The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About760402.tiff * Trci, O * 7826 STATE OF COLORADO RICHARD D. LAMM. GOVERNOR OFFICE OF COLORADO LAND USE COMMISSION 1313 Sherman St., Rm. 415 Denver, CO 80203 {3031 892-2778 NOTICE OF MEETING AND AGENDA PUBLIC HEARING TO SOLICIT INPUT ON LOCAL LAND USE ISSUES August 20, 1976 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO City Council Chambers City Hall 806 Cooper Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 9 : 00 a.m. 1 . Call to Order, Roll Call 2 . Report of Chairman and Other Commissioners 3. Public Hearings on Local Land Use Issues : (a) Commissioners to give summaries of Thursday evening community group meetings (b) Testimony from spokespersons from Thursday evening meetings (c) Public Testimony Lunch Break 4 . Resume Public Hearing on local land use issues , if necessary. 5. H.B. 1041 matters for consideration: (a) Consider acceptance of Pueblo County and LaPlata County H.B. 1041 designations and regulations (b) Officially acknowledge receipt of H .B. 1041 designations and regulations from Montezuma and Dolores counties . WU/lw 8-9-76 �I.�Ie5 760402 of coCo ? 7 Y Y 18 76 STATE OF COLORADO RICHARD D. LAMM, GOVERNOR OFFICE OF COLORADO LAND USE COMMISSION 1313 Sherman St., Rm, 415 Denver, CO 80203 {3031 892-2778 NOTICE OF MEETING AND AGENDA August 27, 1976 Quality Inn, Denver 1840 Sherman Denver, CO 80203 9 : 00 a.m. 1. Call to Order, Roll Call, Minutes 2. Public Comments 3. Report of Chairman and Other Commissioners 4 . Report of Staff Director 5 . Old Business: (a) Walnut Creek Progress Report (b) West Divide Diversion Project (c) Basalt/Pitkin County Issue (d) Louisville H.B. 1041 Designation Progress Report (e) Firest ne Tri-Town Annexation 6. New Business: (a) Selection of Nominating Committee Lunch Break 7. Public Hearings on Local Land Use Issues: (a) Commissioners to give summaries of Thursday evening community group meetings (b) Testimony from spokespersons from Thursday evening meetings (c) Public Testimony WU/lw 8-9-76 .Ot,cO4 S. 7 • 18 16 STATE OF COLORADO RICHARD D. LAMM, GOVERNOR OFFICE OF COLORADO LAND USE COMMISSION 1313 Sherman St., Rm. 415 Denver, CO 80203 (303) 892-2778 PUBLIC HEARINGS SCHEDULED July 22-23 --Pueblo August 19-20 -- Glenwood Springs August 26-27 -- Denver September 9-10 -- Steamboat Springs September 17 -- Fort Cnll ; na September 23-24 -- Durango October 1 -- Colorado Springs October 7-8 -- Grand Junction October 21-22 --Sterling November 4-5 -- Alamosa Chapter 1 of the Land Use Commission Procedures has been amended as follows : 1-1-103 (2) : Election for the two offices shall take place at the September Commission meeting. 1-1-104 (1) : The Chairman shall appoint a nominating committee, subject to approval by the Commission, during the first stated August meeting. The nominating committee shall present its recommendations at the meeting during which officers are to be elected. JK-P/cg PITKIN COUNTY LAND USE CODE - H 104? ;iY ,POSIUM Sponsored by PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS in corjurctir.:n with Colorado Land Use Commission Legislation Hearings August 19, 1976 Held at THE GAIN Aspen, Colorado 9 AM - 3 :15 PM The Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners extends a cordial invitation to all persons who have been involved with HB1041 and/or who are interested in its future to participate in an informal sym- posium in Aspen. The symposium is inten'wed to be a brief but intensive exchange of experience and ideas aimed at framing some key issues relative to the future direction of land use legislation in Colorado. The implementation of HB 1041 as seen from both the local and state perspective will be the subject of panel discussion with extensive audience participation leading up to a concluding panel advocating alternative possibilities. TENTATIVE AGENDA THE PITKIN COUNTY EXPERIENCE - Discussion of Pitkin's new Land Use Code which consolidates zoning, subdivision, and 1041 regulations in a single review process and describing experience with administer ing some 16 matters of state interest. IS HB 1041 WORKING FOR OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS? - Panel discussion with several County officials whose experie a with HB 1041 has been a mixture of success and disappointments. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION - Questions of Pitkin and other county panelists, comment on other 1041 programs. BUFFET LUNCH Catered at the Gant and served on the patio by the pool. Includes liquid refreshment guaranteed to get you into the afternoon. expected charge: $4/person HOW DO STATE OFFICIALS VIEW HB 1041's PROGRESS? - Panel discussion with officials from various State Agencies and the Land Use Comm- ission. Is it working for the state? AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? - Advocate panel consisting of proponents of distinctive viewpoints - that the best method for effective Land Use control is to build on HB 1041; that we should enhance local powers and control; that we need to invest the State with planning and zoning powers; that we need a comprehensive revision of Colo- rado Land Use Law. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION AND RECAP - DEFINING ALTERNATIVE DIRECTIONS FOR THE LEGISLATIVE PACKAGE. PARTICIPANTS / PANELISTS Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners: Joseph E. Edwards, Jr. , Chairman, Dwight K. Shellman Jr. , Michael Kinsley; Colorado Land Use Commission: Fred Sondermann, Chairman, Morley Ballantine, Barbara Chambliss, Dale Colglazier, Gene Fisher, Max Krey, Alan Merson, Buie Seawell, Beverly Warburton; Donna Pasdhg, Land Use Coordinator, Jefferson County; Lynn T. Vandegrift, Regional Planner, Animas Regional Planning Commission, President, Colorado Chapter, American Institute of Planners ; Clark Buckler, Executive Director, Colorado Counties, Inc. , John fold, Director, Colorado Geological Survey; Charles Foster, 1041 Field Coordinator, Department of Local Affairs; William sG. Kane, Planning Director, Aspen, Pitkin County, Karen Smith, Assistant Planner; others to be announced. • NO REGISTRATION FEE Pitkin Land Use Codes Available for Purchase RSVP and for further information: ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado £31611 925-2020 ext. 56 • • • •0100 .Xg-Zg'3l10 sdiNut��u:_Lys U D FMLN I or fI_ NNINGSFHVICES atI ;S vWELUCOUNTYCLNIINNIALRJIER {�" 'f,: 11510th SIlO I �� C.CIIEELEY.COLORADO 80631 GARY Z. FORTNER DIRECTOR O PLANNING 1 WI I C PHONE 1303) 356-4000, EXT.400 COLORADO September 16, 1976 • Mr. Fred Sondermann, Chairman Colorado Land Use Commission 1313 Sherman Street, Room 415 Denver, CO 80203 Dear Mr. Sondermann: This letter has been prepared in response to your request for input and ideas regarding the development of proposals for land use legislation for the next session of the Colorado General Assembly. Since Weld County has been quite extensively involved in land use decision making and the com- prehensive planning process for the past few years, we have become quite aware of a number of areas which should be given attention if local juris- dictions are to be able to effectively plan their futures. We sincerely hope the following listing of items will give ,you some guidance in approach- ing your tasks over the next few months. 1 . ExistingStatutes - Perhaps one of the major difficulties in drafting local comprehensive plans and land use controls is the complexity of the enabling legislation which is now a part of Colorado Statutes. Instead of setting forth a unified approach to land use planning and control for local governments, the existing statutes relating to land use are a disconnected, disjointed, and in general a confusing array of legislative mandates and enabling authority. The overall problem has been somewhat compounded in recent years by the passage of such items as H. B. 1041 , H. R. 1034, and H. B. 1529. H. B. 1041 serves as a good example. This piece of legislation suggested the establishment of separate regulatory and permit agencies at the local level for carrying out the intent set forth in the legislation. It seemingly ignored the possiblity of integrating the suggested regulatory proceedures with al - ready existing zoning and subdivision controls. Second, this piece of legislation failed to establish the relationships which existed between the suggested regulatory process and the comprehensive planning process which was already defined by statute. In both instances such clarifi- cation had to finally be set forth by executive and administrative agencies after a great deal of confusion on the subject. Overall , it 1NEL[) COUN1 Y COMMISSIONERS GLENN K RILLINGS VICTOR .IACOI3000I ROY MOSER NORMAN CAR LSON JUNE STEINMARK r Fred Sondermann September 16, 1976 Page 2 now seems difficult to determine in many cases what authority local government has with reference to land use controls, how the various statutes concerning land use planning inter-relate, and how the var- ious programs may be combined into a cohesive whole and form a unified approach to local land use problems. Perhaps the only solution to this dilemma is to undertake a complete recodification of the land use statutes so that the lack of clarity and confusion which now exists may be remedied. 2. Information for Use in Developing Comprehensive Plans and for Use in Making Land Use Decisions - The development, storage and retrieval of information utilized in land use planning and decision making is another factor which should be given consideration. The development and accessibility of information upon which to base land use plans and decisions can create major problems in the overall process. In many cases we see duplications of efforts in collecting information for various plans and studies. In many cases we see a lack of adequate information which can be used in making land use decisions. In both cases we can see wasted dollars in local government. There is a great need to coordinate the development of information systems which can provide all persons involved With ready access to needed information. It is suggested that efforts be made to coordinate state, regional , and local efforts in developing and disseminating such information. 3. State-Local Relationships - As various state agencies look forward to the development of a state wide plan, the various implications of state and local inter-relationships must be taken into account. It is the opinion of Weld County, that authority for land use decisions should remain with local government. However, it is also recognized, that various matters impact not only local areas, but also extend their impacts to regional and state wide jurisdicitions. In those latter cases a framework should be provided for state, regional and local cooperation and communication, wherein, the interest and concerns of all parties involved can be given consideration. S. D. 35 provided at least a basis for such communication between state and local agencies. It provided the opportunity, through an established referral process, for state agencies to have input into the local decision making process. Perhaps the full benefit of this referral system has not yet been realized. In addition, 5. B. 35 set forth minimum standards which could be administered by local government, without creating inflexibility and state dominance in the local decision making process, where it is imperative that local factors be given recognition. In general , there needs to be, in cooperation with local government, (a) a determination of those matters which are of regional and state concern, (b) an establishment of minimum and realistic standards for regulating such matters, and (c) a display of confidence in local government by allowing local government to administer such standards in a Fred Sondermann September 16, 1976 Page 3 manner which is compatible with local comprehensive plans. 4. Specific Areas of Concern - The following is a list of items which have been addressed in Weld County in its planning programs. Each of these items are related to matters which are likely to be faced by other jur- isdictions within the state as they prepare comprehensive planning docu- ments and programs. a. Agricultural Lands - One of the basic policies set forth in the Weld County Comprehensive Plan is that our prime agricultural lands are a local , state and national resource which must be protected from the encroachments of urban development. It is felt that the protection of our prime agricultural lands on a state wide basis should be iden- tified as an element of state wide concern and be given full consid- eration by all state agencies currently involved in the development of state wide plans and land use legislation. b. Water Resources - Directly related to item "a" above is the question of the priorities which must be considered in the use of the states water resources. If we are to protect our prime agricultural lands for agricultural use, we cannot continue to withdraw water from those lands for urban uses. As stated in the Weld County Comprehensive Plan, in all land use decisions; the broad effect of transfers of water useage which may result in the proposals at hand should be taken into account. This is an issue which we all must be concerned with if we are serious about protecting our prime agricultural lands which pro- vide the food and fiber for our nation. c. Mineral Resource Development - One of the primary problems being faced by Weld County at this time is related to mineral resource exploration. Exploration which has occurred in Weld County for oil and gas, uranium, and other mineral resources has in many cases caused problems. In many cases test holes have been left uncapped with resulting dangers to livestock and the possibility of pollution of ground water supplies. It is felt that it would be appropriate for the state to address these concerns and develop regulations for the proper plugging and capping of exploration holes. It is felt that it would be best if such regul- ations were adopted on a state wide basis so that companies involved would not be faced with 63 different sets of regulations i n their exploration activities . It is felt that if a state wide regulation were developed it could be most appropriately administered and enforced by local government. d. Floodplains - Weld County recently adopted floodplain regulations. In the past three to five years, Weld County has been involved in the de- lineation of its floodplain areas. The major problem which still faces us is the delineation of additional floodplain areas within the county. Fred Sondermann September 16, 1976 Page 4 The major obstacle to continuing such projects is the cost which is involved. If floodplains are indeed a matter of state wide concern it would seem appropriate that additional funds at the state level be committed to such floodplain studies. e. S. 6. 35 - Weld County has encountered two specific difficulties in administering S. B. 35. The first of these difficulties relates to the identification of land transfers and land divisions when they occur. Currently the only means of identifying land transfers is to conduct property research on parcels prior to the issuance of building permits. In many cases this means that such land splits are not identified until it is too late. In many cases it is not possible to determine if land divisions have occurred because the instruments necessary for such transfers have not bee recorded; this seems to be an especially difficult problem in terms of pur- chase contracts. This specific problem needs to be addressed if we are to effectively enforce those regulations which already exists. The second area that should be evaluated with reference to S. B. 35 is the referral system which is established under that legislation. It is suggested that an evaluation be made of the ability of state agencies involved to respond to referrals from local agencies. In general , such state agencies should be adequately staffed to handle such referrals. f. Enforcement of Land Use Regulations - It is suggested that an evalu- ation be made of the current penalties and enforcement mechanisms now set forth under state statutes to determine if they are indeed adequate for the purpose which they are to serve. g. The Use of the Temporary Emergency Power by the Land Use Commission - The use of, or the threat of the use of, the Temporary Emergency Power by the Land Use Commission with reference to land use matters seems to leave something to he desired at this point in time. Although this authority has given the state the opportunity to intervene in land use matters which are of state wide concern, it has not given the state the ability to respond in a manner which would be the most con- structive. In some instances the use of the TEP has provided an op- portunity for effective communication between state and local govern- ment. In other cases, it seems to have caused a degree of frustration on the part of both parties involved. In clarification of the latter case, it would appear that the commission has a means for establishing a road block in certain instances, but does not have the resources available to help the local government remove that road block. In general , it is suggested that if the state is interested in such involvement, it should also be interested in providing the resources and technical assist- ance necessary to help local governments in dealing with the problems with which they are faced. This should be especially true when the local Fred Sondermann September 16, 1976 Page 5 government does not have the financial resources or ability to deal with such problems. In conclusion, we would like to extend our appreciation for the opportunity to have input in the activities now being carried forward by the Land Use Commission. It is recognized by Weld County that if this state is to succeed with reference to making sound and effective decisions with regard to its future, it will require the cooperation of the many units of government which F comprise this state as we know it today. If Weld County can be of any further assistance or provide additional input to your efforts, please feel free to contact us at any time. Respectfully submitted, Gary Z. Fortner Director of Planning 1 GZF/pmr I Hello