Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20043438.tiff Page 1 of 2 Carol Harding From: Myrna Folsom [myrna_f_2000@yahocic0ir ' 7;1 I?: 00 Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 5:03 AM To: Carol Harding f i _. ,_ ;',';_. _ Subject: MUD district To: Weld Board of County Commissioners: Dear Commissioners: MUD criticism commissioners The Commissioners reported visit to Highlands Ranch, at first, raises the hope that they finally realize that there are serious shortcomings in their policy of irresponsibly amending the Mixed Use Development map, thus permitting additional incompatible development in the MUD district. One gets the impression, unfortunately, that the Commissioners, short of realizing that the concept of the MUD district, in itself, is devastatingly contrary to good planning policy, are seeking ways to distract attention from recent criticism of its negative impacts and continue fostering haphazard growth in the MUD district. It is obvious that the benefits of the large-scale, responsibly planned growth at Highland Ranch cannot be compared or adapted to the many, random developments already permitted or planned for the MUD district. The proposition that the property rights of individuals should permit them to realize the monetarily highest and best use for their property is obviously and egregiously fallacious in that it ignores the rights and welfare of the rest of the citizens of the County. County Planning Department officials and Planning Commissioners repeatedly voiced their objection to this proposition when the recommendation for it by the Comprehensive Plan revision committee, came before the Board. The members of this committee, appointed by the Board, overwhelmingly had interests in and would benefit from urban scale rapid growth. The Commissioners approval of the WCR#1 Coalition amendment of the MUD district demonstrated especially the determination of the Commissioners to increase its size even to the extremity of approving addition of land to the MUD district that was unqualified, because of lack of contiguity, according to the Weld County Code. Originally, the MUD district was initiated for the single ostensible purpose of making it economically feasible to build a waste treatment facility to resolve the sanitation problems resulting from urban scale development permitted at the Del Camino interchange. It is unclear as to the role of vicinity landowners was, whose land would collaterally increase in value, in abetting the creation of the MUD district. When the resulting sanitation district became economically self-sustaining, the purpose of the MUD district had been accomplished, and the MUD district should have been abolished. Development of land in the MUD district that was unincorporated should have then been restricted to that permitted in all such areas in the rest of the county according to the regulations in the Code, In all fairness, this might have presented problems, as "takings" issues may have arisen. However, this does not justify in any way the Commissioners subsequent policy of continuously amending the MUD map to include additional lands, particularly when there still remained so much undeveloped land remaining in the MUD district. An additional reason for abolition of the MUD district is that surrounding municipalities are now capable of annexing and developing lands in the MUD district under their comprehensive plans, a course recommended by professional planners and state statute. There are rumors circulating that the Commissioners have initiated a moratorium on additional amendments to the MUD district. I would venture a guess that, if true, it is only for the purpose of deflecting the recent questioning and criticism directed at the Commissioners and the dangers and 0a,0srvtiwrtiew, Ctn9 12/3/204 2004-3438 Page 2 of 2 inadequacies presented by continuing their MUD district policy. John Folsom PS: I want to thank the Board office staff and the Commissioners for bringing the hearing certifications on the website up to date. JSF Do you Yahoo!? Send a seasonal email greeting and help others. Do good. 12/3/2004 Hello