HomeMy WebLinkAbout780444.tiff_ .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
SoPQ��� Recorded at . _ . o'ci«e 4 M.JUN..-- 8. 1978
834 Rec. No. 1'75598'7 Mory Mn Feuerstein, Recorder
RESOLUTION
RE: ENDORSEMENT OF THE POLICIES INCLUDED IN THE LA SALLE
MASTER PLAN.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County,
Colorado, pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home
Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of administering the
affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and
WHEREAS, the Board has adopted a' comprehensive plan covering
all of the unincorporated area of Weld County, Colorado, and
WHEREAS, the Town of La Salle, Colorado , has adopted Ia
comprehensive plan to guide the harmonious development of 'the
Town and its environs, and has submitted such plan to the Board
for approval, and
WHEREAS, the Board has studied said comprehensive plan of
the Town of LaSalle and has determined that same appears to be in
harmony with and complimentary to the existing Weld County Compre-
hensive Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOVED that the Board of County Com-
missioners of Weld County, Colorado, endorse the policies included
in the La Salle Master Plan, a copy of which is attached hereto
and made a part hereof by this reference.
The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made
and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 7th day of
June, A.D. , 1978.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
ATTEST: `'- .:a.
Weld County Clerk and Recorder
a Clerk to the Bo r nn /
By (
eputy County erk
AP VED AS TO nt FORM
"Co
Asst. y Attorney
Date Presented: June 7 , 1978
7130444
'tLO4 5
3 > : * — ntn
% 393 / §
g, m
{ ` /§ 84� \ jj la
\ R § \ ) § § /
8 / § l,1fGO
X27 ,
§ ® m /! cn
. 8 F� 2
° 6 = @
ao k ; \ k
f
BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Move by Ben Nix that the following resolution be introduced
for passage by the Weld County Planning Commission :
Be it therefore resolved that the Weld County Planning Com-
mission recommends to the Board of County Commissioners endorse-
ment of the policies included in the La Salle Master Plan .
Motion seconded by Jerry Kiefer .
Vote : For Passage Abstain Against
r
B e n Nix / bq/i �i(_„fl
Jerr Kiefer
/
Perc Hiatt- .
Frank Suckla j- =z-„< /"tier raAz
Chuck Carlsonn!.,� .,r,,, ,
Harry Ashley ,7/llr --i
Betty" Kountz steir:(7,21-75C-y/c
1
Irma White i ),.�r�. l . ' 6/ ?-
The Chairman declared the motion passed and ordered that a certified
copy of this Resolution be forwarded with a copy of the Lasalle Mas-
ter Plan to the Board of County Commissioners for further proceedings .
CERTIFICATION OF COPY
, Recording Secretary of the Weld
County Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the above and
foregoing Resolution is a true copy of the Resolution of the
Planning Commission of Weld County, Colorado, adopted on
�jwsc���p \O 4\1'"S4 and recorded in Book No. �
of the proceedings of the said Planning Commission.
Dated the\O day of June, 1978.
Sc� aQ�
Secretary
e �0.2
� j 55987
4.40
• /54- a
Certificate of Adoption
This document is adopted by the LaSalle Planning Commission
and the LaSalle Board of Trustees as the official Master Plan
for the Town of LaSalle , Colorado , to serve as a guide for the
harmonious development of LaSalle and the surrounding planning
' area. All maps and supplemental materials herein form the
whole of the LaSalle Master Plan and are adopted herewith.
Adopted by the LaSalle Planning Commission this 4th day
of May , 1978.
SIGNED: SIGNED:
tam GS- 1114-0E-a&--
J ie Barton , Chairperson Lisa Warnecke , Secretary
LaSalle Planning Commission LaSalle Planning Commission
Adopted by the LaSalle Board of Trustees this 9th day
of May, 1978.
SIGNED: SIGNED:
(-
difirice c a an , Mayor ndrum' (Town Clerk
LaSalle , Colorado LaSalle, Colorado
I
I
I
I
r
eoo 84 1755387
164- 3
LASALLE MASTER PLAN
LASALLE, COLORADO
MAY , 1978
LaSalle Planning Commission
Present Past
Julie Barton Bruce Kamada
Maurice McMahan Glenn Clement
Don Wiseman Larry Linder
Rick Reeve Dennis Warnemunde
Lisa Warnecke
Otto Dvorak
Larry Stevens
LaSalle Board of Trustees
Present Past
Maurice McMahan Frank Vawter
Leo Craven Cecil Vigil
Jack Cox Eugene Freeman
Bruce Kamada Dennis Warnemunde
Otto Dvorak Julie Barton
Larry Stevens
Glenn Clement
Weld County Planning Department
Present Past
Gary Z. Fortner Don Brandes
Thom Rounds J.J. Beaver.
Shirley Phillips
Kathy Hrouda
Edward Caller
text by Ann Thayer
cover design by Bert Taylor
I
4
t $o° - 1755987
/5i" - sl
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Goals and Objectives
Introduction 1
PART I 3
Physical Features 5
Geography 5
Soils 6
Flood Hazards 7
Population 9
Community Services and Facilities 20
Water 20
Sanitary Sewer 30
Storm Drainage 32
Facilities 32
Parks and Recreation 33
Schools 35
Existing Land Use 38
Residential 41
Commercial 44
Industrial 45
Public 46
Parks 46
PART II 53
Resident Input 54
Attitudinal Survey 54
Community Planning Session 67
e°°\`
9"4 1755987
/54-5
TABLE OF CONTENTS - Con ' t .
Goals and Objectives 68
Constraints and Opportunities 73
Constraints 73
Opportunities 74
PART III 76
Future 77
Future Land Use Map 78
Designations 80
Staging 83
Population Estimates 85
Future Service and Facility Needs 89
Transportation 94
Existing 95
Future 97
Housing 105
Existing Housing Supply 106
Housing Alternatives 119
Development Policies 126
Implementation 133
APPENDIX
Appendix A - 1975 Socio-demographic Survey 137
Appendix B - 1977 Attitudinal Survey 139
Appendix C - Supplementary Map 140
0O`
13
834 1755987
/5 '/- (O
TABLES
Table Page
1 Growth Rates for LaSalle , 1920-1970 10
2 Population, 1970' s 10
3 Employment Types, 1975 15
4 Employment Locations, 1975 16
5 Shopping Locations for LaSalle Residents, 1975 17 ,
" 6 Water Rates , 1977 25
7 Water Tap Fee, 1977 26
8 School Enrollments 36
9 Student/Teacher/Staff Ratios , 1977 36
10 Distribution of Residential Land Use , 1975 42
11 Conditions of Residential Structures, 1975 43
12 Conditions of Commercial Structures, 1975 44
I
13 Conditions of Industrial Structures, 1975 45
14 Conditions of Public Structures, 1975 46 ,
15 Conditions of Structures , 1975 49
16 Preferences for Future Growth 58
17 Preferences for Parks 59
I18 Commercial Development Question #12 60
19 Preferences for Single Family Residences 62
20 Preferences for Multi-family Residences 63
I21 Preferences for Housing for the Elderly 63
22 Proposed Acreages 84
i 23 Population Estimates 87 ,
24 Width Standards 100
25 Housing Types 107
'�
ia0o 1755987
S34
TABLES - Con' t .
26 Housing Condition, Single Family Dwelling Units 111
27 Exterior Structural Conditions, Residential Units 112
28 Population Projections 121
29 Future Housing Needs 122
30 Future Housing Needs, Low and Moderate Income
Households 123
31 Future Housing Needs for the Elderly 124
32 Future Housing Needs, Minority Households 124
r ,
1
itoo 834 1755987
FIGURES
Figure Page
1 Population, 1920-1970 9
2 Population Comparisons 11
3 LaSalle ' s Age Distribution, 1975 13
4 LaSalle Resident ' s Income Levels , 1975 14
5 Building Permits for Single Family Dwellings 19
6 Monthly Water Consumption , 1977 24
7 Existing Land Use, 1977 47
8 LaSalle Structures, 1975 49
9 Income Levels, 1975 Annual Earnings 116
•
eoo'* 1'75538'7
534 / sal- 9
PLATES
Plate Page
4 Vicinity Map 4
10 Existing Electrical 21
11 Existing Gas 22
12 Existing Telephone 23
8 Existing Water 28
9 Existing Sewer 31
5 Existing Land Use 39
6 Existing Zoning 40
7 Existing Structural Conditions 51
13 Future Land Use Map 79
14 Future Thoroughfare Map 98
eo°` 1755987
824 1544- 10
Goals and Objectives
I . To maintain and improve the existing small town atmosphere
of the Town of LaSalle .
A. Preserve and enhance the peaceful , quiet character of
the Town of LaSalle.
1. Protect the character of residential neighborhoods
from intrusive and disruptive development .
2 . Provide a transportation system which will serve
the resident ' s travel needs with maximum efficiency,
safety, and comfort while minimizing the disruption
to neighborhoods .
3. Encourage business and commercial development which
generates a high volume of truck traffic to locate in
areas where the adverse impacts of noise and conges-
tion can be minimized.
4 . Reduce public nuisances such as barking and roaming
dogs and noxious weeds .
5. Protect Town residents from crime and promote an
atmosphere in which they can feel safe .
B. Retain the present feeling of spaciousness by preserving
and enhancing the aesthetic features and natural beauty
of the Town of LaSalle .
1 . Utilize open spaces to buffer areas with conflicting
land uses, provide relief from the effects of urban
intensities , and preserve the neighborhood identity
of residential areas .
2. Develop and maintain , if possible, a connected and
linear open space system which will be accessible
to all residents .
3 . Capitalize on the location and aesthetic value of
th South Platte River by utilizing it as open
space area.
4 . Encourage the use of drainage facilities such as
canals and detention ponds for open space purposes .
5. Enhance the appearance of developed and developing
areas, public streets , and parking lots through
the creative use of landscape design.
C. Promote and protect the health, safety, and general
welfare of the residents of the Town of LaSalle .
10( 1755987
834 isq- n
1. Provide safe drinking water to LaSalle residents.
2. Keep air, water, and noise pollution at a minimum.
3 . Encourage quality medical services to locate in
LaSalle which conveniently and adequately meet the
minimal health service needs of Town residents,
particularly the elderly and low income .
4. Provide rapid and quality emergency services for
Town residents.
5. Limit development in natural hazard areas or require
construction modifications which would mitigate
natural hazards without degrading the environment .
6 . Aggressively negotiate with the Union Pacific
Railroad to ensure the optimum solution to the
present dangerous and inconvenient problem that
the switching grounds at the First Avenue crossing
creates.
7. Promote and support community service organizations
which meet , in part , the social , cultural , and edu-
cational needs of Town residents and facilitate the
establishment of other institutions capable of
offering a broad spectrum of opportunities to meet
such needs.
8 . Encourage alternatives in design and materials so
as to reduce construction costs and energy expen-
ditures, provided such changes do not have a
detrimental effect on the health, safety, and
general welfare of the residents of LaSalle .
D. Provide a choice of quality housing which is affordable
to a wide range of income levels and available to all
persons without discrimination.
1 . Promote a community effort to encourage the main-
tenance of standard units and the rehabilitation
of substandard units .
2. Encourage the protection and preservation of his-
torically significant or unique buildings and homes
in the Town of LaSalle .
3 . Encourage the diversity and dispersion of housing
types and sizes which meet a broad range of housing
needs with a greater choice of location .
4 . Seek the construction of multi-family residences
which are designed in an attractive manner and
provide privacy.
ii
B00K 1755989
834 /54- /A
II . To maintain and improve public services provided to the
residents of the Town of LaSalle .
A. Provide the best possible public facilities and services
to the existing and future residents of LaSalle which
are safe , reliable , affordable , and efficient .
1 . Ensure that proposed development will not deplete
the capacities of the Town of LaSalle to provide
services.
2 . Ensure , to the extent possible, that new develop-
ment pays its own way so that it does not put an
excessive burden on the residing taxpayer .
3 . Adapt services so that they are responsive to the
needs of LaSalle residents.
4 . Promote progressive management techniques in
operating and maintaining utility systems so as
to provide good service at reasonable rates.
5. Encourage development to locate adjacent to
existing development to minimize extensions of
services and utilities.
6. Encourage the construction of storm drainage
facilities which will protect Town residents from
drainage problems or flood hazards .
B. Provide park and recreation programs which respond to
the needs and resources of the residents of the Town
of LaSalle .
1 . Improve existing parks and encourage the acquisi-
tion and development of new park sites which are
accessible to all .
2. Develop and preserve parks and open spaces which
are important as focal points , lend neighborhood
identity, or are unique natural features.
3 . Prevent urban encroachment upon areas needed for
recreational and open space.
4 . Provide a broad spectrum of passive and active
recreational activities to meet the recreational
needs of all age levels and interest types .
5 . Provide community centers and recreational facili-
ties as a place for groups to meet 'and for general
use .
iii
Bpo c 834 1755987
1511- /.3
III . To ensure the orderly , harmonious, and economical develop-
ment of the Town of LaSalle.
A. Promote orderly growth for the Town of LaSalle .
1 . Discourage urban sprawl .
2. Ensure consistent and equitable application of
land use regulations .
3. Promote better integration of land development
and transportation facilities realizing the im-
pacts transportation systems have on land use.
4 . Encourage coordination between school facility
planners and land developers in order to locate •
residential development where it can best be
served by educational facilities.
5. Promote energy conservation in all land use, trans-
portation, and utility programs .
B. Promote the maximum harmony and compatibility between
land uses in the Town of LaSalle .
1 . Encourage future development to be compatible with
existing land uses and the adopted land use plan
of the Town of LaSalle .
2. Encourage new development to utilize landscaping,
screening, setbacks , berms , and other techniques
to provide visual and noise buffers between adja-
cent conflicting land uses.
3 . Maintain and preserve land for agriculture which
is best suited for that use based on fertility,
slope , and efficiency of operation.
4. Ensure that future development will be accomplished
so as to create the least degradation of the envi-
ronment .
C. Promote commercial and industrial development in desig-
nated areas to provide Town residents with a reasonable
choice of goods and services and employment opportunities .
1 . Promote a program to coordinate and aggressively
seek businesses to locate in the designated com-
mercial areas of LaSalle , particularly the Central
Business District (CBD) .
2 . Strive to improve and unify the architectural and
landscape design of the Central Business District .
iv
goon 4 1755987
3 . Encourage diversified and non-polluting employers
to locate in LaSalle.
4. Encourage employers to hire LaSalle residents.
5 . Require industries to be designed in an aesthetic
manner with buffers and landscaping to minimize
visual blight and noise.
+� v
:a°°(S 4 1755987
/ski- /5
Introduction
In the past , the Town of LaSalle has utilized annexation, zoning
and subdivision regulations to manage development . While these
regulations have set standards for development , they do not , by
themselves , provide guidelines for the long-term, comprehensive
development of the LaSalle area. The LaSalle Master Plan , as an
official document , provides long-term, comprehensive guidance to
elected officials, private developers , and residents in matters
of future development . The Plan, in setting development criteria,
provides consistency and continuity in land use decision-making.
Equally important , the Plan is a powerful tool for preserving the
"quality of life" presently enjoyed by LaSalle residents by di-
recting development in a logical and orderly manner .
The LaSalle Master Plan has been organized according to three
major parts answering:
1) Where are we now?
2) Where do we want to go?
3) How do we get there?
Answering the first question required the gathering and analysis
of substantial amounts of technical data in regard to existing
setting, the socio-demographic characteristics of residents ,
community services and facilities and the existing land use.
These background elements explain "Where are we now. "
The second major part discusses "Where we want to go" as gathered
from an attitudinal survey and a community planning session. In-
put from residents was condensed in Goals and Objectives , which
1
00( 1755987
634 /6-q- /CO
concisely state the aspirations of residents regarding LaSalle ' s
future development . •
The final part, the Future Land Use Section, addresses methods
to achieve the aims found in the second major part of the Master
Plan. The Future Land Use section, particularly the Future Land
Use Map and the Development Policies , serve as a realistic guide
to future land use decisions which is solidly based on documented
data about the existing setting and input from residents as to
their desires for LaSalle' s future development .
Altogether the LaSalle Master Plan reflects what the Town of
LaSalle has agreed upon as the most effective approach to future
land use planning in order that LaSalle remain an attractive
place to live, work and play.
2
er-Oc
E434 1755987
/sv- l7
e°°` 1755987
S34 1s41- 18
II KILOMETERS _ 1
O 5 10 20 .. •
■ ■ MEE. MILES
O 5 IO IS
LASALLE VICINITY MAP
_ 1
_T 12N
LARAMIE COUNTY. WYOMING
—_ _ �__ __ •
I/ WELD COUNTY, COLORADO ,
111W
I
— I Grover.
T ION
25 I
rI
.
TEN 0 h
o z
U
— Wellington) R 0 Nunn Keota■
WIU
F O T 5 I4
C \
J
; Pierce
— I 55
FORT ` IA Ault E� fs1 .
T T N e
COLLINS°rs e `F
— I Eaton
�Windsorw F
TEN \. z •
— 25 L0 \ t2- 0
LOVELAND a` Inv.,. '
34 '"'GREELEY v
2
T s u ._ . - `era 4
3q s Kersey 0 a
John Milliken / LaSaI le 4 . if- r
own /
Berthoud •y
TAN __�_ \VE
I �
— Gil� crest I
Me; I
7.
Tsu Q O Platteville
I — I •
i ii
Long month n
r
TIN 2I Firestone Keeneebur• I
•
°
u Frederick -
.
I!: Erie Daconorl4 ort I
99I TIN 0I 25 0
NI'rCt Lupton Hudson —
o Lochbu(a WELD COUNTY _�_�—�
— ADAMS COUNTY
I R T O W I R 66 W I R 66 W I R 67 W I R 66 W I R 65 W I R ••W I R Oa W I R 02 W I R et W I Roo W I Rea W
IPLATE 4
s°0c 834 1755987
/51- 19
Physical Features
An analysis of the physical features of the Town and the
surrounding planning area provides decision-makers with a
fuller understanding of the environmental opportunities,
constraints , and consequences of development in the LaSalle
area. Physical features which are briefly discussed are the
geography , soils , and flood hazards of the area. •
Geography
LaSalle is located in the southern central portion of Weld
County, approximately five miles south of Greeley and forty-
five miles north of Denver of U.S . Highway 85 . (Please refer •
to the LaSalle Vicinity Map, Page 4. ) LaSalle is situated
on the plains with the Rocky Mountains twenty-five miles to
the west . The topography of the area is flat with a slight
downslope to the northwest. The elevation varies from 4640'
to 4710' above sea level . The climate is classified as mild.
The area has a relatively low humidity and the precipitation
averages 12" per year. While this light precipitation
supports native vegetation, sitessful cultivation of crops
depends upon irrigation . In the LaSalle area, irrigation has
made the surrounding agricultural land highly productive.
r
5
e°°( I">5598'7
834 /54- ( c)
Soils
Information about the soil characteristics in the LaSalle
planning area is helpful in identifiying soil suitability
characteristics for future development . The U.S. Soil
Conservation Service has sampled and identified the soil
conditions based on categories related to slope , bedrock,
permeabilijiy, shrink-swell potential , and the degree and
extent of limitations for residential and commercial
development . The maps prepared by the Soil Conservation
Service specify areas according to the amount of engineering
design which would be required in order to manipulate the
soils to support the intended land use . The "slight" classifi-
cation refers to soils that exhibit few if any limitations
for construction of buildings with or without basements or
public sewer lines . "Moderate" soils exhibit limitations
and require special engineering designs. "Severe" soils
exhibit the presence of a seasonal water table, a shallow
bedrock, or are in the natural fllod plain , thereby requiring
extensive engineering design to mitigate any problems. At
the Soil Conservation Service offices in Greeley, aerial
maps are available for public inspection of the soil conditions
in the LaSalle planning area. While these maps do not
eliminate the need for on-site soil sample testing and planning
of construction designs to match the specific soil type , it
r
6
834 1'755987
would appear from the maps of the surrounding planning
area, that the LaSalle area is not hampered by severe soil
conditions. LaSalle' s most limiting area for future develop-
ment is along the south bank of the South Platte River.
Flood Hazards
Land along the banks of the South Platte River is frequently
flooded during heavy rains and spring runoffs . In a study
completed in 1977 for the Weld County Planning Department ,
the actual flood plain lines for the 100-year flood and the
1973 flood were delineated by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers . Maps within this study indicate that in most
locations in the LaSalle area, the water level of the 1973
flood exceeded the 100-year flood plain line. The delineations
of the flood plain is crucial in terms of future development .
LaSalle , in response to past flooding and the continual
hazard of future flooding , is a participating member in the
National Flood Insurance Program, a program which provides
flood insurance tb individuals and communities at lower rates
than could be obtained without the federal government subsidy.
In order to qualify for the program, communities must adopt
and administer local regulations which protect lives and new
construction from future flooding. Section 16 .06. 05 of the
1976 LaSalle Subdivision Regulaitons states :
"No lots shall be platted in areas subject to flooding.
Provisions of state control shall apply to all areas
that may from time to time be identified by the Town
of LaSalle as being within a flood plain area. "
7
K 17;5,,,3&7
� S34 /.54-az
Accordingly, intensive land uses such as residential, commer-
cial, and industrial uses cannot be constructed on the flood
plain if it will risk damage to lives or property. However,
this land retains its value as an open space and recreational
area. In fact , the 1976 Recreation Facility Study explored
the potential opportunity of developing a community recreation
area and recreational complex on this land. In addition to
the potential this flood plain offers for aesthetic and
recreational purposes, it contributes significantly to a
sense of community identity for the Town of LaSalle. The
South Platte River provides a natural boundary between LaSalle
and Evans , the only community in the immediate vicinity.
Presently , the land between the two communities is argicultural.
If this open space is lost , LaSalle will become a mere part
in a sprawling, urban extension of Greeley .
8
e0O( 17Sb;i8'7
834 /5i- 02.3
Population
The size and general characteristics of the past and present popu-
lation must be considered in order to better define reasonable
needs in LaSalle ' s future development , specifically in determining
future service and facility needs and future land use requirements.
In 1920, the first year in which U. S. Census figures are available
for LaSalle, the population was 464 . Most of this population was
associated with the railroad industry since LaSalle was the
Northern Colorado headquarters for the Union Pacific Railroad.
However, as the surrounding land became settled by farmers and
ranchers, the town grew as a commercial center. The continuation
of these two factors contributed to LaSalle' s steady growth as
shown in Figure 1 .
Figure 1
Population 1920 - 1970
1300 1227
1200 -
1100 - 1070
1000 -
I900
797
800
775
700 -
I600 - 564
464
500
400
1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970
SOURCE: U. S. Census
9
I
DULl
As found in Table 7 these population increar s were computed
154- Aq
into growth rates for each decade. The average per decade rate
of growth during the period from 1920 to 1970 was +22%.
Table 1
Growth Rates for LaSalle
1920 - 1970
Percentage
Year Population Rate Change
1920 464
1930 564 +22. 6
1940 775 +37 .4
1950 797 + 2. 8
1960. 1070 +34 . 2
•
1970 1227 +14 . 6
SOURCE: U.S . Census
The rate of growth in LaSalle was even greater during the 1970' s.
Table 2 shows the population figures for the years for which data
or estimates are available.
Table 2
I �
Population - 1970' s
Year Population
1970 1227
1973 1501
1975 1669
1976 1778
1977 1800
SOURCE: Estimates by the Weld
County Planning Department and
the Colorado Division of Planning
10
5
6ou'
834 1755987
/ A/-01S
These population increases translate into a high average annual
growth rate of 7% for the period from 1970 to 1977. When compared
with the growth rates in three neighboring communities, LaSalle
was found to have grown at a more rapid rate than Gilcrest and
Kersey, but a slower rate than Platteville .
R
Figure 2
Population Comparisons
1800
1800 —
1600 — 1550
1400 —
1227
1200 — •
1070
1000 _ LaSalle
850
800 _ 683
582
600 — Platteville 474 700
378
400 _ Kersey
Gilcrest 357 382
200 —
0 I I I
1960 1970 1978
SOURCE: Town Clerks
In addition to an examination of LaSalle ' s population in terms
of numbers, it is important to analyze the population in terms
of its socio-demographic characteristics. In order to accurately
characterize the population, a socio-demographic survey was con-
ducted in June of 1975. The survey, a sample of which can be
11
boo'-
834 1755987
/52/-aco
found in the appendix, was conducted by four residents of
LaSalle who , through a door-to-door survey, gathered data
on 1 , 589 residents, 80 less than the estimated population at
the time, the difference being attributable to an unsuccess-
ful contact after three attempts. Instead of 1 , 589 responses ,
the number of responses to a particular question varies since
respondants provided the information voluntarily. As a result ,
the number responding to a question on their annual income
level , for example, was lower than many of the less-personal
questions.
Tabulated results from the socio-demographic survey provided
data regarding the composition of the population in terms of
racial distribution, age distribution , and income levels. As
for racial distribution, in 1975, approximately 85% of the
town' s population were Caucasian and approximately 15% were
Chicano. The age distribution of the 1975 population of 1 , 580
residents is presented in Figure 3. As Figure 3 indicates,
approximately 2/3 of LaSalle ' s population in 1975 were thirty
years of age or younger. Only 15% of the residents were over
fifty and only 5% were sixty-five years of age.
SEE NEXT PAGE FOR FIGURE 3.
12
OK
g° 834 175598'7
-a7
Figure 3
LaSalle' s Age Distribution - 1975
25 — — 400
20 -
p - 300 N
E U
R 15 - M
C - 200 B
E E
N 10 - R
T
- 100
5 -
0 0
AGES 0-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-64 65+
NUMBER 211 150 178 139 349 185 131 152 85
SOURCE: LaSalle Survey, 1975
General conclusions from LaSalle ' s age distribution figures in-
dicate a large portion of young residents. These residents are
likely to require age-specific needs such as educational facili-
ties and active recreational opportunities.
In regard to income levels , residents were asked in the socio-
Idemographic survey to place themselves into four income categories.
As displayed in Figure 4 , 31% reported their annual earning as
Ibelow $7, 500, 44% in the $7, 500 to $12, 499 range, 21% in the
$12, 500 to $19, 499 range and 4% in the above $20, 000 range .
I
a
13
d
oO(
et 834 1755987
Figure 4
LaSalle Residents' Income Levels - 1975 '
50 -
43 .40%
40 -
31 . 10%
30 -
PERCENT
21 . 25%
20 -
10
I
4. 25%
0
less than $7, 500 - $12 , 500 - $20, 000+
$7 , 500 $12 ,499 $19, 999
1
SOURCE: LaSalle Survey , 1975
' As this figure reveals , nearly 75% of the 1975 population responding
to the annual income question earned less than $12 , 500 . Less than
5% earned over $20 , 000 annually.
To a question regarding home ownership , 413 households, or 83. 6%,
were buying or already owned their homes. The remaining 81 families ,
or 16.4%, rented their housing . This was a high ownership rate as
both the national and the Colorado home ownership rate was 64%.
r
14
,pOK 834 1'7:;)98'7
/541 -.2_9
To further characterize residents , interviewees were asked to place
themselves into one of the twelve occupational categories listed
on Table 3 . Based on 543 responses , the following breakdown of
employment types was determined. k
Table 3
Employment Types - 1975
Category Number . Percent
Craftmen 91 16 . 76
Clerical 86 15 . 83
Managerial 64 11 . 77
Operative,
non-transport 62 11 .42
I
Professional 62 11 . 42
ISales 33 6 . 07
Labor, non-farm 33 6. 07
i Service 29 5 . 35
ITransport 27 4 . 98
Retired 25 4 . 61
ILabor , farm 23 4.25
Private, household 8 1 . 48
ITOTAL 543 100. 00
ISOURCE: LaSalle Survey, 1975
IBased on these responses , there was not a dominant type of employ-
ment among residents of LaSalle . Of more significance was the
Iplace of employment . A tabulation of 563 responses showed the
following locations of employment .
I
15
S
Boo(
1715O98 7
/64-30
Table 4
Employment Locations - 1975
LaSalle
Platteville
Evans
Gilcrest
Windsor
Denver
Greeley
Other
SOURCE: LaSalle Survey, 1975
As indicated, 322 or 57. 2% of those responding to the employment
location question worked in Greeley. Additionally, 108 others
worked outside of LaSalle i.n surrounding small communities or in
Denver . Only 133 , or 23 . 6%, listed their place of employment as
LaSalle .
In addition to working outside of LaSalle , according to the 1975
survey, the majority of residents did their shopping in Greeley.
The results of a question regarding shopping locations for food,
hardware , clothing, appliances, transportation, and drugs is found
in Table 5.
16
oK
ie' 834 1'75598'7
/S4-3/
Table 5
Shopping Locations for
LaSalle Residents - 1975 t
Item Location Number Percent
Food LaSalle 273 51 . 03
Greeley 260 48. 59
Other 2 . 38
TOTAL 535 100. 00
Hardware LaSalle 67 13 . 65
Greeley 420 85 . 54
Other 4 . 81
TOTAL 491 100. 00
Clothing LaSalle 0 . 00
I
Greeley 516 98 . 84
Other 6 1 . 16
TOTAL 522 100. 00
I
Appliances LaSalle 5 1 . 03
IGreeley 467 96 . 69
Other 11 2. 28
ITOTAL 483 100. 00
ITransportation LaSalle 3 . 62
IGreeley 438 90. 31
Other 44 9 . 07
a TOTAL 485 100. 00
1
6
i 17
O�
Bo 834 1755987
/52/-3a
Table 5 - con' t .
Drugs LaSalle 1 .20
Greeley 487 99. 80
Other 0 . 00
TOTAL 488 100. 00
SOURCE: LaSalle Survey, 1975
As Table 5 reveals, somewhat over half of LaSalle residents shopped
for food in LaSalle, but food was the only item which a majority of
LaSalle residents bought locally. Approximately 15% of LaSalle
residents bought their hardware in LaSalle. Almost no one bought •
clothing, appliances, transportation, or drugs in LaSalle .
Lastly, from the 1975 survey, the average household size in LaSalle
was calculated to be 3. 06 persons per unit , slightly lower than
the Colorado average of 3 . 19. Knowledge of the household size can
aid decision-makers in predicting future population sizes and
needs for community services and facilities . This prediction can
Ibe based on the amount of residential development as determined
through the building permits. Figure 5 shows the number of building
permits for single family dwellings issued since 1970.
I
SEE NEXT PAGE FOR FIGURE 5
r
I
18
ems534"
1955997
1541- 33
Figure 5
Building Permits for
Single Family Dwellings
80 — 71
70 — 65
60 —
N
U 50 -
M 37
40 - 38
R 30 - 21
20 - 20
10 -
7
0 I I I I I I
YEAR 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976
SOURCE: Town Hall Records •
As noted, 65 permits were issued in 1974. The Town Board felt
that continued building at this rate would have detrimental effects
to the Town. As a result , in 1975, the Town Board set a limit of
48 residential building permits per year . Realizing the relation-
ship between residential construction and household size , local
officials can anticipate population increase . For example , the
construction of 48 units at an average household size of 3. 06 would
mean a population increase of 147 persons . Through an examination
of the socio-demographic characteristics of the population , decision-
makers will be in a better position to anticipate service and
facility needs , a responsibility of the Town.
19
‘3OUC.
534 1755987
154/- d4
Community Services and Facilities
Not only does LaSalle have a responsibility to provide residents
with adequate services and facilities, the Town must do so in the
most economical manner possible . This requires planning. The
first step in planning service and facility needs involves a com-
plete inventory of the existing services and facilities. This
provides data from which an evaluation of existing services and
facilities can be made and aids in determining future improvement
and expansion needs. By interrelating these needs in a coordinated
manner, the Town can provide services effectively and efficiently,
critical at a time when service demands and expectations are in-
creasing, while costs are soaring .
This section explains LaSalle ' s water and sanitary sewer systems
and quality standards which apply to these systems. It discusses
LaSalle' s storm drainage system. While the Plan contains maps of
the electric and telephone networks in 1975 (Refer to Plate 10
and 12 ) , additional information concerning these services must be
obtained through the Home Light and Power Company and the Mountain
Bell Telephone Company.
Water
One of the most important elements in the future development of
LaSalle is the availability and quality of water. LaSalle has an
abundant supply of water from three wells, two located behind
Town Hall and the third at Town Park. The pumping level at these
sites has remained at approximately forty feet . LaSalle is not
experiencing a water shortage created by drought conditions as
are many communities.
20
• i
T 0
an, `5 O
a 0 r
in -. Z I • s i5
ri W A Y e▪ ..j."Z a Q V _y a
8 :;g 1 ,•C i C I.< d
0 ,,„. ..,,,,,,,1 3 z
8 ".e ` 43, 0
W °El 0.v* "- � ��
Wv 3jj$
Q
J
l'/, �' 7 \ \/ \ NovA�V _iii -- .—_
h
, , �,„, ,/,,, ,VAS ` v /, :� i II _ l
/., / /NJ < /."'/N ( L. /
��> I
v
y
.`,..� '\
Lam ..
M
S
co
M MN M MO MN NM I = E MI =I I I MN NM NM NM MN N
G J
a 0Q P
a ; : ` m ; zW 4
Z $ -1 .1. cur,, O Z V a
lg.] d= ° V J
`' W 111111
77E'1lin=E' QV J
2 o g` Q
um 7 l- I- $ �El ; in W W
' o 4
wl
i
�: � �
L- t
/ , = _
1I =t r--
7` yam° , �/ \ `� �` 1-3- lo LA IL
1,, /'// '''/ �� �. i ��� /A II 1�H'" ( ... .. ....._......�......
�I .. � ��
f,`/ '''/ `ti
0::, / `,8 / /4':,,,,>,-:;,,Z'''..:',/�C'' °\ \\ 4 $ Al = i-- i __---7:37Z-3,7.--fl '\
1/4 YYX
y
'' /..,.,.,y,;.,../ -',' 1,' .. 4 ' :-:,I ra' L_I,)---,°-----7- I-- .„,,,,,,,,..,:_ ,,
i -...„, „7 /„-„„ ,,,-N> , ,,,,r„,,,,,‘,- /:,-/ ->-,47,/,... .„.... .--_-),--,:_,-. -...-s:,-. : ,,-__-:-_!r--,,, --:,---,_ „,/
/,.�- < / /7-'''' I// L -_ -- ,-..w—
Jr' L a '".., N
�, '7:f:`,.( 'S� T
\ G4 .>",, .I
�/ \ - -
- - I.I Ilk'
J
\a
M ME M - I - - - - M = - = - M I M S
O
o In CU
oZ
z. . .
CC ,� H $ £. z�
C Z W '' Z~ O Z O W
1 , W < O $ �g§ d2 0 v a
ry V D :` B �Oi 0.
c o �- ,,; C ZN l C
W 2 at; 2 8i 0 W y W CC Wm a3 J
W OQ a _ CO J
'o 'V a t.II 3V H W W
€ p a H
1
vs I
i
!- --- _- -- f - �_ _v __ _ -1
'
- FE I
1110,c /,' >-, -.--.. 'N\N"-- ---1 i i ' 1
B''''\'-‘7/,tom � ,2,"/
._--11-7-T,i-'n--tE-,j_ ,I
.. . I� —r-,-- ,�.,..,...m.,,... -li —
� � -. �_
NN I
A ,... ,..,
-,. ,, - --,....., \:„,
--,,,,,,,, , ,-,..„....;N,-, 1-,,-..i.,_______,
,, ,... ,,,...„, . / , ,. _, .,„_, ,: --,,, I ,
,,,,,/ ,,„,, ,7';;;;TN. ';', i I \-..—1
4
I#.I s
41
Cl
CO
Jme Imi.
—. —
eoo�
834 1755987
/5-4- .3g
The pumps which bring LaSalle' s water supply to the surface have
been tested by the Home Light and Power Company and were found to
operate above an optimum efficiency level of 65%. Secondly, the
pumps have been operating substantially below their maximum time
capabilities. According to records from the Home Light and Power
Company, the average annual operating time for each pump equaled
less than six hours per day in 1977. Even during the peak con-
sumption month, July, each pump operated an average of 12 hours
Iper day. The graph on Figure 6 shows the monthly water consump-
tion rates for 1977. As illustrated, peak consumption occurred
Iduring the summer months , most likely because of outdoor watering.
•1 Figure 6
Monthly Water Consumption - 1977
I 4O —
35 - o
n
0 711
:: ; oh
m
it
N N V O M
n W M h O O
W W N
O "tr M h W
20 CO V� O h
M N N O M
O N d
mCD M r-1 [ M CO n
m h r-I N r-1 ^ M
15 — n o
op
10 - h W N
I
5 -
i 0 .
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.
ISOURCE: LaSalle Town Hall Records
I24
80014534 1755987
/t5i/ - .34
LaSalle ' s average water consumption is high. Town records from
1976 indicate a consumption rate of 356 gallons per person per
day. Several planning guidelines set the average consumption
figure between 150 to 250 gallons per person per day. One probable
reason for LaSalle' s high water consumption relates to the lack of
an economic incentive to conserve water . For residential users ,
the water fee schedule is based on the frontage property lot-size
rather than the actual water consumption . For businesses , since
the majority are metered, the fee is related to water usage. How-
ever , under the existing fee schedule , the cost per unit decreases
with higher usage. Table 6 displays the rates for residences,
businesses and out-of-town subscribers .
Table 6
Water Rates - 1977
Type Monthly Fee '.
Non-metered
Residential - Frontage Lot Size
Less than 50 feet $7 . 25
50' - 75 ' $7 . 65
75' -100' $8 . 05
100' -125' $8. 45
125' -150' $8 . 85
More than 150 feet $10. 00 flat rate +
$. 40 per addi-
tional 25'
Commercial $4 . 25
Metered
Commercial $4 . 25 per 3 , 000
• gallons plus $.45
per every 1 , 000 •
gallons additional
25
Boo& 175598'7
• ' 834 /54- go
Out-of-town $8. 50 per 3 , 000
gallons plus $. 80
per 1 , 000 gallons
additional
SOURCE: LaSalle Town Hall
In addition to this monthly water fee , there is an initial water
tap fee for connection between private lines and main lines. The
fee charge varies with the size of the line as shown on Table 7.
Table 7
Water Tap Fee - 1977
Size of Line Cost
3/4" 800. 00
1" 1 ,440. 00
1i" 2 , 800. 00
2" 5 ,200. 00
3" 11 , 200. 00
4" 20, 000. 00
Fee for any tap exceeding 4" shall
be negotiated with the Town Board.
SOURCE: LaSalle Town Hall
An integral part of LaSalle' s water system is storage and distri-
bution of the water. At full-capacity, LaSalle ' s two storage
tanks hold 550, 000 gallons, an amount surpassing peak demand and
requirements for fire protection purposes. This storage system
provides a water pressure of fifty pounds throughout the Town ,
with the exception of the 100 block of Union Avenue, where
residences are served by 2 inch water lines. There are
plans to install 8 inch lines at these areas, which will
26
Bool-
. ' 834 154 - 41
alleviate the problem and will help service water lines in the sur-
rounding areas.
Specifically, in terms of water distribution, the Existing Water
Map, Plate 8 , shows the locations and sizes of water lines in 1975.
Since 1975, there have been several improvements so that there are
no areas with water transmission loss or stagnation problems.
Thus, LaSalle ' s water system is in "good" condition in terms of
availability of water and ability to distribute it . There is no
problem with the quantity of water.
However, in terms of LaSalle'.s water quality , tests conducted since
January 1976 have indicated concentrations of total dissolved
solid such as nitrates, sulfates, and chlorides . Of prime concern
in LaSalle ' s water is the nitrate level . The Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, under authorization through the Safe Drinking Water
Act of 1974, has tentatively set the maximum nitrate level at '10. 0
parts per million. Samples taken from LaSalle' s water supply in
August 1977 disclosed nitrate levels of approximately 17 . 0 parts
per million .
State and County health department officials are working with
Town officials to improve the water quality by testing the water
and researching practical and affordable methods for treating the
concentrations of total dissolved solids. The LaSalle Town Board
has budgeted funds for the 1978 fiscal year for a study to examine
the contaminate problem, and provide a feasibility study of various
treatment processes and/or alternative water sources . However,
since this study will take time to conduct and implement , it is
1 27
BOOK L .4
I
I
I
ri
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I�
I
l 1
,•i ii //A..
l ' •r
ill Ill ' I
I l I.,' i :oa oa 1 eoo.or ,pap'
The
�� Dreparaomn of the mplonn g gtmom In p>t
it*.i�**^ Ilroupb a Dompnbeneiwa 1pnninp,rant fmm Ibe
�',_•�" Deportment of Housing and Urban DepMoment.
prepared by
I
WELD COUNTY PLANNING
COMMISSION STAFF
for the
' town of
LA SALLE , COLORADO
I
EXISTING
• WATER
I
IPLATE 8
I B�K 1`75. 38'7
� 4 /5Y/- 4/3
Ilikely that the nitrate level in LaSalle' s water supply will
exceed the pending EPA maximum standards . Therefore , it is impor-
Itant to know the provisions in the Safe Drinking Water Act for non-
Icompliance. The Act allows for exceptions for public water systems
unable to comply with EPA standards if non-compliance will not
result in an unreasonable" risk to users . A variance may be re-
quested to permit a system to disregard certain provisions if
technology has not mastered the contaminate problem. An exemption
' may be requested by systems unable to meet the standards because
of "compelling reasons , including economic factors. " Despite
Ithese provisions , a public water system must be in compliance by
January 1 , 1979, if the timetable follows the EPA Interim Regula-
1
r tions.
IAnother provision of the Safe Drinking Water Act which LaSalle
Ili should know, is the notification procedure . A system is required
'hi to notify its customers if it :
I 1 ) fails to meet quality standards for nitrates;
2) fails to perform the required monitoring;
3) has a variance or an exemption; or
I 4) fails to comply with the schedules for such.
Notification is required every three months in the water billing
Iand all local newspapers to warn customers of a possible health
risk. Presently, the known health danger from nitrate concentra-
lltions applies to bottle fed infants under one year old by affecting
I their oxygen use (methemoglobinemia) . As to the affects of long-
term exposure to adults , more studies are being conducted, but past
Jmedical studies have indicated there may be a greater incidence
r
of high blood pressure. While the health risk is still being
Iresearched, it appears that it is not of such a severe nature as
I to be a growth deterent .
al
29
ap°K SA
/ V - 4/q
Sanitary Sewer
In 1966, a waste treatment facility utilizing an aerated lagoon
process was constructed on a thirty-five acre plot northeast of •
ILaSalle. At this site, there are two eight acre lagoons with
the west lagoon being functional and the east one being supple-
mentary. To better understand the capabilities of LaSalle ' s
sewer system, below is an outline of the treatment process. The
1
sewage leaves its source in 6" or 8" collector lines . These
Ilines join 12" or 15" trunk lines which traverse the Town , and
then feed into an interceptor line paralleling Lathem Ditch.
IThis interceptor runs eastward under the highway and the railroad
tracks to the sewer treatment facility. (Please refer to the
I Existing Sewer Map , Plate 9. ) It should be noted that past
Ibuilding patterns have allowed the sewage to arrive at the treat-
ment facility through gravity rather than electrical power. Once
■
• at the facility, the sewage is sent through a wet well which con-
tains a grate for screening large objects and then it is pumped
Iinto the west lagoon where four aerators add oxygen , creating an
Iideal environment for the micro-organisms which decompose the
sewage. The treated sewage is then sent to a holding pond north
of the lagoon where it goes through a rock filter for further
purification. Lastly, chlorine is added to meet government
Istandards before being emptied into the South Platte River . This
Iprocess and the design capabilities of the sewer treatment facil-
ity mean that the existing sanitary sewer system can treat sewage
a
for a population of 4, 000 people. Accordingly, sewage treatment
is not a constraining factor to future growth .
30
0
12
C.;
L: E:3 2t 0 st
IW W
Lc II I YC
WVI
8 �Ee 62ND 3 d
< „ ��= d�f N W
W l••
W !;5 PO J X y
2 € ••")�u Q
� � B sF1 ; H W
4rc a
.--
I-
-
rd k. I
/ -
J
x' //iT / /N /) ‘.>-•,/H A : �NI I
. iy //A�t/, , N, NN r' / 1. ' _ I
y.,,,, „ /// //./\`'<:. y> f .__ • - )- -
-7- —_
/ N-,,,_- N
r \
._ �. \'-N m,rt�. N.// '�.. •N
t
e!+
c
8.
:600(1334 1755987
Storm Drainage
LaSalle' s storm drainage system has been inadequate in trans-
porting storm water off the streets to water disposal outlets.
Realizing this problem, the Town Board contracted with the con-
sulting firm of Hogan and Olhausen in 1974 to conduct a study
and prepare a drainage plan for the Town. Hogan and Olhausen
recommended approaching the Town' s storm drainage problem in
four phases . Phase I , the only completed phase , dealt with
installing underground pipes and storm drainage boxes on the
east side of LaSalle to transport the storm water to a holding
pond on land leased from the Union Pacific Railroad. Phase II ,
at an estimated cost of $90, 000, completes what is required to
rectify storm drainage problems on the east side. When Phase
II is completed, the final two phases applying to the west side
of LaSalle will be initiated. Hopefully, this will alleviate •
existing drainage-problem locations. Furthermore , if regula-
tions applying to storm drainage in the LaSalle Subdivision
Ordinance are met by the developer, this storm drainage problem
in LaSalle will not be compounded.
Facilities
One of LaSalle' s primary responsibilities as a municipality is
to provide town residents with adequate public facilities and
services . Below is a brief description of the facilities and
services currently found in LaSalle.
Town Hall :
Located at 119 Main Street in the Central Business
District , this building contains office space for
the Town Administrator , the Town Clerk and an assis-
tant , and it has meeting space for Town officials .
The building, remodeled in 1966 , contains 3 , 575
square feet . At present , the Town is using an ad-
32
oK 834 1755957
l.sy - U7
joining building as a storage and maintenance area
for the town equipment .
Police :
In back of the administrative section of the Town
Hall is the police department and municipal court .
Presently, there are three full time officers and
two police vehicles.
Post Office :
The U.S. Post Office is located east of the trans-
portation corridor on the north side of Union Avenue,
which is especially important since there is no
f home mail delivery. Built in 1961 , its 1060 square
i feet are in good condition . Employees at the present
time are one postmaster , two rural carriers , two
Isubstitutes, and three clerks.
Fire :
I LaSalle is served by LaSalle Fire Protection District
No. 9. The station , located across from the Town Hall ,
stores four trucks. Protection is provided by one
full time man and force of 31 volunteers , all with
fire fighting and first-aid training. The National
• Fire Insurance Underwriters have given them the best
possible rating for volunteer departments.
I
Health:
Since there are no doctors and only one dentist in
r LaSalle , most residents have their medical services
provided in Greeley. However , five fire protection
volunteers are certified Emergency Medical Techni-
cians (EMT' s) and are trained to provide emergency
para-professional medical aid around the clock.
Ambulance service and hospital care are available
' in Greeley at the Weld County Hospital .
IParks and Recreation
The principal purpose of this section is to assess the leisure
' time opportunities currently provided to LaSalle residents .
First , an inventory was done of the existing park sites . Below
' is a brief description of each site .
1 LaSalle Town Park:
This square-shaped, grassy park on 4 .25 acres is
located in the northwest part of Town, with its
east side bordering U. S. Highway 85. It has ap-
proximately ninety mature deciduous trees which
provide shade for the picnic tables and play-
, 33
j ._
��� 834 1755989
ground equipment . According to the 1976 LaSalle
Recreational Facilities Program Study, this park
has 15,900 user days per year. Cost of maintenance
and improvements are borne by the Town of LaSalle .
Water Tower Park:
This triangular, grassy area under the Town ' s older
water storage tank contains 0. 15 acres. It is
relatively isolated from residential areas by the
railroad tracks and the commercial district on Main
Street . Over two-thirds of the households surveyed
for the 1976 Recreational Study did not use the
Water Tower Park at all . It was estimated that it
had 90 user days per year.
JayCee Ball Field:
This triangular site of 16. 7 acres is on the east
side of the transportation corridor north of Todd
Avenue. It is rented under a 5 year lease from
the Union Pacific Railroad with the condition that
it be used only as a ball field. Except for a sin-
gle row of trees , the existing landscaping is limited. •
The lot is primarily sand and dirt , which at times
causes a dust problem for the neighboring residential
area. The land has been developed to the extent that
in 1977, it contained bleachers , dugouts , lights,
scoreboards , fences , restrooms, and a concession
stand. One of the terms of the lease is that thirty
days after the lease has been terminated , all struc-
tures or improvements , if not removed, become the
property of the U.P.R.R. Although the J.C . ' s cover
the minimal rent costs , the operation and maintenance
has been done voluntarily. The site has received a
substantial amount of specialized use from March to
August by the high school baseball team and league
play.
School District Park:
This area contains twelve acres of school-owned
property which is available for public use during
non-school time . In addition to large, grassy playing
fields, there are two , non-lit tennis courts . It was
estimated in the 1976 study that the tennis courts
received 11 ,500 user days per year, mostly during the
warmer months. Maintenance has been done by volunteer
groups, individuals, and the School District .
Presently , Town residents have these forementioned park sites and
a facilities available for their use . The majority of these facili-
i
ties are passive-use. This section would not be complete without
I
34
a
CY" 1755987
/Sy - y4
a discussion of how these sites have been or have not been meeting
the recreational needs of LaSalle residents . In 1976, the LaSalle
Town Board contracted with Community Services Collaborative to pre-
pare a Town Recreation Master Plan. As part of their study, the
firm conducted a survey of a small portion (9%) of the residents
as to their recreational desires. A summary of their findings
showed that existing facilities were not meeting residents' recre-
ational needs. To the question, "Are there enough recreational
Ifacilities available in LaSalle?" , roughly 75% responded negatively.
Moreover, over 50% of the respondents were willing to be taxed to
provide major recreational facilities , the most commonly mentioned
facility being a swimming pool . Data from the 1976 Recreation
Facilities Study is being used by the LaSalle Recreation Commission,
a volunteer group whose purpose is to promote and improve recrea-
tional programs and facilities in LaSalle . They function as an
advisory body to the Town Board. It is the Town Board which does
the actual allocating of funds for various recreational programs ,
park acquisition and park development .
Schools
With the reorganization of the Weld County school districts in
1960, LaSalle was incorporated into the RE-1 School District . As
a consequence of this reorganization, LaSalle students attend
elementary and middle school in LaSalle and high school in Gil-
lcrest , a community six miles to the south. Table 8 shows the
enrollments for the closing day of the 1976-1977 school year for
the three schools involving LaSalle children .
I
35
a
v.00'-
834I 1"155987
/Sy - 50
Table 8
School Enrollments
Number of
School Grades Students Attending
LaSalle Elementary K - 5 329
North Valley Middle 6 - 8 165
Valley High 9 -12 484
SOURCE: RE-1 School District
The student/teacher ratios and student/staff ratios were noted for
the three schools as listed in Table 9. The student/teacher ratio
was based solely on the number of regular classroom teachers.
Specialized teachers were counted as staff , along with administra-
tive personnel and support staff . This table indicates a desirable
0 ratio of students to teachers and staff .
Table 9
Student/Teacher/Staff Ratios
i
1977
I LaSalle North Valley
Elementary Valley High Total
IStudents 329 165 484 979
Teachers 13 8 . 5 20 41 . 5
Student/Teacher 25: 1 19: 1 24: 1 22 : 1
Ratio
IStaff 25 14 30 69
Student/Staff 13 : 1 12 : 1 16 : 1 14 : 1
Ratio
SOURCE: RE-1 School District
r
I
36
B001- 834 '7 175 98
/Sy- 5/
The size of the schools and the student/teacher/staff ratios con-
tribute to the individual attention the students received and the
personal concern and involvement of the school employees.
Lastly, it is important for future planning purposes to note the
capacities of the existing facilities . Each of these three
schools could according to RE-1 School District Superintendent ,
James Burks, handle approximately fifty more students. In order
to avoid the reduction of the quality of education because of
overcrowded conditions, regular communication between the school
district and the Town is important as a means of anticipating
residential development .
Ir ,
I
I
I
I
I
I
37
e°c 594
1755957
Existing Land Use
In order to ultimately propose a future land use plan , data
regarding the existing land use must be thoroughly gathered,
documented, and analyzed to provide a firm foundation from
which future land use decisions can be made. This is essential
because existing land use patterns and conditions exert such a
strong influence on the type and extent of future development .
Included in the Existing Land Use Section is an examination of
LaSalle ' s zoning districts and basic data on the residential ,
commercial , industrial , and public land uses presently found
in LaSalle. •
The Town of LaSalle adopted its present zoning ordinance in
December of 1974 . The ordinance established six major districts :
R-1 : Single Family Residential District
R-2 : Multiple Family District
CBD: Central Business District
C: Commercial District
II : Industrial District
A : Agricultural District
IBasically, these zoning districts establish areas of permitted
Iuses and densities . (Please refer to the LaSalle Zoning Ordinance
for specific information . ) The Existing Zoning Map , Plate 6 ,
Ivisually defines the zoning districts for the land within the
Town of LaSalle . If compatibility of land uses is determined by '
4
■ the degree of harmony between the type , location , and overall
' spacing of co-existing land uses , then generally, LaSalle ' s over-
all pattern of land use could be termed compatible.
38
O
Z 10x1000 $ $EE z� o mu) in
In Z - Z< o Z D W
W J Lt
_ so 6y a V Q
f �' a :o s �O C � a.
a = Q Q v Q Z Exa °yZH .0 _ ILA Cl
2 wq
O m� o o°_ CO J
H E f s is 8 ? a 3 u N W Q
s 1i Q
J
I
I
Ilifi!!lot
I i I NO gEl
O =
1
/ r..‘. .:::s_„,_' ,rte. �. _ _ _ '
't6 �. � E.
I /, II
I jJ_IIL,LHH
IO ,, ',.."4„S . N .,,„
si
, , V , e
Wp \ 6
a.
4
a.....Z ,L III 1 ; 1 ' ' \
! �
l
I \
Hill
'..los I '
rfA
C)
CO
m
• 6
O CI
r, . , , ,
, =€ = o00tor . I -E1E, �.i.1 ... O Z I-Liw • ie2� �N O V �Z J N J ,I _ 3� YC- �Zmmi
o ._4.4 7 Q J C + IT., y ZN t Q mF v' a a °i= - cf W �Of oO
oc� cnW N < O ▪ € WVQ.✓c' oz4 $ Eli ; H Ill
a• ?8 Q
• t „; ;,,,, i,., ..
I
r ,L 1..,„„,_;L / Itr \ '''.-,-,-,"-,,,,,,N, t. i,L- 7L—I iii � i. I
.'. �. A`�.� fry
•
� RRR�{{ „AA
\/ ] TT T
//",'''',,‹� ')11 /' \ \ �j� /yam l
X���., �'���-`\i �1��1, �7'::-,..,":,-,..1,,,,,
.�.. ��1._�-U I �� u---_�i�rvrr a,, ,�srr rlrn rt�.._..4 I ,c� x, T
11
� �, t `4, 14i
>!t ��`, ��4' . uxiwJLJ.i ''. ����� i���
j o 'mil- ,
'-`�, /- / rn ,rn mrn-n,rn-rt rn-re, �'M i3
a. `�C / 3t6., ,, o y,% ##:
1
I
CO
Sr''
CO
a
IMINI Mil — — — VIII MI. III' IIIIII I■■ ISM I'll — M — gill MINI all MIN
OK
�� 175598'7
Y 534 /51-55
To provide specific and documented data on the existing land uses
in LaSalle, an extensive analysis was conducted by the Weld County
I Planning Department in 1975. This analysis examined the amount of
Iland devoted to each land use type, the general location of land
uses , and the number and exterior condition of the existing struc-
Itures. The exterior condition of the structures was classified
by a "windshield" survey as standard, substandard or dilapidated
M
i in accordance with urban renewal guidelines distributed by the
IDepartment of Housing and Urban Development . Below is a brief
definition of these classifications:
I Standard:
A structure which has no obvious defects or only slight
defects which could be corrected during regular main-
4 tenance. It has adequate roofing , siding , weather pro-
m tection , a good foundation , and an overall "good"
appearance .
I Substandard:
A structure which needs repairs beyond what could be
considered "normal maintenance" . It has an appearance
4 of general disrepair, for example , a deteriorated or
i sagging roof .
I Dilapidated:
A structure which has major or many structural defects
requiring extreme repairs, thus making the building
I economically or structurally unfeasibile for rehabili-
tation. It typically has a deteriorated foundation
or frame.
1 The findings of the existing land use analysis will be presented
for each land use type prior to a discussion of the overall
Icomposition of land uses in LaSalle .
IResidential
LaSalle is primarily a residential community . This is most evi-
al dent by noting the amount of land devoted to this land use . The
I1975 analysis revealed that 121 . 8 acres or 49% of all developed
0 41
a
I Bo0K 1'755981
i' � 4 /Sq - 5(n
Iland in LaSalle was residential land uses. A good indication of
the location of these uses can be found on the Existing Land Use
1
IMap, page 39 . These residential areas are , for the most part ,
Iwithin districts zoned for residential use. As Table 10 shows,
residential land use was found on either side of the transporta-
Ition corridor formed by U .S . 85 and the U.P.R.R. tracks.
ITable 10
Distribution of Residential
ILand Use - 1975
I Location Acres Percent
East 49. 7 40. 8
l West 72 . 1 59. 2
TOTAL 121 . 8 100. 00
I - SOURCE: Weld County Planning Department
Through the development of residential land uses on both sides
of the transportation corridor, LaSalle has gained the indirect
Ibenefit of preventing neglect of the older homes and stabilizing
land values on both sides of the transportation corridor.
The residential settlement pattern has grown from the center
Ioutward. The older homes, many dating back to the early 1900' s ,
Iare located in the center of LaSalle . Newer residential develop-
ment has occurred primarily in the southerly direction of LaSalle.
IRecent developments include Sunset Heights and the Ley and Goodner
Additions. This pattern is compatible with the designated resi-
M
r dential land use areas found on the Future Land Use Map . On that .
ilmap, development is directed away from the northerly direction
of Town because of the floodplain of the South Platte River and
1 42
834 1755957
/54 - 57
and the potential incompatibilities with existing and proposed
heavy industrial land uses.
Of the amount of land devoted to residential land use, 98% were
single family units and 2% were multi-family units. According
to the 1975 analysis, LaSalle contained 568 residential units.
This number represents 84. 3% of all of the structures in LaSalle.
In other words, eight of ten structures were residential units.
These 568 units were inventoried by a "windshield" survey to
assess the exterior structural conditions. As indicated in
Table 11 , nearly three-quarters of the residences were in stan-
dard condition. Twenty percent were classified as substandard
meaning that with minor repairs , they could become standard.
Thirty-three homes were classified as dilapidated.
Table 11
9 Conditions of
Residential Structures - 1975
I
Type Number Percent
Standard 419 73. 8
I Substandard 116 20.4
Dilapidated 33 5. 8
TOTAL 568 100. 0
SOURCE: LaSalle Structural Conditions Survey , 1975
The Housing Section , pages 104 - 124 , provides additional infor-
4 mation on housing.
m
43
4
gOOK
V 534 1'73598'7
/54- 54
Commercial
Two commercial districts, the Central Business District (CBD)
and the Commercial District , were established by the LaSalle
Zoning Ordinance . The CBD is located east of the U.P.R.R.
tracks , along both sides of the 100 block of Main Street and
the 100 block of Union Avenue. The Commercial District borders
U. S. Highway 85 through the center of LaSalle. (Please refer to
the Existing Zoning Map, Plate 6. ) The amount of land devoted
to commercial uses was 14. 38 acres or 5. 79% of all land uses.
Commercial structures comprise 9. 5% of all structures. There
were 64 buildings designed for commercial use. However , some
of these, particularly in the CBD, were vacant . Others , as the
structural conditions survey documented, were in poor condition.
In the survey, as indicated in Table 12 , less than one-third of
the commercial structures were classified as standard and almost
70% were classified as substandard or dilapidated.
Table 12
' Conditions of
Commercial Structures - 1975
Type Number Percent
Standard 20 31 . 3
Substandard 23 35. 9
Dilapidated 21 32 . 8
TOTAL 64 100. 0
SOURCE: LaSalle Structural Conditions Survey, 1975
The condition and viability of the commercial land uses poses a
hardship to LaSalle in terms of reduced employment and shopping
44
8OOK
534 175'5987
15g- 59
opportunities in LaSalle and a financial burden because while
requiring services, the deteriorated commercial land uses pro-
vides limited" revenues.
IIndustrial
Following the 1976 annexation of the Dabco property, industrially
Izoned areas accounted for approximately 72 acres or 30% of the
area within LaSalle' s town boundaries . The Dabco Industrial Park,
sixty acres located in the southwest portion of LaSalle, is yet
Ito be developed. It is planned for light industry, mostly ware-
housing operations. The twelve acres of developed industrial
uses are located in two areas of town , ten acres in a strip bor-
dering First Street with access to U.S . 85 and the railroad tracks ,
and two acres at a site at U.S . 85 and Fifth Avenue.
The 1975 analysis tabulated twenty-four structures for industrial
use. This represents 3 . 6% of the structures in LaSalle . Of
these , 14 were standard, 7 substandard and 3 dilapidated.
Table 13
I Conditions of
Industrial Structures - 1975
Type Number Percent
' Standard 14 58 . 3
Substandard 7 29. 2
Dilapidated 3 12 . 5
TOTAL 24 100. 0
3,
r SOURCE: LaSalle Structural Conditions Survey , 1975
1
45
4 co(
�. 834 1755987
/Sill- (,0
Public
Within Town boundaries , approximately 19. 2 acres of land were
devoted to public purposes other than streets or parks . These
other uses include the School District , the Fire Protection
District , the Postal Service, the Town of LaSalle, and churches.
A description of these facilities is found in the Community
Services and Facilities Section and their locations can be seen
on the Existing Land Use Map.
Seventeen structures were identified as public structures . This
was the smallest land use category, comprising only 2. 6% of the
total number of structures . According to the structural condi-
tions survey , the majority of public structures were in standard
condition. The six units classified as substandard could be
brought to standard classification with minor repairs.
Table 14
Conditions of
Public Structures - 1975
Type Number Percent
Standard 11 64. 7
Substandard 6 35 . 3
Dilapidated 0 0. 0
TOTAL 17 100. 0
SOURCE: LaSalle Structural Conditions Survey, 1975
Parks
Park land was separated from public land to provide a clearer
understanding of the amount of park land and the recreational
1 46
10%K
E 34 1755987
/54J - (s)
opportunities available to residents .
Within the town boundaries there are 21 acres of land classified
as parks. Land owned by the School District , while providing
recreational opportunities, is not included as a park land use
since it is under the control of the School Board and this land
use could conceivably change. Since 16 acres of the park areas
is the ballfield, less than 5 acres is devoted to grassy , open
space areas. This is below the acreages suggested by recrea-
tional experts (17 acres) for a community of LaSalle ' s size. A
description of these parks can be found on page 33 and their
locations can be seen on the Existing Land Use Map. The Struc-
tural Conditions Survey was not applicable to public land uses.
The amount of land devoted to the various land uses was analyzed
in 1975 by the Weld County Planning Department . This information,
with adjustments made for the annexation of the Dabco property,
is presented in Figure 7. The amount of land devoted for trans-
portation was not calculated into these figures .
IFigure 7
Existing Land Use - 1977
I
SEE NEXT PAGE FOR FIGURE 7
r
47
13OOY-
834 1'755987
154 - CcD.
Industrial
72 .45 acres
29. 22%
Residential
121 .8 acres
49. 0%
Commercial
14. 38 ac
5. 79%
Public
19. 20 ac
7. 72%
Parks
21 . 95 ac.
8 . 27%
1
SOURCE: Weld County Planning Department
In 1977, a total of 250 acres was developed or was in the process
of being developed. However, the total acreage within the town
boundaries was roughly 560 acres. The difference is largely
Iattributable to land used for transportation .
IThe location and pattern of these land uses are depicted on the
Existing Land Use Map . Even in 1975 , there were few vacant lots
and to date, there are fewer . As a result , annexation must pro-
2 ceed prior to future development .
The 1975 land use analysis provided data on the number of struc-
tures in LaSalle and the exterior, structural conditions of
48
A
OpK
,8„ 834 1755987
Id4- (,3
these structures. In 1975, there were a total of 673 structures
in LaSalle . Of these, 568 or 84 . 3% were residential units, only
9. 5% were commercial structures, 3 . 6% were industrial uses , and
2 . 6% were public land use structures. This information is
displayed in Figure 8.
Figure 8
LaSalle Structures - 1975
Type Number Percent
Residential 568 84. 3
Commercial 64 9 . 5
Industrial 24 3. 6
Public 17 2 . 6
TOTAL 673 100. 0
SOURCE: Weld County Planning Department
These 673 structures were inventoried through a "windshield"
survey according to HUD guidelines . Of the 673 structures, 464
or 68 . 9% were classified as standard, 152 or 22 . 6% were classified
as substandard, and 57 or 8. 5% were classified as dilapidated.
Table 15
Conditions of Structures - 1975
Type Number Percent
Standard 464 68. 9
Substandard 152 22. 6
Dilapidated 57 8. 5
TOTAL 673 100. 0
SOURCE: LaSalle Structural Conditions Survey, 1975
49
, 13O°C 3.75L;987
834
15'4 -W4
In order to indicate to LaSalle officials and residents the loca-
tion of areas in need of rehabilitation , the figures regarding
structural conditions were arranged by location. This arrange-
ment is visually presented in the Existing Structural Conditions
Map, Plate 7, page 51 . This map reveals the number of standard
( Is ) , substandard ( • ) , and dilapidated ( Ai ) structures per total
number of structures in a block. For example , the triangular
area along the 100 block of Main Street and the 100 block of
Union Street contained, in 1975, 17 structures. Of this , 5 or
30% were standard; 6 or 35% were substandard; and another 6 or
35% were dilapidated. Clearly, this part of the Central Business
District contained a large concentration of substandard and dilapi-
dated structures. Another concentration of dilapidated structures
was found to be in the residential block bounded by Church Court ,
First Avenue , Second Street and Sunset Drive . Twelve of the 26
structures , or 46% were dilapidated. Another ten structures , or
38%, were categorized as substandard. Additionally, small pockets
of substandard or dilapidated housing were found scattered
throughout the Town.
This concludes the first major part of the Master Plan . It has
described LaSalle ' s existing setting, analyzed the socio-demographic
characteristics of Town residents , and examined the community
services and facilities. The Existing Land Use Section has pro-
vided an analysis of LaSalle' s residential , commercial , industrial ,
public and park land uses . Combined, these sections have answered
0 the first basic questions of "Where we are now" .
I
50
0 H
G z- a N
C G a
Lra � o zu. O
Lti
ei sal
I:I d z o 0 0 zeg CD mu�- a
,��.`C r i„.'
QW 8 .E oe O ,to O C Q-
..,
p Qm �d $ pppi d 8P*. 4-
« W ��'z
W Q tow cod o fie` �y �V O
J N Dec N� -F; 1 W V
$ F_o IX
Q
J IMM
V)
n:le
'iX a
I. SA
m
'- olm ogle .::I.4°
:�(
N r -✓ \
t ,,
,, ` 3ry -_ -- /
ml- r
r
N
1. :,I 1
.1Af
:1. i4
cl
k/
O
D
co
RAO- 6 1'755�'E`7
834
The next major part of the Plan 4s concerned with "Where do we
want to go?" . The identification and formulation of goals and
objectives stating the manner in which future development should
proceed to fulfill the aspirations of Town residents seeks to
answer this second basic question . The basis for Goals and Ob-
jectives originates with input from residents , the major sources
of which will be discussed in the following section . •
M
1
1
1
1
i
I
r
52
‘300( 17559S7
S34 15y- 6,7
PART II
•
I '
•
82)4 175 5987
(54 - Cog
Resident Input
The aim of the LaSalle Master Plan is to make LaSalle a better
place for residents to live , work and play . Therefore , it was
crucial to gather input from residents as to their ideas and
concerns about the type of future they would like for LaSalle .
While this involved substantial effort , it was considered an
essential element in a plan concerning LaSalle ' s future develop-
ment . This section provides a detailed explanation of the two
primary sources of resident input , the attitudinal survey and
the community planning session .
Attitudinal Survey
Rather than strictly rely on residents to voice their attitudes ,
an attitudinal survey was conducted by the town' s planner in
August , 1977. This survey involved randomly interviewing approx-
imately every sixth residence and asking fifteen short-answer
A questions. (Please refer to the appendix for a copy of the
Isurvey. ) Interviews averaged approximately fifteen minutes. It
was the opinion of the interviewer that residents were very
receptive to being questioned on their opinions on growth and
LaSalle ' s future . They had definite ideas as to what they
wanted preserved, what they wanted improved, and the amount and
type of development they desired. All these aspects are impor-
tant in planning LaSalle' s future . Hence , they will be discussed
thoroughly.
The first question residents were asked regarded the length of
time they had resided in LaSalle : less than five years , five to
fifteen years , and more than fifteen years . Of 100 responses,
54
53. 1955987
E 834 /ski- (s9
it was determined that 41 respondants had lived in LaSalle less
than 5 years , 31 had lived in LaSalle between five and fifteen
years, and 28 had resided longer than fifteen years in LaSalle.
Length of residence was noted to determine whether this factor
influenced the response to any of the questions. Where length
of residence appeared to have an affect , this will be noted.
I Secondly, residents were asked what they liked about LaSalle .
Many responded to this open ended question with more than a
Isingle answer . The most common responses were the size of
LaSalle (48) , the quiet nature of the town (30) , the friendly
Ior familiar atmosphere (30) , and the quality of the schools (16) .
0 When asked about their concerns and complaints , the most frequent ,
I response was the railroad track crossing. The crossing was con-
sidered a problem to residents on either side of the tracks . Of
the 46 people mentioning this, 25 resided on the east side and 21
resided on the west side of the transportation corridor . Specif-
IIically, the complaints concerned safety hazards and delays re-
lated to trains blocking the crossing. Secondly , over one-fifth
of the interviewees mentioned the lack of recreational oppor-
' tunities in LaSalle. A frequently expressed desire was for a
swimming pool and a community building . Additionally , residents
' discussed the need for a park on the east side of town to reduce
the danger to children crossing the transportation corridor to
get to the existing park. Fourteen residents discussed the need
n for home mail delivery to ease service, particularly for the
■
elderly and those living on the west side who often must wait to
1 cross the railroad tracks on their way to and from the Post Office.
al 55
g°°334 175:337
l;4 - 70
Nineteen people complained about the problem of roaming dogs.
They supported the dog ordinance but wanted to see it enforced.
An equal number (19) said the Town needed to improve maintenance
of streets and parks. For the most part , these people were
referring to unfinished sidewalks, weeds in gutters , and drain-
age problems in their immediate neighborhood. Nine residents,
all residents of LaSalle for longer than five years, spoke of
•
the need for a general practitioner and a pharmacist in LaSalle .
In order to assess residents attitudes regarding growth, they
were asked what they thought was the prime advantage and dis-
advantage of growth. As to the advantage , nearly one-fifth
plainly said they did not consider growth as an advantage in
i r
LaSalle. Nearly 20% mentioned an increased tax base . Over
half of those citing an increased tax base had resided in LaSalle
less than five years, four were five to fifteen year residents,
and six had lived in LaSalle over fifteen years. To nineteen
others, the prime advantage was more businesses in LaSalle which
would provide shopping and employment opportunities.
Without a doubt , when asked what they considered the prime dis-
advantage of growth, many LaSalle residents stated that growth
would negatively affect the quality and character of the town
because of overcrowding (26) , noise increases. (14) , increased
crime (13) , and loss of the small town atmosphere (10) . Beyond
a disturbance of the quality and character of life , sixteen
others expressed a concern for the strain on community services
and facilities. Primarily, this concern was voiced by residents
of more than fifteen years.
■ 56
BOO1( 175 337
. 834 r547. 7/
Following this question, residents were asked questions regarding
the amount of growth they wanted. In one question , residents
were asked if they wanted growth to continue much as it had,
slow down, or grow faster. A fourth choice was they were not
sure or had no right to interfere in the pace of growth. A tabu-
' lation of the 100 results showed that 41% wanted growth to con-
tinue as it had in the recent past , 31% wanted it to slow down ,
11% wanted faster growth, and 17% chose the fourth choice.
To clarify the meaning of their responses, residents were asked
to respond to numerical figures. Specifically, they were asked
what they considered the ideal population for the town in 1988,
the categories being: less than 2, 000, 2 ,000 to 3 , 000, 3 , 000 to
■
4 , 000, or more than 4 , 000. A fifth category was developed for
those who were not sure or felt they had no right to interfere
in the amount of growth. Of 100 responses, 26% said less than
A 2, 000, 45% said 2 , 000 to 3 , 000, 14% said 3 , 000 to 4, 000, 11%
said over 4, 000, and 4% responded in the fifth category.
As shown in Table 16, length of residence affected the amount
of growth they desired by 1988. Nearly half of those indicating
the 2, 000 to 3, 000 range had lived in LaSalle less than five
years. Those residing in LaSalle longer tended to choose a
higher population category. Nevertheless, in all cases , the
most frequent response was in the 2 , 000 to 3 ,000 range .
r
1
57
S
,a0°534 1'75593'7
/54- 7a
Table 16
I
Preferences for Future Growth
I
I
Length of Residence - Years
0-5 5-15 more than 15 Total
ILess 24% 23% 32% 26%
I than
2, 000
e
i 2 , 000- 51% 42% 39% 45%
3 , 000 •
I3 , 000- 10% 19% 14% 14%
4, 000
I More 12% 10% 11% 11%
than
4 , 000
INot 3% 6% 4% 4%
sure
ITOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100%
SOURCE: LaSalle Survey, 1977
I
In an attempt to uncover general philosophical beliefs in planning-
` related manners , residents were asked if they thought it was im-
I portant to gather input in the planning process . Eighty-six per-
cent responded in the affirmative. Approximately 50% responded
Ithey would be interested in participating in a meeting to discuss
LaSalle' s future . Eighty-five percent indicated they were willing
tto accept guidelines to direct future growth and an equal number
I agreed with the concept of zoning as a means to manage development .
Seventy-nine percent favored planning to manage growth while 21%
Ithought the marketplace should determine the amount and type of
r
growth. Residents supported the Town's efforts on the Master
IPlan and planning in general .
1 58
BOOK
834 1755987
/54{ - 73
Questions relating to recreational , industrial , commercial , and
residential development comprised the remaining questions on the
survey. To determine whether residents remained dissatisfied
with the recreational opportunities in LaSalle as the 1976 Recre-
ational Study concluded, residents were asked if they favored
more parks and open space. Sixty-nine percent responded in the
affirmative, while 31% responded in the negative, stating that
the Town should take care of the existing parks prior to acquiring
f more. Responses were influenced by the length of residence, as
Table 17 indicates. Apparently, the younger adults and parents
with young children considered the existing parks as deficient ,
while the older residents were satisfied.
Table 17
fPreferences for Parks
Length of Residence - Years
j 0-5 5-15 +15
{ More Parks 82% 70% 48%
No More Parks 18% 30% 52%
TOTAL 100% 100% 100%
SOURCE: 1977 Attitudinal Survey
Residents were asked about industrial and commercial development
Iin order to assess if residents were concerned about the dominant
pattern of working and shopping elsewhere. When asked if they
would like to see a light industry locate in LaSalle which would
r
employ roughly 500 people, 73% answered in the affirmative .
59
(0
834 17559s7
16y - 7<1
Twenty-seven percent objected to an industry of that size
locating in LaSalle.
When asked if they would do more of their shopping in LaSalle
if there were more competitively priced stores in Town, the
response from 85% was an enthusiastic "yes" . The majority of
interviewees desired the choice of shopping in LaSalle or else-
where and the opportunity to spend their money in LaSalle where
it will benefit the Town and its residents. Fifteen percent
responded they would continue to shop in Greeley because they
liked the selection and prices . Length of residence had a
fifteen point spread in responses between the newer and older
resident categories as shown in Table 18.
Table 18
Commercial Development Question #12
Length of Residence - Years
0-5 5-15 +15
Yes 90% 87% 75%
No 10% 13% 25%
TOTAL 100% 100% 100%
SOURCE: 1977 Attitudinal Survey
The 85 people who responded that they would shop in LaSalle if
competitively priced stores were available were asked how often
they would shop in LaSalle. Fifty responses were "most of the
time" , 28 were "frequently" , and 7 were "only quick pick-up
items" . Then , these 85 persons were questioned about which items
4 60
s3— 13‘24 1755987
/SY - 75
they would likely shop for in LaSalle. Eighty-one persons said
they would probably shop for groceries and drugs in LaSalle , 75
for hardware and 56 for. clothing. Despite the fact that many
residents would like to shop in LaSalle, they are forced to go
elsewhere because many items are not available in LaSalle. This
result tends to verify the alleged deficiency in commercial
development .
Additionally, residents were asked whether they favored the
revitalization of the Central Business District (CBD) . Revitali-
zation was explained as an effort to remodel the store fronts and
occupy the vacant stores. According to this explanation, 73
favored a revitalization effort . Twenty-seven did not , believing
the CBD could never be a viable retail area because of the rail-
road tracks. A few others did not object to the appearance of
the areal Responses were affected by the length of residence.
i While 80% of those residing in LaSalle less than five years
favored it , just 61% of those residing more than fifteen years
favored it . Seventy-four percent of the five to fifteen year
residents favored revitalization of the CBD.
IThe final question interviewees were asked concerned the types
of residential development they wanted to see in the future.
[ They were asked if they wanted to see more , same or less single
Ifamily housing, multi-family housing and housing for the elderly.
The results for single-family residences are presented in
Table 19. Fifty-five percent said they would like more , 36%
said the same, and 9% said less. There was a preference for
single family housing units.
61
eooK 1755987
834
154,1 - 7 6
Table 19
Preferences for Single Family Residences
Length of Residence - Years
Average
0-5 5-15 more than 15 Total
More 56% 59% 48% 55%
Same 41% 34% 30% 36%
Less 3% 7% 22% 9%
f TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100%
SOURCE: LaSalle Survey, 1977
As shown, the longer the length of residence, the larger the per-
cent favoring "less" si,ngle family units. This may be related to
the fact that this group was most opposed to growth of any sort .
Responses regarding the amount of multi-family development resi-
dents wanted to see is shown in Table 20. As shown, 35% wanted
t to see "more" , 22% said the existing ratio was right , and 43%
i said they wanted to see "less" multi-family units'. Many with
Ithis response qualified their answer by saying they did not oppose
multi-family units constructed in R-2 zones.
I
SEE FOLLOWING PAGE FOR TABLE 20
•
62
A
Ood-
I L 534 1755987
Table 20 /S�_ 77
Preferences for Multi-family Residences
Length of Residence - Years
Average
0-5 5-15 more than 15 Total
IMore 29% 44% 33% 35%
Same 22% 31% 11% 22%
ILess 49% 25% 56% 43%
ITOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100%
SOURCE: LaSalle Survey, 1977
•
I Residents were also asked their opinions about the need for some
type of elderly housing. The specifics of the type were not
given. Nevertheless, 71% thought LaSalle needed more elderly
Ihousing, 16% responded the same portion would be sufficient , and
13% said that they thought the present housing was adequate .
a Table 21 shows the figures for housing for the elderly.
ITable 21
IPreferences for Housing for the Elderly
I Length of Residence - Years
Average
0-5 5-15 more than 15 Total
IMore 78% 65% 68% 71%
ISame 12% 13% 25% 16%
Less 10% 22% 7% 13%
1 TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100%
I
SOURCE: LaSalle Survey, 1977
I
63
A
2.O°\"834
on 8 4
175,7387
i5v - 7g
The preceeding has provided results from the survey taken from
all of the 100 survey responses according to question. Also ,
this data can be presented by length of residence. Below is a
summary of results for each of the three residency categories.
Less than five years:
- 18 cited LaSalle ' s size as what they liked best about
LaSalle, an equal number said its quiet nature.
- The railroad tracks (18) and the loose dogs ( 11 ) were
the main concerns.
- 78% favored planned development over the marketplace .
- 15 respondants saw no advantage to growth, 11 said it
would increase the tax base.
- As to disadvantages, many were concerned about losing
the small town atmosphere , and only three persons
mentioned the strain on facilities.
- 39% wanted growth to continue much as it had , 30%
wanted it to slow down, 7% wanted faster growth, and
24% said they were not sure or did not think they had
a right to say.
- 75% wanted LaSalle' s population in 1988 to be less
than 3 , 000.
- 80% favored more parks and open space.
- 73% favored a light industry employing 500 people
locating in LaSalle.
- 90% favored more shopping facilities in Town .
- 80% favored revitalization efforts in the CBD.
- As to the type of single family residential develop-
ment they desired to see in LaSalle in the future, 56%
wanted more, 41% the same, and 3% less .
- For multi-family housing, 29% said more , 22% said the
same, and 49% said less .
- For elderly housing, 78% wanted more , 12% wanted the
same, and 10% wanted less.
64
O834 175588'
/54- 79
Five to fifteen years :
- This group also liked LaSalle ' s size ( 14) , but 8 men-
tioned liking the school system.
- The two most mentioned problems were the railroad ( 10)
and the lack of recreational opportunities (10) .
- 80% favored planning to manage LaSalle ' s growth.
- 14 persons saw no advantage to growth, the other
responses were scattered among eight reasons .
- The prime disadvantage was losing the small town atmos-
phere .
- 35% wanted growth to continue , 29% wanted it to slow
down , 16% wanted it to grow faster , and 20% were not
sure or did not want to say.
- 65% wanted LaSalle ' s population in 1988 to be less
than 3 ,000.
- 70% wanted more parks and open space.
- 77% favored a light industry employing 500 people
locating in LaSalle .
- 87% wanted to see more stores and 74% supported •
revitalization efforts in the CBD.
- As to single family housing, 59% wanted more , 34% the
same, and 7% wanted less.
- For multi-family housing, 44% said they wanted more ,
31% wanted the same, and 25% wanted less.
- For elderly housing , 65% said they wanted more, 13%
the same and 22% wanted less .
More than fifteen years:
- 16 persons mentioned LaSalle' s size as what they liked
best .
- The most frequently mentioned problems were the rail-
road (7) , and speeding traffic (4) .
- 77% favored planned development for LaSalle .
- 43% saw no advantage of growth, 20% said an increased
tax base , and 20% said more business .
65
E334 1755057
/5 - 80
- The most frequently mentioned disadvantage was the
strain on facilities (8) , four said they did not see
any disadvantages.
- 50% wanted growth to continue as it had, 36% wanted
slower growth, 11% wanted faster growth, and only 3%
were not sure or did not want to say.
- 71% wanted LaSalle ' s population under 3, 000 in 1988.
- 48% wanted more parks and open space, 52% did not .
- 73% favored a light industry employing 500 people
locating in LaSalle .
- 75% wanted to see more shopping facilities.
- 61%' favored revitalization efforts in the CBD.
- For housing types , 48% favored more single family
units, 30% said the same, and 22% said less.
- For multi-family residences , 33% said more, 11% said
the same, and 56% said less.
- As to housing for the elderly, 68% said more was wanted,
25% said the same, and only 7% said less.
The attitudinal differences in responses between the three cate-
gories was summed up as the younger residents seemed more con-
cerned about planning for LaSalle ' s future and keeping LaSalle
a small , quiet and self-contained community, while residents in
the five to fifteen year category favored growth and all types
of development . The older residents , rather than favoring
growth, wanted to see LaSalle remain the same , with the only
exception being more housing for the elderly .
N
66
160 ��� 1'755987
15,41 - 8/
Community Planning Session
In addition to input from the 1977 attitudinal survey , a Community
Planning Session (CPS ) was held to gather input from all interested
residents not just those who had been surveyed. The LaSalle CPS
was held the evening of November 3 , 1977 , at the LaSalle Elementary
School . Over 50 persons attended this community event . These
residents viewed a slide presentation which explained the process
involved in the LaSalle Master Plan and provided background infor-
mation on LaSalle and the socio-demographic characteristics of
its residents . Afterward, residents were divided into small
discussion groups led by a Town Board or a Planning Commission
member. These groups were encouraged to discuss growth-related
issues applied to LaSalle ' s future. A lengthy and intense exchange
of ideas between residents and local officials ensued. While the
topic of discussion varied for general development to specific
site locations, below is a synopsis of these discussions .
- LaSalle needs to regulate and control the pace and
pattern of its growth to preserve the quality of
life, particularly the small town atmosphere and.
the high quality of schools .
- LaSalle needs to encourage commercial and indus-
trial development as a means of generating local
employment , offering shopping opportunities , and
increasing the economic viability of the area ,
thereby making LaSalle more attractive to residents.
- LaSalle needs to provide adequate recreational
opportunities and medical services to its residents.
- LaSalle needs to improve its street maintenance and
lighting, enforce the dog ordinance, improve the
water quality, and rectify the railroad crossing
problem.
These discussions at the Community Planning Session were a signifi-
cant element in the planning process. First , local officials , in
67
°°& S'4 1750987
/31- 2
discussing issues with residents, heard constituents concerns
about future development , which will aid them in their evaluation
of development proposals . Secondly, the discussions confirmed
and reinforced the results from the attitudinal survey. Although
there was a different cross-section of residents at the CPS than
had been surveyed, 'many of the ideas and concerns were similar.
Residents were in basic agreement regarding their desires for
LaSalle ' s future. This concensus meant that the Town of LaSalle
could formulate town aims reflective of residents desires. These
aspirations were then concisely written in the LaSalle Goals and
Objectives .
Goals and Objectives
I �
Without the Plan providing a strong statement as to what the Town
desires for its future development , it is of little value . For
this reason, the LaSalle Goals and Objectives are the most
important element of the Master Plan . The Goals and Objectives •
indicate to local officials , developers and residents what LaSalle
wants for the Town' s future . As such, they serve as guidelines to
Town Board and Planning Commission members in their evaluation of
development proposals .
The Goals and Objectives were organized around three key concepts :
1 ) To maintain and improve the existing small town
atmosphere of the Town of LaSalle .
2) To maintain and improve public services provided
to the residents of the Town of LaSalle.
A 3) To ensure the orderly , harmonious , and economical
development of the Town of LaSalle .
Under these three key concepts were the goals and objective state-
ments . Goals are the ideal end towards which effort is directed.
1 68
‘s5°°\(834 tar51'JLJ
154 - 8.3
Objectives are the means to that end. They are measurable and
achieveable. Both are deliberately general in nature to allow
flexibility to unique circumstances . As such, any type of
development proposal can be weighed against this framework of
community aspirations. The goals and objectives are also long
range to provide long-term, comprehensive planning.
I . To maintain and improve the existing small town atmosphere
of the Town of LaSalle. •
A. Preserve and enhance the peaceful , quiet character of
the Town of LaSalle.
1 . Protect the character of residential neighborhoods
from intrusive and disruptive development . •
2. Provide a transportation system which will serve
the resident ' s travel needs with maximum efficiency,
safety , and comfort while minimizing the disruption
to neighborhoods.
3 . Encourage business and commercial development which
generates a high volume of truck traffic to locate in
areas where the adverse impacts of noise and conges-
tion can be minimized.
4 . Reduce public nuisances such as barking and roaming
dogs and noxious weeds.
5 . Protect Town residents from crime and promote an
atmosphere in which they can feel safe.
B. Retain the present feeling of spaciousness by preserving
and enhancing the aesthetic features and natural beauty
of the Town of LaSalle.
1 . Utilize open spaces to buffer areas with conflicting
land uses , provide relief from the effects of urban
intensities , and preserve the neighborhood identity
of residential areas .
2. Develop and maintain , if possible, a connected and
linear open space system which will be accessible
to all residents.
3 . Capitalize on the location and aesthetic value of
the South Platte River by utilizing it as an open
space area.
69
6°°L
834
1755,)67
/5-4/- 81
4 . Encourage the use of drainage facilities such
as canals and detention ponds for open space
purposes.
5 . Enhance the appearance of developed and developing
areas, public streets , and parking lots through
the creative use of landscape design.
C. Promote and protect the health, safety, and general
welfare of the residents of the Town of LaSalle .
1 . Provide safe drinking water to LaSalle residents .
2 . Keep air , water, and noise pollution at a minimum.
3 . Encourage quality medical services to locate in
LaSalle which conveniently and adequately meet
the minimal health service needs of Town residents,
particularly the elderly and low income.
4 . Provide rapid and quality emergency services for
Town residents.
5. Limit development in natural hazard areas or
require construction modifications which would
mitigate natural hazards without degrading the
environment .
6 . Aggressively negotiate with the Union Pacific
Railroad to ensure the optimum solution to the
present dangerous and inconvenient problem that •
the switching grounds at the First Avenue crossing
creates .
7. Promote and support community service organiza-
tions which meet , in part , the social , cultural , •
and educational needs of Town residents and
facilitate the establishment of other institutions
capable of offering a broad spectrum of opportuni-
ties to meet such needs .
8. Encourage alternatives in design and materials so
as to reduce construction costs and energy expen-
ditures, provided such changes do not have a
detrimental effect on the health, safety, and
general welfare of the residents of LaSalle .
D. Provide a choice of quality housing which is affordable
to a wide range of income levels and available to all
persons without discrimination .
1 . Promote a community effort to encourage the main-
tenance of standard units and the rehabilitation
1 of substandard units .
70
so°K
s. 834
175598'7
/54,/ - 85
2 . Encourage the protection and preservation of his-
torically significant or unique buildings and homes
in the Town of LaSalle.
3. Encourage the diversity and dispersion of housing
types and sizes which meet a broad range of housing
needs with a greater choice of location .
4. Seek the construction of multi-family residences
which are designed in an attractive manner and
provide privacy.
II . To maintain and improve public services provided to the
residents of the Town of LaSalle.
A. Provide the best possible public facilities and services
to the existing and future residents of LaSalle which
are safe, reliable , affordable , and efficient .
1 . Ensure that proposed development will not deplete
the capacities of the Town of LaSalle to provide
services.
2 . Ensure, to the extent possible, that new develop-
ment pays its own way so that it does not put an
excessive burden on the residing taxpayer .
3 . Adapt services so that they are responsive to the
needs of LaSalle residents .
4 . Promote progressive management techniques in
operating and maintaining utility systems so as
to provide good service at reasonable rates .
5. Encourage development to locate adjacent to
existing development to minimize extensions of
services and utilities .
6. Encourage the construction of storm drainage
facilities which will protect Town residents from
drainage problems or flood hazards.
B. Provide park and recreation programs which respond to
the needs and resources of the residents of the Town
of LaSalle .
1 . Improve existing parks and encourage the acquisi-
tion and development of new park sites which are •
accessible to all .
2 . Develop and preserve parks and open spaces which •
are important as focal points , lend neighborhood
identity, or are unique natural features.
71
175M87
'7 '?c8''
834 /54- 8Co
3. Prevent urban encroachment upon areas needed for
recreation and open space.
4 . Provide a broad spectrum of passive and active
recreational activities to meet the recreational
needs of all age levels and interest types .
5. Provide community centers and recreational facili-
ties as a place for groups to meet and for general
use .
III . To ensure the orderly, harmonious, and economical develop-
ment of the Town of LaSalle.
A. Promote orderly growth for the Town of LaSalle .
1 . Discourage urban sprawl .
2 . Ensure consistent and equitable application of land
use regulations.
3. Promote better integration of land development and
transportation facilities realizing the impacts
transportation systems have on land use .
4. Encourage coordination between school facility
planners and land developers in order to locate
residential development where it can best be
served by educational facilities .
5. Promote energy conservation in all land use, trans-
portation, and utility programs.
B. Promote the maximum harmony and compatibility between
land uses in the Town of LaSalle .
1 . Encourage future development to be compatible with
existing land uses and the adopted land use plan
of the Town of LaSalle .
2 . Encourage new development to utilize landscaping ,
screening, setbacks, berms, and other techniques
to provide visual and noise buffers between adjacent
conflicting land uses .
3 . Maintain and preserve land for agriculture which is
best suited for that use based on fertility, slope ,
and efficiency of operation .
4 . Ensure that future development will be accomplished
so as to create the least degradation of the environ-
ment . .
72
00 834 1755987
/ 551 - Y7
C. Promote commercial and industrial development in desig-
nated areas to provide Town residents with a reasonable
choice of goods and services and employment opportunities.
1 . Promote a program to coordinate and aggressively seek
businesses to locate in the designated commercial
areas of LaSalle, particularily the Central Business
District (CBD) .
2. Strive to improve and unify the architectural and
landscape design of the Central Business District .
3. Encourage diversified and non-polluting employers to
locate in LaSalle .
4. Encourage employers to hire LaSalle residents.
5. Require industries to be designed in an aesthetic
manner with buffers and landscaping to minimize
visual blight and noise.
Constraints and Opportunities
The direction that residents desire for the future development of
LaSalle was expressed in the LaSalle Goals and Objectives. While
these statements play a primary guiding role in evaluating future
development , it is essential to account for LaSalle ' s existing
setting and existing land use. These factors strongly influence
the future. Accordingly, before the Future Land Use Map and the
Development Policies can be formulated, it is necessary to specify
potential constraints and opportunities related to the existing
setting and the existing land use .
Constraints
- LaSalle , although primarily a residential community ,
generally lacks housing diversity.
- LaSalle lacks sufficient commercial and industrial devel-
opment which could provide local employment , local
shopping, and contribute to the tax base.
- Commercial development may be discouraged from locating
in the Central Business District in LaSalle because of
its neglected appearance.
73
tr 334 175598''
i6-q - 88
- The size and number of signs along U.S . Highway 85 tends
to detract from the visual- appearance of the Town .
- At present , development is discouraged by the lack of
vacant land within the Town boundaries.
- The Town lacks adequate in-town health services to meet
the minimal health service needs of the residents, such
as doctors, drugstores, etc.
- LaSalle lacks adequate recreational facilities and acti-
vities for residents of all age groups.
- Areas of LaSalle have not been provided with adequate
storm drainage facilities .
- The Town presently faces a water problem related to the
high nitrate concentration in its water supply.
- Intensive development in the northwesterly direction of
LaSalle is restricted by the floodplain of the South
Platte River.
Opportunities
- General compatibility among its existing land uses makes
LaSalle an attractive community.
- LaSalle offers a pleasant residential living environment .
•
- LaSalle ' s housing , for the most part , is in good struc-
tural condition and repair.
- LaSalle is a choice location for those desiring to live
in a small town which is close to a city.
- LaSalle has close accessibility to the commercial and
cultural centers of Greeley and Denver.
- LaSalle is served by an excellent school system and high
quality police and fire protection systems.
- LaSalle is surrounded by agricultural open space and is
not confined by neighboring communities.
- LaSalle , because of highway and rail systems and the
demand for shopping and employment opportunities , is a
potential location for commercial and industrial develop-
ment .
- LaSalle has adequate water and sewer systems to serve
existing and future uses.
74
zooK 1755987
534
151 - 89
- The South Platte River floodplain offers the potential
for being developed into an excellent park system.
Residents have a strong sense of community identity and
pride.
LaSalle' s development depends , in part , upon the Town' s ability
to recognize these constraints and opportunities. By diminishing
or solving its constraints and by capitalizing on its opportunities,
the Town can further meet the expressed needs and desires of present
residents.
Essentially, these needs and desires have been documented in this
part of the Plan. It has answered, through extensive citizen input ,
"Where we want to go. " Citizen input from the 1977 attitudinal
survey and Community Planning Session , and input from local
decision-makers were condensed into a list of community aspirations
related to LaSalle ' s future development . These Goals and Objectives,. , .
as statements of LaSalle' s future ideals , provide guidelines to
Planning Commission and Town Board members as they evaluate develop-
ment proposals. Other guidelines are found in the Future Land Use
part which follows.
75
eoo�c 1'755387
534 /64- 90
PART III
av
534 1755987
Future 154 9 !
All the preceding documentation found in this Plan has been aimed
at answering the final question of "How do we get there" . This
section further addresses LaSalle ' s future development aspirations
by providing specific guidelines to decision-makers, developers
and residents. Namely, these are the Future Land Use Map and the
Development Policies. The Future Land Use Map provides a graphic
illustration and the Development Policies provide a verbal explan-
ation of "How we get there" . This, in essence , is the substance
of the Master Plan .
In addition, the remaining sections are included to reflect the
comprehensive approach of this plan . Related to LaSalle ' s future
development is the Town ' s responsibility to provide municipal
services and facilities. This topic is covered in the Future
Services and Facilities section. Following this is a section on
transportation in the LaSalle area. It discusses LaSalle ' s
existing thoroughfare system and proposes the location of future
major thoroughfares. The intent of the Transportation Section
is to recognize the relationship between land use and transpor-
tation and provide safe, efficient and aesthetic transportation
facilities. Likewise , the Housing Plan , which follows, is an
important part of the LaSalle Master Plan. It examines the
present housing supply and the characteristics of the population
as they relate to housing. From this , an analysis was made as
to housing needs . As a means of satisfying these housing needs,
housing goals, objectives and policies were developed. Lastly,
implementation strategies and evaluative criteria have been pro-
77
eo°(1334 1755987 4
/51 - 99.
vided for the Housing Plan . Similarly, the LaSalle Master Plan
concludes with implementation procedures and recommendations
concerning the review process. This is a critical section in
I that it must be followed to ensure that the LaSalle Master Plan
is a usable tool for preserving and improving the quality of
life in LaSalle.
Future Land Use Map
Prior to the drafting of the Future Land Use Map, socio-demographic
information on LaSalle residents was documented, existing land use
was analyzed, input was gathered, goals and objectives were agreed
upon, and constraints and opportunities were discussed. Then ,
these elements were graphically illustrated in the LaSalle Future
Land Use Map , page 79 . The Future Land Use Map portrays the
Iexisting town boundaries and land uses as well as the boundaries
and proposed land uses for the surrounding planning area. The
1 planning area contains all the area within a three mile radius
9 of the town, as legally allowed for a planning area by Colorado
law. If the land within LaSalle' s planning area was to ever be
Stotally developed, it would support a population of roughly
40, 000. This population size is much greater than LaSalle residents
desire . However , the size of the planning area has been maintained
0 to include the surrounding three mile area in the long-range, com-
prehensive plans of the Town as a means of protecting the quality
of life in LaSalle. The Town of LaSalle claims its quality of
life to be one of its main attributes . One aspect relating to its
quality of life is its compatibility of existing land uses. A
1 primary aim of the Future Land Use Map is to preserve this general
78
!"� s LLI
-+ 1 LL Q v Q J
., �^ Vi
I o g o $
0 a - z LL O
Z $ go " Q 2 ti Q 0 Q
s g g J N u ,� J
W II
, c m U 8 = a ''' z '''
0 Y
W ° ° a , m e _ d � FJ CC
L O
J f E w x a yy n U can
E I • m J v i w g i E Q I-
Q 4 < Q a Q y tilt-, L.:
J
o 8
= z z U Q 5 ._ °b — - H
w W W J W ~ I- U w W
° C] ° Q 1 g Cg J O C7
W W W p O ° ° . F H
CC CC CC -.1
U Z 2 d fn. N
i
v \ \
/
-,rte r� ' ,� a�
to 9G�^.,Itx1�4 a i.y2 / _ _
ke A }i '^v Say:,_.lam
I ' -,) c.. - --,v- , ..1.-:•?,,,,---; ,„-, ,,,,"4,_ 1 i __ -7)__ 1
\ ' I` .i ..:6,4 -.1",' - VY' ,
9) -''`‘, ':.`'\ ,..., „
A11,1,
Qf/
\ to t i
\vt
Rte. \ i \i <
a � 1 �"�
I. N',,%\:"',.
goo , �,,"li- �,y,�,;i, . s
N
N
R ON ) t ° I ,, =1 atw
iii"' \;f
\t\8 t:� .. —_ \
e� I gI
�� I j \
t. . 534 1755987
/5AI- 94i
compatibility, both within the existing town and within the
surrounding planning area.
Designations
Therefore , the Future Land Use Map designates the land uses
within the present town boundaries in compliance with the existing
zoning. It proposes future land uses in the planning area which
are compatible with existing uses and match the future land use
needs and desires of LaSalle residents as determined through a
comprehensive approach.
The Future Land Use Map expanded the number of zoning districts
from the existing six zones to the eight land use types. These
designations provide additional compatibility control by being
more restrictive than the six zones found in the LaSalle Zoning
Ordinance of 1974. Specifically, in the planning area, the eight
land use designations allow for a differentation between multi •
-
family residential (medium and high density) , commercial and
local commercial , and light and heavy industrial uses . Below
is a brief explanation of the eight designations found on the
Future Land Use Map .
Low Density Residential - Conventionally built single
family structures on an individual lot of a minimum
of 7, 000 square feet or a maximum of 6. 2 dwelling
units per acre (DU/AC) .
Medium Density Residential - A minimum lot size of
5, 000 square feet per dwelling unit . Multi-family
structures in this category include duplexs, tri-
plexs, and townhouses. An acre, at the maximum, could
contain 8.7 units.
80
ppolc
S 34 1755987
/5Y1 - 95
High Density Residential - Units with greater than 8 .7
DU/AC. Up to 14 units per acre with the minimum lot
size being 2 , 000 square feet .
Commercial - Retail and wholesale uses designed to serve
the shopping needs of the community.
Local Commercial - Small retail uses intended to serve
only adjacent neighborhoods .
Light Industrial - Storage and warehousing operations of
goods assembled at a heavy industrial site or the
manufacture of parts without the use of heavy equipment .
Heavy Industrial - The manufacture or assembly of goods
with heavy equipment which emit noise or pollution.
Park and Open Space - Land utilized as green space to
provide visual reflief from urban uses , buffer adjoining
land uses , and provide recreational areas .
As shown on the Future Land Use Map, residential development was
categorized into three zones, not just the former single-family
residential (R-1) and multi-family residential (R-2) zones. A
third category, high density residential , was adddd to provide
greater range of housing type and price range. Both the medium
density and high density residential zones can, through good
planning and design, accommodate in an attractive manner large '
numbers of people. This will he increasingly important as a
means of increasing housing selection and reducing the escalating
costs of housing. Additionally, designated medium and high density
areas serve to buffer low density residential areas from non-
residential uses .
The commercial land uses have been designated into two districts.
The Commercial district complies with the existing Commercial
zoning. The only future commercial zone found in the Future Land
81
1
spo 534 1755987
/544 - 9(
Use Map is located south of the present town boundaries at
the south interchange of U.S . Highway 85. The size of this
area, about 15 acres, will allow a community shopping center.
The local commercial district , designed for small neighborhood
shopping centers , is depicted in one area outside of the
present town boundaries . Development of local shopping centers,
although convenient , detract from the residential character of
the area. In fact , many residents stated in the 1977 survey
that they opposed businesses locating in residential areas.
Moreover, commercial development should be directed to the
existing commercial districts to utilize them to their fullest
extent and make them more viable. It is only after the full
development of the existing commercial district that consider-
ation should be given to local commercial development proposals .
As previously mentioned, light and heavy industrial uses have
been given separate designations. This was done to provide
the Town of LaSalle with more control over the location
of light and heavy industrial uses. Light industrial uses,
when properly designed and landscaped, can more aptly be located
adjacent to other land uses without creating incompatibility.
In LaSalle, the Future Land Use Map designated light industrial
uses on both sides of U. S. Highway 85 directly south of the Town.
This area is buffered by open space land and major thoroughfares .
Heavy industrial uses, because of its potential offensive nature
to other land uses , were designated where it will have minimal
incompatibility. Specifically, in LaSalle, heavy industrial uses
82
eQ°( 1'755987
834 /54- 97
were designated in the northeasterly corner of .the planning area.
The surrounding uses are buffered by open space land and the
railroad tracks. The Town of LaSalle in recognizing the sign-
ificant and lasting value of open space land has proposed to
preserve a large amount in a wide spectrum of open space types
to meet the recreational and aesthetic needs of residents.
First , for use of the entire town, a large park complex is
proposed along the south bank of the South Platte River in
the floodplain. Secondly, neighborhood parks are proposed to
serve immediate neighborhoods. Corridor parks are proposed as
buffers and, as envisioned, they will connect the town, thereby
providing pedestrian trails to parks , schools and commercial
areas. Not only does the Future Land Use Map propose land uses
in designated areas, it also proposes stages of future develop-
ment .
Staging
Staging of future development permits local decision-makers,
developers and residents to know where development can take place
by closely gauging the timing and pattern of development . Also ,
since staging of future land use encourages development to occur
adjacent to existing development , this strategy lessens urban
sprawl , one of the major blights of unplanned development . Like-
wise,1 staging reduces the costs of providing municipal services
by encouraging future development which is contiguous to existing
town services and facilities. For these reasons , staging is seen
as an important method to preserve the quality of life in LaSalle.
l
83
,z \L 1755987
154 - 98
As shown on the Future Land Use Map, the LaSalle planning area
has been divided into two stages. While the boundary lines are
not , for the sake of reality, hard and fast lines, they do
provide guidelines to local officials as they review development
proposals. Most of the land within Stage I should be developed
before directing development to Stage II .
Land within Stage I , not including the land within the present •
town boundaries, involves roughly 470 acres . The area included
in Stage II involves approximately 385 acres . Below, in Table
22, the designated uses and acreages for each as found on the
Future Land Use Map are provided.
Table 22
Proposed Acreages
Total
Stage I Stage II Total Percent
Proposed Use Acreage Acreage
Low Density Resid. 125 125 50 35
Medium Density 40 55 95 14
High Density 25 20 45 6
Commercial 0 15 15 2
Local Commercial 20 0 20 3
Light Industrial 80 0 8n 11
Heavy Industrial 90 0 90 13
Parks & Open Space 90 20 110 16
TOTALS 470 235 705 100
SOURCE : Weld County Planning Department
Although these figures are approximations , this information is help-
fulin determining the appropriate areas of proposed land uses. These
acreages translate into the following over-all land use pattern for
the surrounding planning area:
84
BQOK
834 1755987
/s4- 99
Residential - As can be seen in the Future Land Use Map,
proposed residential uses comprise over half of all
proposed land uses in Stages I and II . Of the residential
designations, nearly 64% are for low density use, 24%
are for medium density use, and 12% are for high density
use.
fr
Commercial - Only 5% of the proposed uses within both Stage
I and Stage II are designed commercial . The 'purpose in
designating only 15 acres for commercial and 20 acres for
local commercial is to utilize the existing commercial
areas prior to creating competitive locations elsewhere
in the area.
Industrial - All industrial uses are designated within Stage
I . It was felt that there is sufficient acreage within
Stage I (170 acres) to support a large number of industrial
uses . If , at some future point , this amount of land is
determined to be insufficient , industrial uses can be
designated in Stage II by adjusting the staging lines.
Parks and Open Space - Within both stages there is a sub-
stantial amount of land (160 acres) designed for this use
to better meet the recreational and aesthetic needs of
LaSalle residents .
This over-all pattern of proposed land use acreages is in harmony
with the expressed needs and desires of LaSalle residents .
Accordingly, they should be adhered to until such time as those
desires change.
Population Estimates
From the acreages of proposed residential land uses, population
estimates can be made. These estimates are only for the land within
Stage I and Stage II . They do not include the population within
the existing town boundaries. The population within the existing
boundaries should remain fairly constant around 1 , 800, since the
residentially zoned land within the present boundaries is fully
developed. •
85
00 834 1755987
154,1-/oo
The following table shows the type and amount of low, medium
and high density residential land uses for Stage I and Stage
II . From these figures, estimates were made as to the number
of dwelling units which would be found on each acre. These
were determined by the definition of each density. This figure
was then multipled by the estimated average number of people
per unit. The result was the total estimated future population.
1
I
86
eo�� 834 C 1755987
Q]) 0 Ion In O M cO Tr CO r-4 hS<I -tot
4- i-) CI N H '-I N CO NCO
cd C) cd N O N d• N •-1 N di •
E H r-I I I I I I 1 - ii
•F-1 C C In N N di I ch
i' ri O
!-) 1-) a N N- Co Co N N If) O
in 0 o ri Co 1.0 m H C) d+ 10
44 Fry F)+ H N H N I
i
f
W
O -P
.r1
r0 C
-1 'F7 O 00 CO a¢' o 00 CO <
600 F1 CO N NO CO N NO
� A F F
w
0
td o co o o 0) 0
It 0• N CO) CO N CO
co ri ry m I I I I I I •
+, cd ri +J L0 0 CO 10 O d'
+) N •r1 l ICI` N do H N CI N
• [O ^ CO N N CO CI H
I CI 4-)
N CD
w
ri d •r
CO
• .
[-1 .N
• tO Q)
H i •rI U N N H
O r-I W Q' I I
r-1 i-a (.0 00 N Co CO N
a Q) •r1 F+ I I I I
e a co Co Cl) M Co CO
I PI
C
• C)
E
I P
F1
ce
a
re 0
O O H O iU 10 LI 0 A
O cd Cl d1 N N In NH tO
O H ri
• O
' a c • Cd
C
ri
a
C
I
M In • • 0
'9 a I-1 r4 a)
a) b
CD H C.'• CO I-I Cr. r ri
i Q) 0
Q) - +- • • C) i-I • • 3
SO •rI CD In t0 •r1 CD In
I t cd V) CZ CD • C CO C C
CI) O A A CO C) can W
o A A 0
be r
;-I0 C) 0 Cl.) • 0
a a x a ' x ca
534 1755987
/54 -/oz
It should be noted that changes in the acreages , the densities ,
and the average household size will alter these figures. However,
•
based on these assumptions and this computation method, the esti-
mated total population for Stage I will range between 2, 364 and l
4 , 135. The estimated population for Stage II will likely be
between 2 , 500 to 4, 319. These population increases are within a
•
range acceptable to the majority of Town residents .
Another criteria which must be evaluated is the Town's ability
to provide municipal services to this future population . The
following section of the Master Plan discusses the probable
future service and facility needs and demands which correspond
to the estimated future population increases.
gI
I
I
I
I
I
0
I •
88
e0( 1'75598'7
. ' 534 /5,{ -103
Future Service and Facility Needs -
This section of the Plan outlines the possible future service
and facility needs and demands when considering the estimated F
future population as Stages I and II are developed. The pur-
pose of outlining responsibilities related to future service
and facility needs is to diminish the negative affects that
anticipated future growth has on town services and facilities .
! This section is not intended to propose specific solutions or
Iways of improving a facility since that is the Town Board' s
responsibility .
IAs discussed in the Community Services and Facilities section ,
1 the Town of LaSalle is concerned about the quality of water.
At this time , there are plans to contract with an engineering
' firm to present recommendations to improve the water quality .
Their recommendations must be implemented without delay by the
d Town Board . Time is a factor , not solely from a health point
of view, but also since the price of water is constantly
rising.
A related consideration is the quantity of water. At present ,
IIthe supply is ample . However , present consumption is high.
Currently there is not an economic incentive to reduce water
1 consumption . If in the future consumption remains high, the
L population dramatically increases , or drought conditions per-
sist , there is a possibility of a water shortage . An ample
lig supply of water should not be taken for granted. Water must
be treated as a valuable and limited resource . For this
i1 reason , serious thought should be given to the installation
i89
17S.�98 7
r. €3 4 /5-51 - /0-9
of water meters , which would provide an economic incentive to
conserve water and encourage water saving devices .
In addition to water quality and quantity , the Town Board has
the obligation for storing and distributing this water in an
acceptable amount and manner . As LaSalle grows, the Town will
need to periodically investigate the water storage capacity .
If the demand for domestic use and the need for fire protec-
tion is nearly equivalent to the storage capacity , engineering
studies to expand the storage system are warranted. In regards
to the water distribution system, the smaller lines, particu-
larly the 2" lines should be replaced by 8 inch lines . New
developments should also be equipped with 8 inch lines.
r
ILikewise , the smaller sewer lines should be replaced by larger
pipes as usage requires. The lagoon facility seems to be in good
A condition. •
cThe existing facility has a treatment capacity for
4 , 000 people . Thus, the treatment facility is not an immediate
1 constraining factor . However , when the population reaches
3 , 200 or 80% of the design capacity , the Colorado Water
Quality Control Act requires the initiation of engineering
planning for the expansion of the facility . Commencement of
construction must begin when the system reaches 95% capacity .
Until such time as required by law, the Town Board has the
responsibility for any future planning of facility expansion.
The amount of expansion should be reflective of the amount of
qui growth desired.
1
90
siodi" 1755987
b X3 4 ISI - ios
Other services and facilities play a role in meeting residents'
needs and demands. One of the main concerns to LaSalle resi-
v.
dents was the lack of recreational opportunities for all ages . ;
Specifically mentioned as top priority items were a community ;
I
building and a swimming pool . Additionally, a majority of
residents expressed their desire for more park sites. Toward
this end, the Future Land Use Map designates the proposed park
j sites and open space land. As shown , a large area is proposed
I northwest of LaSalle in the floodplain of the South Platte
River. Serious effort should be made to ensure acquisition
Iand development of this area. Its development would ensure
present and future generations of a major community park com-
iplex. On the neighborhood level , smaller sites have been
designated throughout the planning area. In order to provide
accessible neighborhood parks , the Subdivision Ordinance re-
iquires a park dedication or money in lieu of from all developers .
Prior to acceptance of such, the Town Board should ensure the
1 proposed park sites are adequate and accessible.
FIn conjunction with park and open space site planning is
planning for future school sites. The RE-1 School District
Board is aware of the need to coordinate future growth with
the Town of LaSalle to insure that the quality of education
does not suffer because of overcrowded schools. The School
Board is sensitive to population increases and decreases . A
recent trend of smaller families has meant that demand on
[1 school facilities is less for the number of houses than pre-
viously experienced. Hence , many schools are losing enroll-
ments . While this is not the case in LaSalle , the enrollment
I 91
e0°\c
534 1755987
/54- IO&
has nearly stabilized. For this reason, the School Board has
no definite plans for a new school site. Nor have they reserved
I any sites since doing so greatly increases the cost of that land.
IThe School Board does not think they are jeopardizing educational r
quality since a new site can be purchased and a school constructed
Iwithin a two year period. They feel this allows flexibility to
delay any decision on a future school at this time .
While the present educational services are adequate , the health '
Iservices in LaSalle are not . Many LaSalle residents are dis-
Isatisfied with the existing health services . Immediate effort
and action should be taken to encourage at least one doctor and
1 one pharmacist to locate in LaSalle . A Chamber of Commerce , or
I
a similar organization , is needed to promote the Town of LaSalle
Ito prospective medical personnel .
As development occurs, the Town must plan and implement the
A
necessary expansion of services and facilities in a manner that
Iresponds to residents' needs while staying within a limited
Ibudget . In order to accomplish this most effectively , the Town
must plan its service needs according to priorities.
IOne means of doing so is to establish a Capital Improvements
Program. This program outlines the maintenance and upgrading
Iof town services and facilities over a three year period. In
Idoing so , the Town would be regularly investing in physical
improvements rather than attempting massive "catch up" programs .
III A three year program is an acceptable scheduling length . This
allows for future planning while not being so far into the
Ifuture that the program cannot account for changing needs and
: 92
i30°"(-
834 1955987
/ sy- /U 7
circumstances. It is recommended that in 1978 , the LaSalle
Town Board, with assistance of the Planning Commission , estab-
lish a Capital Improvements Program which would cover the years
to 1981. This program should specify when the Town intends to
expend funds for water , sewer, and recreational improvements.
Once the Capital Improvements Program is adopted, it is recom-
mended that it be reviewed and updated annually by the Town
Board. Furthermore, in 1981 , a new program should be written
and adopted.
4
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
r '
93
60ot-
534 1755987
/5,/- /Off
Transportation
The importance and interrelationship of transportation with land
use planning dictates a section on transportation in the LaSalle
planning area as an integral element of the LaSalle Master Plan .
As explained earlier , LaSalle is primarily a residential community.
The ease, convenience and availability of the automobile has
allowed residents to commute to their place of employment and
shopping to other locales , primarily Greeley . By car, Greeley is
a 10 to 15 minute commute along a major highway . Even for trips
within LaSalle , the car is the main mode of transportation.
The dependence upon the car is expected to continue in the future •
as people have increased incomes , more leisure time, and farther
distances to travel . In light of this , it is anticipated that
LaSalle ' s future development will be accompanied by increased
demands upon the transportation system of the area. The purpose
of this section is to discuss how the Town of LaSalle can best
Iprepare for this demand in a manner which provides safe , effi-
cient , and aesthetic transportation facilities for the area.
ITo this end, a future thoroughfare map depicting the major
' routes for the LaSalle planning area was drafted. Since cars
were expected to play a predominate role in future transporta-
tion in LaSalle, the map was primarily concerned with vehicular
' routes .
In order to coordinate transportation planning with land use
• planning , the future thoroughfare map is identical in size to
' the future land uses and their corresponding traffic require-
94
o €3F34 175598'7
/5'- /O9
ments were analyzed in order to determine the appropriate type
and location of proposed routes in the planning area.
}
Existing
Since the existing transportation network is the base for the
Future Thoroughfare Map, it will be discussed first . Of major
significance in the existing system is the transportation corridor
created by U.S . Highway 85 and the Union Pacific Railroad tracks .
Conceivably, the transportation corridor , passing directly through
the center of LaSalle , could create a division of the Town . But
in spite of the physical separation , both sides of town have re-
tained a single community identity and have experienceddevelopment .
Still , U .S . 85 and the railroad tracks retain their importance as
i
heavy traffic carriers.
Regionally; U.S. 85 provides the most direct route from Denver to
Cheyenne . Of significance to local users , U .S . 85 is the only
route to Greeley and is the major north-south bound traffic
Icarrier for in-town trips. As such, U. S . 85 receives heavy use
I from travellers, truck transport and commuter travel . In fact ,
the State Department of Highways, in 1975 , conducted a traffic
' count which reported the average daily traffic volume to be
15 , 300 vehicles at the north edge of LaSalle and 11 , 825 at the
' south edge of Town.
Likewise, the Union Pacific Railroad tracks receive heavy use .
Again , its location in relation to the Town has magnified the
significance of the railroad. At this time , the only improved
crossing between the east and west sides of LaSalle is at
95
e°834 1755987
/541 - //0
First Avenue , directly in the pathway of the northern Colorado
switching grounds of the U.P .R.R. As such, this crossing is
frequently blocked by trains , resulting in lengthy traffic
delays and congestion. .Safety hazards related to the existing
crossing are further aggravated by faulty cross-bars and
motorist ' s habitual by-passing of the bars. The safety of
school children crossing the tracks is also questionable. For
these reasons , the railroad tracks are perhaps the foremost
challenge relating to transportation . Outside of the railroad
crossing, the existing transportation network is, for the most
part , exceptionally good.
A
The existing streets are arranged in a safe and efficient grid
i
pattern dominated by U.S . 85, onto which the major east-west
bound streets feed. Secondly , the streets are in good condi-
tion . Most of the streets are paved and repairs are made when
needed.
In addition to being serviceable , the tree-lined, spacious
' streets add a picturesque dimension to the town . Secondly ,
the wide width of the streets allows two free-moving lanes of
' traffic and parking on both sides of the street without inter-
fering with the traffic flow.
' Traffic signalization throughout the Town is , at this time ,
' adequate. The only lighted signal in LaSalle is at the inter-
section of U .S. 85 and First Avenue . This lighted signal , in
r addition to regulating heavy vehicular flow, provides controlled
' pedestrian crossing through the use of "walk" and "don ' t walk"
96
j
,oO J34 1'755987
154 - /II
signals. This crossing precaution is particularly important
at this intersection , as it receives substantial pedestrian
use from school children. According to the State Department
of Highways, this one lighted signal is adequate to safely regu-
late the traffic flow on U .S. 85. In their assessment , U .S . 85
through the town , is presently serving traffic demands in a
safe and efficient manner . However, from an aesthetic point of
view, the proliferation of signs along the highway has resulted
in an unsightly view of LaSalle . For many travellers , their
impression is solely related to the visual image of LaSalle
from the highway. This image , though unfounded, reflects
poorly on the community. Secondly, the visual blight of the
highway strip development is a concern to residents since they
are constantly exposed to it . The aesthetic quality of life
could be improved through beautification efforts along the
highway.
Future
Future development in the LaSalle planning area requires a plan
of a future thoroughfare system which is capable of handling
increased traffic loads in a safe and efficient manner . The
Future Thoroughfare Map , Plate 14 , illustrates such a planned
transportation network for the LaSalle planning area. It indi-
cates proposed major routes , proposed interchanges, a proposed
park-and-ride facility , and proposed bicycle and pedestrian
trails.
First , the purpose in proposing the major thoroughfare routes •
at this stage in LaSalle ' s development is to :
97
L
O0 : W
i•f ' g gr MMW a
I i9 o p CC
$ $ Z O Q O
W Z W Q LL cr W LI-
r p CC 2
M.
W a J a . ,1!,.-: J ri
U z d U
O w W F e °' c f- Z Z Q
H L, Z - _ a Z p 3 J
W z a a o z g a) p N p n O
J o U S o g u a pV f Q
W S ~ - N LL Cc
H WI- w $ 0 5 00
cc a K .. E J U Q O
Z J
¢ Q a ,'>,
`f 1 o W
J 0 W W 0 ro o T
a H w o i
Q i w
W cc W J W S p J
I- -,0 J 0 Q (7 J T
III i
j i c\
•
•
� '� I
V ,a ` U..%'� �. . ate. I_,
„\
/d °��'/� ��a.,� SIG e h;
...._.
R
z- ) - ) ,
a , _ f � 1
,o \\
0
0
,B9oK 1755987
E134
1 /5s/- // 3
1 ) optimally utilize the existing transportation network,
2) facilitate the acquisition of rights-of-way,
3) align routes in a logical pattern ,
4) maintain continuity in the character and design of
routes,
5) optimally utilize routes according to their capacity
function , and
6) minimize conflicting land uses along routes designed
to carry through-traffic.
The Future Thoroughfare Map shows the proposed major routes
under the designations of arterial , major , collector , and local .
The definitions of these route types are as follows :
Arterial : a divided , multi-lane route designed to carry
large volumes of traffic at a relatively high speed.
Major : an access-controlled street intended for through
traffic which provides access to traffic generators
such as schools , shopping centers and major employ-
ment centers .
Collector : an intermediary between a major and a local
which is designed to distribute traffic from majors
to locals without individual lot access.
Locals : streets , usually within residential neighbor-
hoods, which are designed to provide direct access
for the abutting properties.
To optimally utilize these routes for the function for which
they were designed, width standards for the route types were
set in the 1976 LaSalle Subdivision Ordinance. These standards
should be adhered to in the future development of the transpor-
tation network in order to achieve the aims of the transportation
plan.
99
BOOK
534 1755987
/64- ily
Table 24
Width Standards
Rights-of-way
Classification Width Roadway Width
Arterial 200 ft . variable
Major 100 ft . 80 ft .
Collector 80 ft . 60 ft .
Local
Curb Walk 60 ft . 40 ft .
Property line 70 ft . 40 ft .
SOURCE: LaSalle Subdivision Ordinance, 1976
The Future Thoroughfare Map depicts these route types for the
existing transportation network and for the planning area. As
can be seen , U.S . 85 is the only arterial . There are no plans
pending in regard to another arterial in the area. U .S . 85 ,
as an arterial , will be the primary through-traffic mover . As
Isuch, it will be increasingly important to improve the service-
ability of this route by prohibiting parking, reducing the
number of curb cuts, and adding lighted signalization. In this
I regard, the Future Thoroughfare Map shows plans for the eventual
closing of several streets feeding into U.S . 85 in an effort to
reduce the number of access points along the highway. One such
street is Sunset Avenue. Once closed, traffic would be directed
north along Church Court to First Avenue where the lighted
signal provides regulated traffic ingress and egress. Along the
east side of Church Court , a commercial district is proposed
100
so0 1'75 595'7
834 15 4 - // 5
with businesses facing west , thereby having visibility and
accessability to passing motorists. Other streets planned for
closing are Fourth Avenue at its intersection with U.S. 85 and
the collector proposed to service the Dabco Industrial Park.
Traffic from the industrial park would then be directed west
to the proposed major feeding into the grade-separated inter-
change south of LaSalle. These closings should improve the
serviceability of U .S . 85 as a major through-traffic carrier.
To supplement U.S . 85 as the major through-traffic carrier, the
Future Thoroughfare Map proposes that the future planning area
be served by access-controlled majors at mile intervals in a
grid pattern of connected squares. For the most part , these
majors are along the existing county roads or are extensions
Iof the existing major routes in LaSalle. Such a system would
provide close access to a major route from all locations in the
planning area. This design would encourage full utilization of
Iroutes intended for through-traffic while minimizing traffic
and safety hazards on local streets.
IFeeding into this grid pattern of majors are proposed collectors
at half-mile intervals. These collectors would handle traffic
generated from locals in the vicinity.
' Locals are shown but only within the existing developed areas.
Locals are not shown within the surrounding planning area in
order to allow developers to design the street pattern in
r their developments in a manner which considers the topography
and traffic needs to be generated by the development .
101
e0O( 1755987
534 /54./ . //69
In addition to denoting proposed routes , the Future Thorough-
fare Map shows proposed grade-separated and at-grade inter-
changes. Two grade-separated interchanges are proposed. At
the north edge of LaSalle , an overpass or an underpass is
proposed across the railroad tracks east of the Godfrey Bottom
Road. The second grade-separated interchange is proposed
immediately south of the highway overpass south of LaSalle.
These two interchanges would provide alternatives to the
IFirst Avenue railroad track crossing and ease traffic ingress
and egress on U.S . 85 at major intersections. Due to the func-
tional nature of these interchanges , traffic in the area would
be funneled to these interchanges. For example , traffic
0 generated by the proposed heavy industrial land use area in
the northeasterly section of LaSalle would be directed northward
to the Godfrey Bottom Road. Likewise, traffic generated from
the Dabco Industrial Park would be directed to the south inter-
change once it is constructed.
In addition to these two grade-separated interchanges , at-grade
Minterchanges are proposed throughout the planning area at inter-
secting points of major routes . These at-grade interchanges
would regulate the traffic flow on these routes .
Immediately north of the grade-separated interchange south of
LaSalle , the future transportation plan makes provisions for
the future development of a park-and-ride facility. This facility
would utilize existing railroad tracks in providing mass transit
service to the metropolitan area of Denver for commuters from
' LaSalle and the Greeley urban area. As feasible, other forms
102
8oOA.
• 834 1755987
/5t 117
of mass transit should be available to provide , service to the
proposed park-and-ride facility.
4
4
In addition to providing safe and efficient transport, the
ftransportation plan has an important aim related to aesthetics.
In this regard, the concept of buffers was paramount. First ,
corridor parks of green space throughout the planning area
function as logical sites for bicycle and pedestrian trails ,
providing safe and scenic non-vehicular travel , particularly to
high non-vehicular traffic generators such as schools, parks,
shopping centers and major employment centers. Secondly, cor-
ridor parks serve to buffer major routes with heavy traffic
A volumes and adjacent land uses. Thirdly, proposed land uses
were designed to buffer low density residential uses from major
thoroughfare routes with their corresponding traffic volumes
and noise. At intersections of many of the majors , high and
medium density residential land uses are proposed. These uses
' can more aptly be situated adjacent to major routes in a manner
and design which minimizes the incompatibilities.
While the Future Thoroughfare Map denotes the major routes ,
interchanges , a park-and-ride facility and bicycle paths, it
does not present all the future considerations which the Town
' of LaSalle believes necessary to provide safe , efficient and
aesthetic transportation facilities. These added considerations
are found in the Transportation Policies section , page 13t.
7
■ This transportation section is intended to aid local officials
and developers in planning and designing future development in
103
aooK 1755987
834 is� -ins
a manner that safely, efficiently, and aesthetically meets the
transportation needs of LaSalle residents and non-resident users .
Since the transportation system is a critical factor in the
quality of life , it is strongly recommended that the Thoroughfare ,
Map and transportation goals , objectives and policies by followed.
I
I
I
I
5
II
I
3 104
Boo<
834 175598'7
154/ - 119
Housing
In the 1970' s LaSalle experienced a large influx of residents.
These recent residents and anticipated future residents necessitate
considerations of present and future housing requirements to
provide a safe and decent home for all residents . The Town
accepts this obligation and recognizes the scope of local control
regarding housing. The task of providing safe and decent housing
is largely a local matter. Local governments have control over
zoning, subdivision approval , and building permits . The strong
effect of local decision-making on the quantity and quality of
housing makes it critical to have a housing plan. A housing plan
provides a direction and a guide to all decision-making related
to residential development. From this plan, decisions can be
made in a rational and coordinated manner.
Basically , this housing plan examines the existing supply of
housing in terms of number, type, and condition. It discusses
{ the escalating costs of housing, particularly how costs put a
financial burden on the low-income , the elderly, and minority
households . An analysis of the ability of the present housing
supply to meet the housing need follows. In addition to examining
present housing needs , this section discusses future housing
needs based on population projections . Housing needs , present
and future, are addressed in housing goals, objectives, and
policies .
First , it is critical to determine the existing housing supply
•
in order to then analyze housing need. Data on housing supply
relies heavily on residential land use analysis and information
105
BOO'
534 1'75598'7
/5N - /.20
relating to the social and economic characteristics of LaSalle
residents . Together, this information provides the basis for
establishing the housing need. Housing need is based on the
number of residents without safe and decent housing and the
availability of housing at a range of types and prices .
Existing Housing Supply
The 1970 Census reported a total of 411 dwelling units in
LaSalle . Of these , 389, or 95%, were occupied. Only 22 were
vacant . Updated information on the total number of units was
gathered from the Weld County Housing Monitoring Study as
reported in the Weld County Housing Plan and the Town of LaSalle
building permit records . The Housing Monitoring Study recorded
•
a total of 591 dwelling units in 1977. Unfortunately, not all
of LaSalle' s units were captured in the HMS data base . Building
permit records record a total of 300 building permits being
issued since 1970. Of these , 255 permits were issued for single
family units and 45 were issued for multi-family units .
The type of dwelling units in the housing supply is critical.
Information taken from the 1970 Census and the Housing Monitoring
Study indicate the following dwelling types.
r
1
106
8001(
. 534 175598'7
/54- 111
Table 25
Housing Types
,
1970 1970 1977 1977
Classification Number Percent Number Percent
Single-family 336 82 512 95
Multi-family 66 16 78 5
Mobile Homes 9 2 1 --
TOTALS 411 100 591 100
SOURCE: 1970 Census
Weld County Planning Department .
As shown, the majority of residential units in LaSalle were single-
' family dwelling units. This remains the case today. LaSalle ' s
1 housing diversity has not enlarged with recent construction of
multi-family units . Multi-family units constitute only a small
Ipercentage of all residential units .
In addition to having a small portion of multi-family units ,
LaSalle' s housing supply is limited in the type and availability
lof its multi-family units . Multi-family units in LaSalle include
duplexs , apartments, and townhouses. These units are scattered
Ithroughout the town while still being within the R-2 Zoning District .
I (Please refer to the Existing Land Use Map, plate 5 and the
Existing Zoning Map , plate 6. ) The high occupancy rate of the
Iexisting multi-family units further reduces the choice of housing.
IThe majority of residential units are owner-occupied. The 1970
Census reported that 67% of the occupied units were owner-occupied.
The remaining 33%, or 130 units , were renter-occupied. The home-
•
ownership rate in LaSalle in 1970 was above the 1970 national and
107
e°°3:34 1755987
state homeowner rate of 63%. More recent data from the 1975
survey reported figures of 85% owning or buying their homes
while only 15% rented their housing.
In addition to the composition of the housing, it is crucial to
know the condition of the housing since by definition , usable
housing supply refers only to standard units. It does not
include substandard or dilapidated housing units in the analysis
of the supply and need.
Housing condition of dwelling units in LaSalle was determined by
four criteria:
1) The average household size ,
2) Number of persons per occupiable room,
3) Interior facilities analysis , and
4) Windshield survey of exterior conditions.
The 1970 Census reported that the average household size was 3 . 15
persons per unit . The 1975 socio-demographic survey determined
the average household size in 1975 to be 3. 06 . Current estimates
indicate the average household size remains at roughly three
persons per unit .
The number of persons per occupiable room is also important in
an analysis of the existing housing supply and a discussion of
housing needs. Occupiable rooms were defined by the Census Bureau
as habitable rooms such as bedrooms , kitchens , and living areas .
The definition did not include bathrooms , halls , or closets . From
an examination of the number of persons per occupiable room, over-
crowding can be assessed. An overcrowded unit was a unit with
more than 1. 01 persons per occupiable room.
108
Boo''
1755987
nv /5/11 - /a5
According to the 1970 Census , 10% of the owner-occupied units
were overcrowded. There were 19 units which had between 1. 01
and 1. 5 persons per room and 4 units which had more than 1. 5
persons per room. For renter occupied units , there was sign-
ificantly greater overcrowding. Over 20% of the all rental
units were defined as being overcrowded. There were 10 units
which had 1. 01 to 1. 5 persons per room and 17 units which had
more than 1. 5 persons per room.
This indicates that LaSalle ' s renters were not provided with
rental units of sufficient size. The Weld County Housing Plan
revealed that there were no four bedroom apartments in LaSalle.
Therefore, it is possible that rental unit overcrowding similar
to that of 1970 still exists .
Thirdly , data is available regarding the interior fixtures such
as kitchen and plumbing facilities and central heating.
The Census provided data on plumbing and kitchen facilities on
housing existing in 1970. Plumbing facilities were classified as
either standard or substandard. A standard unit included cold
and hot piped water, a tub or shower, and a flush toilet . A
substandard unit was lacking in one or more of these components .
IOf the 259 owner-occuped units , 243 or 93% were classified as
standard. Sixteen or 7% were substandard. Of the rental units ,
110 or 85% were standard and 20 or 15% were substandard.
I
I
109
so
OK 1334 P755987
/ 1. ;j/
Complete or incomplete classifications were applied to kitchen
facilities . Kitchens which had piped water, a refrigerator, and
a range were classified as complete. There were 383 units which
were complete . Six units were incomplete , lacking one or more
of the criteria.
More recent data was provided in the Weld County Housing Monitoring
Study. A computerized inventory was conducted in 1977. Each of
the 512 dwelling units on file was analyzed according to its
interior condition based on criteria relating to the unit ' s size,
heating system, and plumbing facilities . Specifically, a unit was
classified as standard if it was larger than 600 square feet , had
central heating throughout its area, and had adequate plumbing
facilities . Adequate plumbing facilities were defined as having
hot and cold water, a sink, a tub or a shower, and a toilet . If
the unit failed to satisfy one or more of these criteria, it was
classified as substandard.
The substandard units were then analyzed through a computer analysis
to determine the cost required to make the unit standard. A unit
was classified as rehabilitatable if the cost to make the unit
standard was less than 50% of the unit 's value . It was considered
financially feasible to rehabilitate the unit . A dilapidated unit ,
on the other hand, was one in which the cost of repair was determined
to be more than 50% of the unit ' s value or simply not economically
feasible.
110
eo°K 1755987
5346 /54- /.25
Table 26
Housing Condition
Single Family Dwelling Units
Condition Number of Units Percent
Standard 487 95
Rehabilitatable 24 5
Dilapidated 1 --
TOTAL 512 100
SOURCE : Weld County Housing Plan
According to the criteria and computer analysis used by the Weld
County Monitoring Study, a total of 25 units did not provide a
safe and decent living environment for occupants of the dwellings .
However, 24 of the units could be made standard through improve-
ments that were financially feasible . Only one unit had
deficiencies beyond what were considered to be financially feasible
to correct .
In addition to data regarding interior condition, residences in
LaSalle were analyzed according to exterior conditions . A "wind-
shield" survey conducted in 1975 of 568 dwelling units resulted in
the following classifications as found in Table 27. (The
classification system is explained on Page 41 ) .
SEE FOLLOWING PAGE FOR TABLE 27.
I
111
eooK 534 1755987
/51- /0260
Table 27
Exterior Structural Conditions
Residential Units
Classification Number of Units Percent
Standard 419 74
Substandard 116 20
Dilapidated 33 6
TOTAL 568 100
SOURCE : 1975 Structural Conditions Survey
By outward appearances , three out of every four residential units
were considered to be in standard condition. Minor repairs in the
majority of substandard units could make them standard. Major
1 repairs were determined to be required in 33 units .
Based on this data, LaSalle has a housing deficiency in at least
25 units and perhaps as many as 174 units . Unfortunately, it is
not possible to cross-reference the results of the HMS and the
"windshield" inventories to determine the extent of overlap.
Regardless , housing need is not being met in the 25 units with
interior deficiencies or in the 149 units with exterior defects .
These deficiencies and defects must be corrected if the goal of
providing safe and decent housing for all residents is to be met .
Moreover, the Town must periodically monitor its housing supply
to check that existing housing does not deteriorate, thereby
reducing the supply of standard housing units.
But , at this time, the majority of residential units were in good
condition. Several sources and methods evaluated the interior
Ifixtures of the units to he acceptable. Most of the units
were served by complete kitchen and plumbing facilities . Most
112
$00N8 4 1755987
were equipped with central heating and had a floor area above
600 square feet . For the most part , the exteriors were judged
to be in sound structural condition and have a good physical
appearance.
One final factor which is particularly pertinent to housing
supply is cost . In LaSalle, like elsewhere in the country, the
cost of housing has risen dramatically . For illustration , the
average market value for a "for-sale" house in 1970, according
to the 1970 Census , was $14, 147. Today , realtors report that it
Iis difficult to buy a house in LaSalle for under $30, 000. The
escalating price of housing is primarily related to significant
increases in material and labor costs . Costs for a single family
dwelling averaged $16 per square foot in 1970 and $25 per square
foot in 1977. Additionally, there have been rising costs related
to land values, particularly in areas served by utilities, and
in land improvement costs related to subdivision and zoning
regulations and building code requirements. These costs to the
developer are passed along to the buyer.
One method of determining the costs of new homes in LaSalle is to
examine the value declared on building permits. In 1976, seven
building permits were issued for single family dwellings . The
high building value was $30, 024. The low value was $17, 000.
There were no units valued within $1 , 000 of this low value. The
average building value was $21,687. These figures do not reflect
the value of the land so another $5,000 to $10, 000 should be
I
1 113
e°°\` 1'75.598'7
added to reflect the market value. This would mean that the
average market value for these seven new homes was between
$26, 000 and $31 ,000.
In 1977, building permits were issued for six townhouses at an
estimated value of $19, 623 each and four single-family dwelling
units at an average estimated value of $19,623. Again, these
figures do not include the cost of the land. The average market
value was in the $25, 000 to $30, 000 range. •
In addition to market value, home buyers are faced with sub-
stantial financial costs related to interest rates on mortgages .
It has been estimated that financial costs , in the long-run,
account for approximately 50% of total housing costs. Additionally, •
insurance costs , maintenance costs , and taxes account for another
6-10%.
It is critical to relate this information of rising housing costs
to a household' s ability to bear that cost . Primary emphasis
in this analysis will be on groups having special needs related
to housing. Specifically, these are low-income households , the
elderly , and minority households.
Low income households are defined by the U.S . Census Bureau as
households with an income below 80% of the median income. In
Weld County, the 1975 median income was $11 , 812 . A household
with an income of less than $9, 450 in 1975 would be classified as
a low income household.
114
f3L)4 1755987
is'1 - ia9
Moderate income households would be those earning between 80%
and 120% of the median income. In this case, those earning
between $9,450 and $14, 174 would be classified as moderate
income households.
Data from the 1975 socio-demographic survey provides information
regarding the income level of LaSalle residents. This data is
in terms of four income categories. Unfortunately, these cate-
gories do not exactly correspond to the income ranges for low
and moderate income classifications . Therefore , it is difficult
to precisely pinpoint the number of low and moderate income
households in LaSalle. However, as shown in Figure 9, a sub-
stantial portion of LaSalle residents would be classified as
low or moderate income households by earning less than $14, 174
fannually . Obviously , at least 74% of LaSalle' s households can
be classified as having low to moderate incomes .
SEE FOLLOWING PAGE FOR FIGURE 9.
1
r
115
Boo( 1755987
534 / s4 -/do
Figure 9
Income Levels - 1975
ANNUAL EARNINGS
50
43 .40%
40
31.10%
30
PERCENT
21 .25%
20
I
10
4, 25%
0
less than $7 ,500 - $12, 000 - $20, 000 +
$7, 500 $12, 499 $19, 999
SOURCE: LaSalle Survey, 1975
The elderly face similar economic problems. They live on fixed
incomes during a period of high inflation in living expenses ,
particularly in housing. In any case, this means a substantial
' portion of their incomes are for housing, thereby reducing the
amount of money they have for health care and other essential
' expenses . They , too, are often unfairly confined to their
existing housing, eventhough it is often not economically feasible
or practical . It is often overlooked that senior citizens make
up a large portion of those needing low cost housing.
•1
116
?poi-
834 1755987
In addition to financial burdens , many senior citizens are
physically limited to the type , design and location of their
housing. For example, they may be limited to ground floors.
They may face restrictions in location such as needing to be
near shopping facilities , health services, and public trans-
portation . The elderly often are not as mobile in choosing a
place to live. Added constraints related the smaller size
of housing they generally require and special difficulties
related to maintenance and upkeep . The elderly are a signi-
ficant segment of LaSalle' s population. According to the 1975
Socio-demographic Survey, 5% of LaSalle' s population were 65 years
of age or older.
Minorities , often times , face a double-edged problem of a low
income and discrimination. Again, this may restrict the avail-
ability and choice of housing. The special needs of minority
households are a further consideration in providing housing to
all residents .
Minorities are a significant segment of the LaSalle population.
The 1975 Socio-demographic Survey indicated that approximately
15% of the population was Spanish speaking or Spanish surname
persons. Judging from a general familiarity with LaSalle, these
minority households reside in dispersed areas of the community.
There are no major concentrations or separate neighborhoods of
minorities .
Financial limitations made it virtually impossible for low income I
households to purchase housing in LaSalle. As previously
117
8OO5334 1755987
/54 -/3,),
mentioned, several realtors claimed it is difficult to buy a
home in LaSalle for under $30, 000. Supplementing this source,
building permit records for 1976 and 1977 reveal an average
market value in a similar range.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development set a guideline
that a household should not spend more than 25% of its monthly
income for housing. A second indicator is that a home should
not cost more than 2-2i times the households' annual income.
Using these indicators , a household in 1976 earning less than
$10,400 annually should not spend more than $216 per month on
housing or purchase a home costing above the range of $20,000
•
to $26,000. Briefly, it is simply not enough to construct more
housing; the housing must be within the economic reach of
residents .
For those households residing in safe and decent housing , the
financial burden could very likely result in a lack of mobility.
This might mean these households are confined to their existing
housing regardless of whether it is meeting occupants housing
needs in terms of type , size, cost , or maintenance requirements.
For the households residing in unsafe or substandard housing,
the financial burden could mean that occupants , without some
housing assistance , might be confined to overcrowded housing or
inadequate housing.
118
�K • 17; X987
r
€ 4 isq - /33
In addition to the housing constraints imposed .by cost , many
households are constrained in housing choice as to type because
of the lack of housing diversity in LaSalle. The vast majority
of residences are conventional single-family units. Only 2-3%
of the existing dwelling units are multi-family units . Addition-
ally, there are no existing units designed for the elderly, either
as a maximum care facility such as a nursing home or a minimum
care facility such as an apartment complex. In these regards,
LaSalle' s present supply of housing is not meeting the demand.
Housing Alternatives
Conventional single family residences, because of their size,
design , and land requirements are more expensive than multi-
family units . Pressures directly related to finances are likely
to produce changes in the type of housing in the future. Societal
changes in family size , marital pattern , death rate, and leisure
time will also influence the housing of the future.
One probable response will be more multi-family units. Multi-
family dwellings reduce the price per unit because of lower land
costs and lower construction costs for material and labor. This
makes multi-family units attractive from an economic point of
view. Additionally, many multi-family units have the advantage
of shared green space, on-site recreational facilities, and
reduced maintenance costs . This makes them particularly
attractive to single adults , childless families , and the elderly.
Moreover, multi-family units may be owner-occupied such as con-
dominiums or townhouses or renter-occupied such as duplexs and
apartments . In summary , multi-family units offer an excellent
119
BOO-
f3` 4 1'7.5538'7
/5-+/ - 1341
alternative to the conventional single-family unit in terms
of meeting the housing needs of LaSalle residents.
Another response to provide adequate housing other than newly
constructed units is the rehabilitation of the existing housing.
In most cases, it is usually less expensive to utilize the
existing housing then construct new housing. Clearly the
exception would be in a unit requiring extensive overhaul of
the wiring and plumbing systems in order to bring the dwelling
up to building code standards. In addition to cost , this
alternative has the advantage of preserving unique homes and
neighborhoods which add to the character of the community.
This method, however, is primarily restricted to owner-occupied
housing units . Normally, if a rental unit is renovated, the
rent will increase, further reducing the supply of low-cost
housing.
The public sector can do much to encourage these alternative
housing types and low-cost housing projects . Many of these
efforts will be discussed in the housing goals, objectives and
policies. These are presented with the LaSalle Goals and
Objectives and the Development Policies. These goals , object-
ives and policies address the housing needs of the present
population as well as the future residents. Projections of
the future population are one step towards determining the
future housing needs .
120
e0-a 4 1755987
isv- /.3.5
The projections below are simply rough estimations based on past
population growth rates , past building trends and an official
policy of the Town to issue no more than 48 residential building
permits per year. In arriving at these figures, it was assumed
that past trends would continue relatively unchanged. If
dramatic changes occur, this will invalidate the projections and
they should be revised.
Table 28
Population Projections
Year Population
1980 2 , 124
1985 2 , 664
1990 3 , 180
1995 3, 680
2000 4 , 150
SOURCE : Weld County Planning Department
The figures on Table 29 indicate the relationship between pop-
ulation growth and housing need. Projections were made regarding
future housing needs in terms of the number of units required
to house the projected population based on an average household
size of 3. 0 persons per unit . For example, by 2000, if the
population is 4 ,150 as projected, then 764 additional housing
units will be needed.
SEE FOLLOWING PAGE FOR TABLE 29.
1 121
gOOK
834 1'753987
/51- 4.3(..0
Table 29
Future Housing Needs
Total Number of Change in
Year Population Housing Units Required Housing Units
Annual Cumulative
1977 1, 800 600 0 0
1980 2 , 124 708 108 108
1985 2,664 888 +180 288
1990 3, 180 1 , 060 +172 460
1995 3,680 1,227 +167 627
2000 4, 150 1, 364 +137 764
SOURCE : Weld County Planning Department
For planning purposes , the housing needs of low and moderate
income residents , elderly residents and minority residents were
projected into the future based on an assumed continuation of
the existing socio-demographic composition of LaSalle residents .
The 1975 Socio-demographic Survey revealed that :
- At least 74% of the population was a low or moderate household.
- 5% of LaSalle' s residents were 65 years or older.
- 15% of LaSalle' s residents were Spanish surname or
Spanish speaking minorities.
As previously discussed, low and moderate income categories are
computed on the basis of median income for each year. Therefore,
it is not possible to, in advance , indicate actual income ranges.
However, as these figures become available, it is a simple matter
to insert them. Then, these could be applied to the federal
guideline stating that no more than 2$ times the household' s annual
income should be spent on housing. From this , private developers
and town officials have an indicator which relates directly to the
needs of LaSalle residents in terms of affordable housing. As
•
122
BocK534 1'755387
/SV- /.J7
Table 30 indicates , within the next 24 years , 118 housing units
are projected to be required to meet the housing needs of the
population in 2000. The Town can, through its policies and
decisions , attempt to encourage housing which is within the
economic reach of residents.
Table 30 ,
Future Housing Needs
Low and Moderate Income Households
# of Low and # Housing Change in
Year Population Moderate Income Units Required Housing Units
Annual Cumul.
1980 2 ,124 1 , 572 524
1985 2,664 1 , 973 658 134 134
i
1990 3, 180 2 , 354 785 127 261
1995 3 ,680 2 , 724 908 123 384 '
2000 4, 150 3,071 1,024 116 500
I SOURCE : Weld County Planning Department
1
I Clearly, one of the deficiencies regarding LaSalle's existing
housing supply is housing designed for the elderly. As Table
31 shows , this will be an increasingly pressing need in the
Ifuture . By 1985, for example , 45 units are projected to be needed
to house elderly residents based on an average household of 3. 0.
IThis average is probably high as many elderly households have
Isingle occupants .
SEE FOLLOWING PAGE FOR TABLE 31.
A
I I
I
123
I
IOO0(
834 1.75L:7)8'7
1 /54- /.3g
Table 31
I Future Housing Needs
J for the Elderly*
1
INumber of # of Housing Change in
Year Population Elderly Residents Units Required Housing Units
Annual Cumul.
I1977 1, 800 90 30
1980 2, 124 107 36 6 6
1985 2 ,664 134 45 9 15
1990 3, 180 159 53 8 23
1995 3,680 184 62 9 32 '
2000 4, 150 208 70 8 40 '
I * Elderly defined as 65 years old or older
ISOURCE : Weld County Planning Department
$ While at this time LaSalle' s housing has not been characterized
I
by racial discrimination, it is important to account for minority
Ihouseholds in order to provide a safe and decent dwelling unit
for all residents . Therefore , Table 32 projects the number of
I
minority residents calculated at 15% of the projected population.
IBy 1985, for example, it is anticipated there will be 400 minorities
in LaSalle and these residents will require 134 units.
ITable 32
I Future Housing Needs
Minority Households
INumber of # of Housing Change in
Year Population Minorities Units Required Housing Units
Annual Cumul.
I1977 1, 800 270 90
1980 2, 124 319 107 17 17
I 1985 2 ,664 400 134 27 44
I 1990 3, 180 477 159 25 69
1995 3,680 552 184 25 94
I 2000 4, 150 623 208 24 118
c SOURCE : Weld County Planning Department
124
1 534 1955987
rr.
/sl-/ -/3q
M In the future, periodic monitoring should be done to determine
u whether the housing needs of minority households are actually
being met . If not , special effort should be directed towards
meeting the need. fr
All proposals for residential development should be reviewed
according to their ability to meet the housing needs of LaSalle
residents. Development criteria are found in the land use
element of the Master Plan. Local officials can, through the
development process of future residential development in the
surrounding area, do much to manage the types and price ranges
of housing. Achieving a wide diversity of housing types requires
the implementation of the housing goals , objectives, and policies.
These statements provide directions to the type of residential
development which the . Town of LaSalle desires.
As explained in the Future Land Use Section on Page 85 , it is
anticipated that Stage I can handle population growth within the
projections found on Table 32 through the year 2000. Within
Stage I , 125 acres have been designated for low density residential
uses , 35 acres for medium density use, and 25 acres for high
density use . These designated acreages would support an additional
population of up to 4, 014. If the land within the town boundaries
and the present population is included, this area could support
a total population of 5 , 814 .
125
5004-
834 1755^57
L5',/ -/Y0
Development Policies
As mentioned in the introduction to the Future Land Use section,
the Future Land Use Map is the graphic display of the proposed
future land uses for the LaSalle planning -area. But , properly
planned development requires more than a map designating future
land uses. It also requires standards applying to the way in
which development occurs. In other words, the "where" and the
"how" are equally important in determining the quality of future
development .
LaSalle' s future land use aspirations are specified in the Goals
and Objections found on Page 68. These are the end toward which
2
the Town is striving. Towards reaching these ends, Development
Policies were established. Essentially, Development Policies
are the means to attaining the community objectives. Moreover,
they are concise statements which local officials can measure
development proposals against . If a proposal is in harmony with
the Development Policies, and likewise the Goals and Objectives
of the Town, then it is eligible for approval. If, on the other
hand, it is contrary to LaSalle' s aspirations, it should he
denied until it concurs. In this manner, decision-makers and
developers know what is expected and required of development
proposals.
General
a
- LaSalle will use the LaSalle Master Plan as the guide in
7 all land use decision-making.
- LaSalle will control growth through two stages as shown
on the Future Land Use Map .
126
o�
eo £3 4 175595'7
/.54 -0 /
3
- LaSalle will discourage development in Stage Two until
3 a substantial amount of Stage One has been developed.
' - LaSalle shall review all of its land use regulations
to compliment the LaSalle Master Plan.
- The LaSalle Planning Commission shall review the Master
Plan on an annual basis and update it regularly. _ They
shall report the results to the Town Board.
- The Town Board shall encourage citizen involvement and
input in the process of land use decision making.
- The Town shall be responsive to resident ' s expressed
needs and desires and make the necessary changes in the
Master Plan to reflect such.
- Development proposals shall he evaluated as to their
economic and social effect upon the community .
- Development shall be located and designed for compat-
ibility with existing land uses and in accordance with
' the Future Land Use Map .
• - The Town shall meet with developers early in the planning
process to get preliminary approval of the proposed
development .
- Applicants for new development shall show their proposal
is in accordance with the LaSalle Master Plan and local
regulations .
- The developer shall be held financially responsible for
all improvements required by regulation.
- The LaSalle Annexation , Subdivision, and Zoning Reg-
ulations shall be enforced.
- The regulations for the control of public nuisances ,
particularly dogs, shall be enforced.
- The developer and public officials shall take all pre-
cautions to avoid unnecessary public expenditures to
rectify problems which could have been avoided at the
time of development .
- The Town shall provide the best' possible local adminis-
tration of government , police, and fire services by
supporting such programs.
- The Town shall coordinate with service providers to reduce
the duplication of services and maximize resources .
- The Town shall actively seek medical personnel to locate
in LaSalle.
127
BUU\''
€24 175.598'7
isv - iva
Environmental
$ - Development proposals shall be reviewed for their potential
it
effect upon the environment .
- Developers shall be encouraged to preserve and utilize
natural contours and existing vegetation.
- Landscaping to enhance the area and buffer adjacent land
uses will be required of all development .
- Landscaping with native vegetation will be encouraged as a
water conservation measure.
- Vegetation or topsoil disturbed or destroyed by the con-
struction of new development shall be replaced or replanted.
- New development proposals shall be designed to conserve
energy and natural resources .
- Intensive land uses on the floodplain shall he prohibited
to reduce the loss in the case of a flood.
- Natural drainage areas shall he maintained so as not to
impair their natural function.
- Irrigation canals shall be imaginatively integrated into
developed areas.
e - Ensure that all signs are located, sized, and designed to
enhance the aesthetics of the area.
Residential •
- Evaluate the potential effects of proposed development
upon the lifestyles of existing residents and proposed
residential areas.
1 - Seek available assistance programs which aid rehabilitation
of historical and unique homes.
- Strive for the elimination of unsanitary and unsafe housing .
1 - Protect residential areas from the intrusion of incom-
patible commercial uses.
1 - Support housing development proposals which meet the needs
and financial capabilities of all Town residents by encour-
aging a wide range of housing types and price ranges.
- Encourage medium density and high density residential
development in the designated areas on the Future Land Use
Map.
• 128
BooK 1755987
� 4 /5<t -/q.3
' Discuss all residential development proposals with school
facility planners.
4 - Support alternative designs and materials in housing which
reduce housing costs, if such do not have a detrimental
effect on the health, safety , and welfare of inhabitants.
- Encourage designs and methods of construction which are
environmentally sensitive and conserve energy.
1 - Encourage the use of Planned Unit Developments (PUD ' s) and
other development proposals which permit innovative and
economic land use and building practices.
- Support subsidized housing programs such as FmHA and VA
which make it possible for low income , elderly, minorities,
and middle income groups to afford housing.
- Encourage development proposals which are attentive to the
housing needs of the elderly residents of the community .
-a Commercial
- Actively promote the revitalization of the Central Business
District .
- Establish an organization such as a Chamber of Commerce
to promote a healthy economic future. •
- Limit commercial development to those areas designated for
such by the Future Land Use Map.
- Require commercial development to provide sufficient access,
parking, and landscaping.
iIndustrial
' - Limit industrial uses to the areas designated for such on
the Future Land Use Map .
- Require industrial development located adjacent to residential
land uses to include provisions to mitigate any incompat-
ibilities.
- Require landscaping to enhance the aesthetics at an industrial
site.
- Encourage the use of industrial parks to centralize services
and facilities and concentrate heavy traffic in one area.
•
129
g°°K 1'ttjtj 7
X34 ivy
Refuse industrial development proposals which would prosper
at the expense of residents and' the environment .
- When reviewing industrial development proposals, determine
whether the industry intends to hire LaSalle residents and
weigh this factor in the acceptance of the proposal. •
I
Public Services , Utilities, and Facilities
- The Town will maintain adequate water supply, storage, and
distribution in order to meet water demand and needs.
- Seek to improve the quality of LaSalle' s water by continuing
to periodically sample the water, by maintaining communication
with the county and state health departments, and by imple-
menting the findings of the engineering study.
- The Town shall regularly inform its water customers of the
water quality.
- The Town shall replace the smaller existing water and sewer
lines with standard size lines.
- As development occurs, the Town shall expand its services and
facilities to meet the needs of residents and reflect the
amount of future growth desired.
- The Town shall direct development to locate in the urban
fringe to efficiently utilize existing utility lines .
- Prior to acceptance of a development proposal , the Town will
determine whether it can adequately service such areas and
$■ its impact on the services and facilities.
- New development which would create an undue burden on the
t existing services or compromise the quality of services will
not be accepted .
1 - Tap fees , service charges, and tax revenues froth all new
development shall he sufficient to protect existing users
from increased costs due to added demands on the system.
® - LaSalle will encourage efforts to conserve energy and
■ resources .
- The Town shall investigate the feasibility of installing
water meters as a means of encouraging the wise use of the
Town 's water resource.
- The Town will develop a capital improvements program to
specify and budget future services and facilities .
1
130
BOOS
834 1755987
15N - /415
Parks and Recreation
- LaSalle shall support programs designed to meet the
1 recreational needs of its residents.
a
- LaSalle will actively pursue the development of a park
system which adequately provides park and recreational
services and facilities for all its residents.
1 - The Town shall seek a full range of recreational
facilities and activities accessible to all.
- The Town shall seek to connect its open space areas to
'•y form a contiguous open space network as proposed by the
' Future Land Use Map.
- The Town shall require dedication of neighborhood park
sites by developers as specified in the LaSalle Sub-
division Ordinance .
1 - The Town shall promote the acquisition of the land in
the South Platte River floodplain for a community park.
1 - The Town shall seek outside funds or instigate a capital
■ improvements program with funding for nark acquisition
and development and for a community building and a
swimming pool .
Transportation
- The Town shall seek to improve the maintenance, appearance
and serviceability of its streets.
- The Town shall continue negotiations with the Union Pacific
Railroad.
1 - The Town shall seek funds to construct an overpass or an
underpass as an alternative crossing at the railroad tracks .
1 - The Town shall enforce the law requiring trains to break
immediately in the event of an emergency .
1 - The Town shall limit the curb cuts and parking on U.S.
Highway 85 so that the safety and serviceability of this
route is maintained.
1 - Signs along U.S . Highway 85 shall strictly comply with the
adopted sign code to enhance the appearance of the Town and
not distract drivers.
of - All future transportation networks shall be in accord with
the Future Thoroughfare Map and in compliance with the
applicable street standards as specified in the LaSalle
Subdivision Ordinance.
131
Bops £3 34 1755957
I54-/V/Co
- The developer shall be responsible in all new development
for the proper engineering design and construction of all
streets within the development.
- All land use decisions shall be evaluated as to their
effect on the transportation system and vice versa.
- All expansion of the transportation network shall be
coordinated with county and state agencies.
- Effort shall be made to construct non-vehicular trails and
pathways to schools, parks, and shopping centers.
- Development proposals must show evidence that all signs
on the site will comply with the sign ordinance.
- Encourage local streets to he designed in a manner that
will enhance the neighborhood identity .
- All development proposals shall he evaluated against the
Future Thoroughfare Map to insure that adequate rights-
of-way are reserved and dedicated to meet future improve-
ment needs .
II
132
bo°` 834 1755987
/s9 - U/ 7
Implementation
To date, LaSalle has not been hampered by major development
mistakes of an irreparable nature. To prevent such from happening,
the Town has written and adopted this document . But it is
obviously not enough to simply have an adopted document . The
adoption of this document must be viewed as the beginning, rather
than the end, of the process. Despite long months of work on this
plan, the real task -implementation-is just beginning.
What lies ahead is not an easy task. This plan has been general
in nature in order that it might also be comprehensive. This
challenges local officials, developers and interested citizens to
use this plan as an over-all guide. They must apply it to the
day-to-day administration of local affairs and to specific develop-
ment proposals . This plan cannot be set apart from the inter-
related tasks of local administration. Decisions in this realm
affect and are affected by land use decisions. Likewise, all
development proposals must be measured against the Master Plan.
Local officials must weigh decisions on their application towards
attaining the future development that LaSalle has deemed most
desirable. This document legitimizes making decisions on this
basis, for decisions are no longer piecemeal or arbitrary. This
plan enables decisions to be made on a comprehensive and well-
founded set of long-range aims which the Town has agreed upon as
the best guide to future development .
133
ao0K 1'75'308'7
834
The Town has available to it several tools of implementation.
No one action taken will mean the Master Plan has been properly
implemented. What is required is a process involving several
factors . Perhaps the single most significant measure to be
taken towards the implementation process is to follow the
Development Policies. They most explicitly state what is
required and desired in terms of criteria for development.
Another important step leading to the implementation of the Master
Plan is to review the Town's land use regulations in order to
complement the Plan and better regulate the development of land.
The Town ' s annexation, zoning and subdivision regulations should
be reviewed, revised, and amended to support the Plan.
Another step to supplement the LaSalle Master Plan is the pre-
paration of a capital improvements plan and a plan for the re-
development of the Central Business District . Both are logical
extensions of the Master Plan. Similarly, efforts should be
aimed towards minimizing or correcting the Town's liabilities
and maximizing or highlighting the Town' s opportunities. Other
responsibilities relate to the educational task of familiarizing
LaSalle residents, developers and other government jurisdictions
and agencies of the purposes, goals and substance of the LaSalle
Master Plan. Understanding, communication and cooperation with
these groups is a critical factor leading to the acceptance and
implementation of the Master Plan . Specifically in this regard,
134
834 1755987
/64- id9
the Town should seek support from the Weld County Board of
Commissioners to attain the goals and objectives found in the
Master Plan for the entire planning area. It is strongly felt
that the unincorporated areas around LaSalle are as important
as the area within the town boundaries in determining the
quality of life in LaSalle.
In addition to the task of implementation, it is just as
essential that the Master Plan be reviewed periodically. First ,
the Plan must be updated to assure that each of the sections
is based upon up-to-date technical information. Secondly, the
Plan must be updated to reflect changes in needs and attitudes.
Modifications to the Plan are expected and desirable. The Plan
is an evolving document .
It is recommended that at least one meeting of the Planning Comm-
ission per year be designated for the review and update of the
Master Plan. It would be advantageous if the Town Board would
join in this review. Moreover, this review session should be
held at a regular time of year, perhaps prior to budgeting.
Such timing would encourage decision-makers to consider expendi-
tures in light of the Master Plan. Furthermore, it is recommended
that a re-write of the Plan be made every five to seven years
to encompass changing circumstances . The LaSalle Master Plan
cannot he an effective development guide unless town officials take
the necessary time and effort to review and update the plan.
135
5(0 1755'987
834
/5V- /SV
Lastly, let it be re-emphasized that LaSalle can maintain its
attractive small town atmosphere, the Town can upgrade its
appearance and economic viability. The quality of life can be
improved. Words and plans are only the beginning. The key to
accomplishing these and other goals is coordinated effort and
action.
136
5130‘C ft: F' Li. , H
834 SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY 17,E`)8'Y
FOR 15{1 -151
Date: Interviewer:
I. POPULATION
A. Total Persons
B. Ages of Occupants
C. Number Attending School
Elementary Jr. High
High College
D. Race
White Spanish Negro
Indian Oriental Other
E. Handicapped
Yes No Age
II. HOUSING
A. Ownership
Owner Occupant Renter
B. Utilities
City Private None
1 . Water
2. Electric
3. City Sewer
4. Heat: Gas Electric Oil Other
5. Plumbing: All No Toilet No Sink
No Bath or Shower No Hot Water
6. General Condition
137
1755987
154 - isa
III. EMPLOYMENT
A. Occupation
1 . Professional , technical
2. Managers and administrators
3. Sales
4. Clerical
5. Craftsman
6. Operatives, except transport
7. Transport equipment
8. Laborers, except farm
9. Farmers and farm managers
10. Service workers
11 . Private household workers
12. Other
B. Income
Below $7,499 Between $7,500 - $12,499
Between $12,500 - $19,999 Over $20,000
C. Location of Employment
1 .
2.
3.
D. Transportation to and from Work
1 .
2.
IV. GENERAL
A. Do you own your own transportation?
B. Would you use some form of public transportation?
V. NOTES/COMMENTS
138
BOOK 8.:5 APPENDIX B 17'15308'7
/54-153
1. How long have you lived in Lasalle? less than 5 yrs. 5-15 15+
2. What do you like best about living in Lasalle?
3. What things do you think might make this area an even better place to live?
4. Do you favor planned growth or do you think an unrestricted marketplace
should determine the amount and rate that LaSalle grows?
Planned _ Market
5. What do you think is the prime advantage of growth?
6. The prime disadvantage?
7. In this area, do you want growth to: continue much as it has
slow down
grow faster
not sure
8. The present population of TaSalle is approximately 1,800. As you see it,
the ideal population for the town in ten years (1988) should be:
less than 2,000 2,000-3,000 _3,000-4,000 more than 4,000
9. To plan for growth and provide for consistency in making development
decisions, the Town is writing a future land use Comprehensive Plan.
YES NO
a. Do you feel it is important to have citizen input on this?
b. Would you attend a Cann unity Planning Session?
c. Are you willing to accept guidelines to direct future growth?
d. Would you accept limitations on the use of land?
10. Would you favor more open space for the Town in the form of parks? _
If.Yes, are you willing to pay the cost?
11. Would you favor a light-industry locating in LaSalle which
would employ roughly 500 people? _
12. If there were more competitively priced stores in town, would
you do more shopping here? If Yes, how much?
Most of the time Frequently Only quick pick-up items
What items?
Grocery Hardware Drugs Clothing
13. Do you favor the revitatlization of the Central Business
District-the area along the 100 Block of Main Street by
Town Hall?
14. As new people move to LaSalle, they will require housing. More Same Less
How much single-family housing would you like to see?
How much multi-family housing would you like to see?
How much elderly housing would you like to see? _
15. Do you have any suggestions as to goals and objectives for LaSalle?
139
e°°K
X 34 17,55387
/54 -/5-1
APPENDIX C
<11
Ala I Ca
Ak � w
E __itO
Em.
Z .
nuaaa8iaHH1111aM O
mic, O
CI 7 /
� �
4�j T
o
lit
•` •
W
C ] ' J
in ,d J
1 I
' � - CO
i
1 a
J
*tr ,,, , ,,.4>r r� ! •1 r r •r Y , ? i r7 t ? � t 1 �,5.4 '�' k 1 l ' rfI'l '14'r� ✓ .{,f" A K' .'tP d 4 'f' }`1 ,,,,k r 1 Y; Y Y f y r)lx J ::11a 7 }� 4�a I •; F �� t s �qgtyv� fS hf (� Af Alf x •11g2$it
L ( ''f sll 7� + An��.kt, f Y C1T f ' er: - �+�+�.. t by3''M�M Ypi�= (Y `et ;<$3i$ Ø:
k "J .N !'ii ^f lj .ki !�' «s AX4i ` {Ft I/� i "� 1 Ylf ..f p.'.asj 71rw2FPt, i r d/'w } I f ' y { ,� 1 df n 1 tNh t 1 firr h. gPU r ') spy`" rn} q I r y ff'c. , +o-rFi Y }tiP t"fi,'f r {.. 3 i �.,r�F' . h 1 P�r' jil �x 7,* f'A I � f �± +1 a �'�}I, t�1 r715w a Y M
dl) l*4 f 7 Kt>r "e , ; v tj{�a .« f y u rx � r
rk vw s� M i� }ite l• ' ', � '^"R ..'* �f f � ""! �� {<+,h' t" 1 j 1 Y}y+'h ,, {+r- , n.
` . w 1 kYeY g�r ! .+ a ,(�M1� 5` Y !
6 ` a M T i} .SS' M `t lift, to
:Le, r41 v r hf .#�Y3 X�f1 t` Y) r 4' i IN N,'Y ix Y 11
, r1F'�Y i i 1 PO Re
¢ :ifqe
m= Y- �y�1i�
.:; 7 r, fir" "` ro 1}A{t�Iy 4F a ,� ' I
I , i rk�1E 'iY�'✓� � nr� r!
3 .'{Y k r 6 r •
y . x mfg.:
fY r r}.r fry,
if 'Y � +Y f at s •, ' '`r s 7 1 i Y� '"" ktf ' rp � h r IN
rn (��,,t J� t t r 9 �ld�r' Ry� Y=4r Fd iy r"4 iPr� f 1 YY,��{y'r,[�1 •I rly 1% ,� � �+r d".i =dk „,:, 1key*F4 y"+ _ exg, f \1P) �{/ ,tnt,,,?.. 7�Yi.% its f 12y .f � r,o4 `( �e �',- , 1 S f,i, . , CE,?,,,,a42
r 1 r a 11 t`�+(f}}"" � �yry
y� >� !E 1 lY u( �T+iN xx'Y 1 . 1`L;'.-•r ' a a 'Y 1tx41��� w YtCv��yy f4t 1
! t it`rf q A 1 r r H•v ^ 1 .,rr a a a .=Y.r tJT Ba qr` h l�Y7 , `-
} ' y� xr (JY J r w}
I/O.'''. tY f '4` 1{'M�' ' ry'""' e�� yf{j�� tlY rf y'y '� ` w I44144 + 4 t YY} r err
ati • 11:. tAf la.^ Y l°2,4 Y ' 1'Itrr � .fit 04 'IS1 r9. 1,1,/4 i? "[[3yY'J] +� "'+" ' _i
}Y e r r k'ti� f , �� „-6,e..-7,,,,, '>t i tl I V )r-11 1, i„.,,1 5Yd. ; y, ' V,t " t w = O irF�r! n � '$ }iy � ��
01. •�"1r f`En'"} YY1 < 1 sa.bi5:1{n .LP. If id' n.� +
,,Y .t. i � E i y>. ';'ar Ar "ir >. rM t_r� 'Xt k ^r � ++r(wir11'( $Yi tf;
S���' L��1'�+ !), {4 b SI OF COLORADO yR� a 4 t VY .. }rYrr `�
" y r`'d 55. Jv +.i 1 I(`4 ,Y 4Tt',V,,,
+'ik r� � b «1 C�.Ui 111' OF WELD 7 %` y (,� ✓ 3f ''i1tl i 114
TA,'(1 , � � r �• : I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS INSTRUMENT �+ jj , ` ,, ' �r ,,, -
Y v ▪ I 7` w a l}?'Yw katf4i •.n, ) y�.
it. ��} _ CK
,�` _ }" r+'s" n WAS FILED FOR RECORD IN MY OFFICE AT ' lH r"any X ' 14 t2" }` 0''4 e Li 1i4� f � 1 ft
e "}y 'J7��'.}. A D IS D OY ROECORDED INJ OOK O.' .4w a 51 f p 't "3i,1" ,srY'IR KC}xi��F,rl( r
` �M1 1 r I K,x, �pr,.,F, 1 C 4 rnR � !
0. +sr` , v" 1• ,' It-En—IL..� �EK i (J. UD 44 Gki ., ti, rrt y 4r tt f ;q r ,uY +I
e I _ rhn t"1 4,,,,4,4f,"
sat4 c ., w ' > MS�vY
;` ,t"r! I = 4 7�r', , rr/' �/�pL, t` "t' 3 t�p'1t �. ,r. 1`�kr',1,� �,s,l'�
° Y ' if P.
rp� U �W�C' "'��7 Ma 7f, , fIr.Y`�.�rlre;. �rr 'r 710 N(1 k. ,7f�r`$r'S r' �r� rN p
�' �( e?. ,`$ "+a1 Tij _�nr/'� /� RECORDER • �rn�,4a`,y*' + I'xY'n + 4 ,n + +'ifi,dr s>sf Y [
Y s,(A�ye✓'"''i' 1,pn..„7i,,Yl f B�—/de Lc.¢ .✓ P. �1���+ . .L.-- "'i 41,,,,,,,;,,,,,i`° ,r 4 3 •
1 .b 'd ,n y7St X'>�, p'r °�y YY ` rf l.�
rlx.x~ .9 " 0,*,,. ?„;,, , .k. i r!'k 'jar ,'" �,A' ..�+ r '''
w DEPUTY
4 r Ma-, , ba t. I�P 0 '„�+w yy AOl Q�t ;
yyyyy����``1y��!@�('` _ " tiy� p�1 f4 ffi = I t sS + 3i" r , n 'r s y'�,„ • x{ad t f ♦p, �wr.�,.
'k` f'II.I k li-, '"itc,'114 .rIZ".4:.g,4,';,,,...� 1„, ',,,,t
t tKI u + iv ,". 1/4• /141/3,;-ft: Y A r,
N Y 4. µ '. ' . 1> ']"�'ia�r'^Iw;r , k 8t , ;�,`( "I -.4 N f ?I', w Y ��rte t � �` r "
e 1 k '' t t 4 IL T „:0,.• • °1f! , IJ., .J X1•"4 v fi+t r� }?7' ''
tit f �7j' �Id7"��tibF` ri`h a't" �" µ'R�"n. (• •y:14
w r �J 1, .Sf� ,"4.
A cr.i'"I. e mild +`1• nI, 1,
41.,•12,1.,”C }al. (qr w is-,‘7
f1= •p „ tli +, r4i} A4r 1 ^r.'a» �` f4• gli, u4t, ) �I_
IA,
rot ,r I"rt + �ltf Prat"
„= q1t ' o " ' . n ,3 , '1,1 i 7 (yAr t1tn..
('t^{M-0 e } LFip Yd ' dy,'N �ar 3 • 4, 1k 9 '�} u 11�Jj k �tix'* (b,i .� ,{I I � �
� ' , 4""dt M y I 1 rn#T. \) }M e:^�' fx�'tl' j �y'}� �iA''3f 'f:.. 4�,2t �G.r r16. tbildA
IS. �y IPItIS
• P,Jt Ii i J,y i ik� }i�r 1 � v rci J' VIMt:
rt 4i 1-kcilt t, 440 14t m�� ql ,d4.�,e e,\ %t t$�rY"r'+`-,, 4 j .° f }Yft e rv�r !rL t��n,o §t! •3 t IlY1 “iii o iii
4. , , . , .. t, "'� 1 f "f'tf 72 ,,4'' Y r T. I IN14110 .'t ;�" �;['it I A1 .;y F IN,/fi
t4 4 t�"��,{$ X14 , TI ' y�,1�{�j r° `l�f to Y + 1 f =1 Pi i ra Y r ,r IY}+ . ' i rr1 ,d y d +
A A ,)„.i ',/,0441991,;9/7e, 's¶j)y{QI' te rF,a 1 t , � + r ,),,' r r �
Hb t .'i' fA fi \ " r .i I. C' �f 7 A'+ 1}.1 ,t,0N} i + yr' ' r '
LA., pip
�1;144',
°J,,;i,,�� R 4S1 �+ ,�i'il ,!/,,rt }I"wl t*� yr iilr *},, �t }s¢+'y� vy�i taiAt,'` a• d"� y. �., r
4 it �;14 $,= J.I E ' , e r,, 5rf ' . L�ryt t� I` �4xt=« �" Yf� 441
1 4 f F tr./Atilt.
.� i C j vp .,y lr
Ir r • f • }.n
ryr,.•' °}{� "f Gy Yr o- t sYlr.,+ ..v, at�.uk�f 7y t ` , f �e^i,' if , I �y iry' '' t•
(di .441* ,aYetr r ',,,, 7 kytt, 4 'I,J61 it •7 pt;'n7 rr yfy+rfji' �
' 41.,-V--1 4 'I t ( 5 �� , J RG ' r� .'S0.a. t' nd ''' /Yr yl F {YvP\PtY.✓"
�} y4 N 1 `v y ip 1
Jy/ }r
+ x Rj =0144)& t .1 V�lMri' .:44,,I,0.71,-,11.4447:1717,,,,. id!'#}�iyzY . -w'" yda fwfl� . 11 'is)' 1 �'4 j,"p""� ` �` . H, �:: -y," .
q "7,.,"4 �.}, , A ,i7,yr{� �,,, �Yy x, /,aF wW 'r1 .t ^r rfpR ,s4
1r7V t " ' t<` ' 1�1 A
h i':,h i *0''''p ,i J4 , S i ',tit,
uY " c $R.` i47�r t r rJ ,j �If,t�'r�{ x1441 Kl/kl 1 �y 11�"Yl trl b'+ r 1� tf",,! , ,
` *R d i n 4, { f 44,. 'il YJJY 4.I#P 44e 1 1U. 1 1_. + ylY e(114: f'ii kC 1)It 1 x..
7 t„ ' i F}g15 , ell i .v r 'iF Y u��yl t rt aR J'ixu�r{''`Y.'
v
44 J >f : &', 4x1 J.Y 1 L c i,.. r
a w. . c"7,izw:;aC ,0„,',”..;', ,. , N �,fr MI � !•'y.+i,o.'^r bl� ,,.,...-t.“.ta. .JEta.1:114''
r" � : `., ,. . .
RECORDING DATA - MAPS & PLAT`'
RESOLUTION
NAME OF SUBDIVISION LA SALLE MASTER PLAN - MAY 1978
Adopted by the La Salle Planning Commission &
NAME OF SUBDIVIDER La Salle Board of Trustees
IOoATION OF SUBDIVISION Town of La Salle, Colorado Incorporated 1910
DATE OF RECORDING JUN 8 1978 BOOK S34 RECEPTION # 1755987
MARY ANN FEUERSTEIN
WELD CO NTY CLERK AND RECORDER
DEPUTY COOINEY CLERK & RECORDER
Hello