial there will be nothing to stop this owner or a future owner from developing the land into heavy industrial uses and heavy manufacturing including those needing major emission source air permits and that would endanger water resources.
While the application states in several ways that the current owner does not wish to pursue heavy industry, this is not binding in anyway and as soon as the property is rezoned Industrial, this or a future owner could do just that. Also, Jefferson Orchards makes several proposals in its like that the large parcel size would allow for buffer zones or that a development like Burr Industrial Park could be pursued. But again, there is nothing holding this owner or a future owner to such assurances.
We are also concerned that if Ranson rezones the property based on these assurances and Ranson tries to enforce them as restrictions on development, then this or a future owner could sue Ranson seeking relief from these restrictions as illegal contract zoning.
In these ways a removing the land from SmartCode and rezoning it Industrial would allow this or a future owner free rein to develop the land in heavy industry including heavy manufacturing.
The impacts of industrial development on this land will be similar or the same as the ones for the rezoning of the other half of this property that was done by Ranson in 2020. Please see this page for more information.
The economic impacts of industrial development on this land will be similar or the same as the ones for the rezoning of the other half of this property that was done by Ranson in 2020. Please see this page for more information.
The application submitted by Jefferson Orchards does not contain the elements that appear to be required by Ranson Code. Listed below are several requirements and an explanation of how Jefferson Orchards did not fulfill the requirement (19A.1.3.c.)
“iii. map of property to be rezoned including topography at a maximum of 20-foot contour intervals, using USGS topography or other available topographic survey and established or approximated 100-year flood plain limits as shown on the official FEMA flood insurance maps.”
The map is so small an illegible. There is no key, so the markings cannot be distinguished. The contour intervals are not labeled, so you cannot determine if they are 20-foot or some other interval (like 500-foot). This is not trivial. One cannot determine the topography of the land and its appropriate uses without knowing this.
“iv. existing property lines with dimensions”
The property shown includes the land that is now North Port Avenue and no longer included in the subject property.
“v. adjoining streets and widths”
The street widths are not shown or given.
“vi. existing structures”
Exhibit 1 is miss labeled such that the existing structures are not labeled. The also individual structures are not marked.
“viii. current zoning of land and adjoining properties”
The actual current zoning of the land is not described in the application ( it is T1, T2, T4, and T5).
“x. proposed maximum density”
The proposed maximum density is not addressed in the application.
“xii. statement describing how the requested change enhances the surrounding neighborhood structure per Section 1.2 Intent.”
The surrounding neighborhood is never addressed. The applicant states “Much of the Property is adjacent to an existing industrial and a major rail line. These high intensity uses will experience little or no impact from the development of the Property.” First this is inaccurate “much” of the property is not adjacent to Rockwool or the rail line. A majority of the property adjoins agricultural rural land in the county. The applicant also states that “The Property’s location allows employees, deliveries and visitors access without impacting any residential subdivisions or neighborhoods. Access to the Property from I-81 is via a 4-lane limited access highway.” Both of these statements are not true and ignore the communities in the county that are clo