Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20041731.tiff Page 1 of 2 Carol Harding From: Myrna Folsom [myrna_f 2000@yahoo.com] ] lU i i I 05 Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 4:32 PM To: Carol Harding [ILL. 1 Subject: Hodges development rights 7050 Loma Linda Ct. Longmont CO 80504 30 833 2992 June 8, 2004 To: Weld Board of County Commissioners Dear Commissioners: Once again, with the announcement of the acquisition of development rights to the Hodges property, Boulder County and Longmont governments are undertaking what Weld County government should be doing or is unwilling to do - preserve agricultural lands and farming through the use of conservation easements by purchasing development rights. Re: The previously reported objections of Weld County Commissioners to acquisition of interests in certain lands by Boulder County in Weld County. Let's hope that the unfounded fears that were expressed, relating to the creation of parks, over the acquisition of development rights to the Schlagel, Regnier and Rasmussen properties are not repeated. For parks to be developed on these lands, ownership would have pass to Boulder County or the City of Longmont. Again ,what is being proposed are conservation easements, not land acquisitions. Even where Boulder County has acquired ownership of land, much of it is still leased for farming. It is an accepted good planning method to maintain non-urban buffers between urban areas. The Weld County MUD district fails to do this, only putting development restrictions on areas that happen to be in the flood plain for "limited development". At this time, the greatest danger to the creation of buffers and loss of prime agricultural land is Weld County's MUD district which permits urban scale development while putting the burden of providing many services and infrastructure on other jurisdictions. If approved, Life Bridge will be another example of this. Furthermore, Weld County government has a record of adding lands to the MUD district even though the majority of the land within it has not yet been developed and the rationale for its existence no longer exists [promoting economic feasibility of the St. Vrain Sanitation District in lands not readily annexable for development under municipal auspices]. We will shortly see whether, unfortunately, Weld government will continue this policy with the Adler property. Conceivably, Weld County government is more concerned about possible lost property tax revenues from developed land than "Smart Growth" land use design. Perhaps it's time to reconsider and reinitiate referral of the failed Weld County Land Preservation Tax so that Weld County will have funding to provide buffering between municipalities and retention of prime farm land. This time, possibly, it can find a way to restrict the minimal sales tax, and voting on it, to the southwestern part of Weld County where it is most needed. Meanwhile, Weld County is missing out on funds available to it from GOCO and the Farm and Ranchland Protection Program. Fortunately, for the future of the area, if they desire, Boulder County and the City of Longmont will be able to continue to go forward with the purchase of development rights in Weld County, thus providing a valuable service to the citizens of the County. John Folsom ol - Ib- oLf 6/11/2004 2004-1731 Hello