HomeMy WebLinkAbout20041018.tiff 1-
To: Dept. of Planning Services January 3, 2004
Weld County, Colorado Wekd County Flans.
From: Dan& Teri Foster
CREEL °FFt EePar'
meat
36329 Appy Rd. JAN Q
Eaton, CO 80615 5 2004
Subj; Case No. PZ-1020 RECEIVED
Proposed Appaloosa Acres Development
Dear Members of the Dept. of Planning Services,
We are writing this letter to express our opposition to the proposed development
of the land to the East of us. We bought our lot in 1990, and built our house in 1991.
When we were in the process of buying our lot, I remember asking Ivan Gilbaugh (the
Developer of Appaloosa Acres....in 1974) if there would ever be any house built out in
front of us. He replied that the 50 or so acres out in front were to remain open space or
pasture land. At that time, this land was a part of this development, with a bridal path
surrounding this land. This land was later planted in corn and beans, and as I remember
was very productive farm land. We enjoyed have crops growing out in front of our
homes.
Some of our concerns with this development are stated below;
We would be looking at the back yards and or fences of the houses built there. The area
around the development is to be planted in native grasses.....which I am afraid would
become weeds. With the way the wind blows out here, I believe that we would be
looking at weeds and trash up against the fences of these homes.
Our view to the East is really wonderful. Many mornings in the summer we go out and
sit on our front porch and watch the sunrise. If they build out there, these views would no
longer be there.
We are also very concerned with what this development would do to our property values.
With our view out our front door being back yards and fences and weeds, we are afraid
our property values would go down.
We also believe that this development would increase the traffic in this area greatly.
There are sure to be some people coming through our development on our private road,
trying to access the new development. This would also increase the traffic on CR 74, and
could be a potential problem for the bus, stopping for pickup and drop off of students.
We also understand that this land is outside of the Urban Growth Boundary. I assume
that this boundary is set up by the county and or the nearest city or town,to limit
growth outside of certain areas. If this is so, then this issue alone should be a major
reason for denying this development.
(1 EXHIBIT
h
2004-1018
If this was land that was not part of a development, where owners were never told that
there would not be homes there, because it was to remain open space or pasture land,
then we would not have nearly as much ground to stand on while protesting. But all of us
out here in Appaloosa Acres bought and or built with the belief that there would not be
a bunch of houses built to the East of us. Now it seems that some people are trying to
change the rules, and force this development on all of us that live out here.
We have a wonderful life out here. We have great neighbors and friends. Many of us
have lived out here for 12 years or more, and plan to remain here for many years to come.
We do not want to see this development go in, and forever change our way of life.
Please, try and put yourselves in our position, and understand the reasons that we
have for opposing this development.
We respectfully urge the Dept. of Planning Services to deny the request to develop this
area. Thank you for your consideration and your time. Sincerely,
an Fo ter
.- Teri Foster
Weld County Planning Department
GREELEY OFFICE 11-D
JAN 13 2004
DATE: January 7, 2004
RECEIVED
TO: Department of Planning Services
1555 N. 17" Ave.
Greeley, CO 80631
FROM: Mike and Karon Long y1'7 it!/lam iv-A"a-
36189 Appy Rd. � �/
Eaton, CO 80615 �--- Yr/a,
RE: Case Number PZ— 1020
Development of Property East of Appaloosa Acres
We are homeowners in the Appaloosa Acres Subdivision and have been since 1994. The new
development being planned for the acreage to the east of our subdivision is of great concern to us
as well as the other homeowners in the existing subdivision. When we purchased our home in
'94 we were told that there would "never" be development on the farm ground in front of our
property. At that time Ivan Gilbaugh owned that property and had also been the developer on the
existing Appaloosa Acres Subdivision. We love the quiet/quaint look and feel of our home and
the surrounding area, we have wonderful neighbors and we all take care of each other. We would
hate to see an area like this disappear.
The way the development is proposed we would be looking at the back of the homes in the
subdivision, which would include their campers, trailers, boats, RV's, etc. Our view would go
from a beautiful view of watching the sunrise, to looking at storage sheds, equipment, and
fences. The small open space that has been proposed would become a huge weed field with trash
and weeds blowing up against the proposed subdivisions fences. We can also expect
homeowners from the proposed subdivision to drive through our subdivision to get to the back of
their homes to park vehicles, make deliveries for building materials, etc.
The proposal also shows at least t 2 retention ponds on each end of the proposed subdivision.
This stale and stagnate water would attract insects, varmints and children wanting to play. All
would create a very unsafe environment for not only our subdivision, but also for the proposed
subdivision.
We have concerns regarding the increase traffic the new subdivision would create. Weld County
Road 74 is already becoming a heavily traveled road, and unfortunately, people are traveling
very high speeds, we have very seldom (if ever) seen the Highway Patrol on that road. Weld
County is very concerned about it's high rate of traffic fatalities, we are concerned that WCR 74
is going to become a death trap for many motorists. The plan for pull-outs, deceleration and
acceleration lanes is okay, but there will now be school busses stopping on the road to pick up
not just 1 or 2 children, but a subdivision full of children. Motorists will now have to watch for
traffic trying to merge into the main lanes as well as traffic turning into the pull —outs. All of the
merging, slowing down, and speeding up will be happening very close to the intersection of
EXHIBIT
13
1
WCR 74 and WCR 41 another well-traveled road. We have 2 children driving these roads every
day, and are very concerned regarding their safety as well as ours with many inexperienced
drivers traveling the roads to and from the Eaton High School.
There is an existing bridal path that surrounds the acreage for the proposed subdivision that
belongs to, and is owned by, Appaloosa Acres Homeowners Association. By looking at the
proposal for the subdivision they have moved it to travel along WCR 74. This is totally
unacceptable. We would now be riding our horses on a road with a great deal of traffic; and we
would have to cross a road entering into the proposed subdivision. This bridal path was an
absolute guarantee when we bought our property. This bridal path was one of the main
attractions to the Appaloosa Acres Subdivision so we would always have a nice quiet safe place
to ride our horses. How would the planners of the proposed subdivision `police' the bridal path
to not allow families from their subdivision to use this path? What kind of neighbors are we
going to be if every time we see one of their children on the bridal path we 'run' them off? We
feel very strongly regarding this issue.
We have invested a great deal of emotion, money and time into our property. We are positive
that the proposed subdivision would cause the existing homes in Appaloosa Acres to drop
significantly in value. Our home is very important to our family as well as being an investment
for our future. I sincerely hope that the Planning Commission will look not only at the huge
traffic problems this would cause, but also at the wonderful subdivision already existing in
Appaloosa Acres.
We thank you for the opportunity to voice our opinions regarding the proposed Appaloosa Acres
Estates (a name we do not care for). We hope that you value the property and the homeowners of
the existing Appaloosa Acres. We sincerely hope there will not be yet another of many, many
subdivision springing up in Weld County's beautiful open spaces and farm grounds. We love the
agricultural feel of Weld County and would hate for it to disappear completely from our
landscape. We have included some photographs to show you how beautiful our subdivision is.
These were taken in front of our home facing the east property that is proposed for development.
Again, thank you.
Y
I
ial
i:r•a
0
" _ .rte
I r
'I Imo. '^ a ,t, ,, . ,
' lw
rI S ' "1 4.11.Ilir 1 i-
y
4L�it4it ' 1
•
Jh
S • j' +q 'L- '.V
(4,
- __ --; 4-,-
,��.ir- .. . ♦-"q: el y _
•silt ..
•>
- vim •' :t-et .t o"Yig ":''''''''`I 'x'+�'p�It-,'�'t
r
l
Weld County Planning Department
GREELEY OFFICE
JAN 13 2004
RECEIVED
Department of Planning Services
1555 N. 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Members of the Planning Commission,
This letter is in reply to the Department of Planning Services letter dated December 8, 2003
regarding Case No.: PZ-1020 Appaloosa Acres Estates P.U.D. Based upon the proposal
submitted by Mr. Cliff and His comments, we believe this proposal is many times better than the
existing Appaloosa Acres lots as they now exist. The existing Appalossa Acres is poorly
designed by "strip" houses, all gravel roads (dirt mostly) and no apparent maintenance. Mr. Clift
has presented a very neat, well designed layout with good access for residences, school and fire.
The common area is a great amenity. Because of the access onto WCR 74, road dust will not be
a factor and turn lanes make it very safe. We prefer Mr. Cliff's type of design/Plan. It is much
superior to the existing Appaloosa Acres existing lots and all of the other"strip" house along
WCR 41 south of WCR 74. This"cluster" by Mr. Clift with its own open space between the
houses and the adjoining farmland is most desirable.
Mr. Cliff's type of rural residence is best suited for families with hobby livestock. The HOA has
control over cleanliness and pest control. Isolated Lot A's of recorded exemptions have no pest
control. They are adjacent to farmland which can be a problem with the neighboring farmers.
The Town of Eaton does not allow livestock, and thus this is a very acceptable alternative. It is
our understanding that the Town of Eaton, Eaton Fire Department and Eaton Schools have no
objections and are supportive of this application.
The land (soil type)that Mr. Clift is proposing to be developed is relatively poor compared to
land south and east of the application site. Development for houses need to be along the ridge
between us and the Town of Eaton and NOT the top farm land where Governors Ranch and
Mappleton subdivisions are located or other land south west and north of the original town of
Eaton!
In summary, please consider the property owner to the south as not opposing this application.
Sincerely, //
Thelma Johnson, Secretary
J. Quarter Circle Co.
E12IrBIT
DATE: January 24, 2004 Weld County Planning ' --
GREELEY OFFiCt
TO: Department of Planning Services
1555 N. 17th Ave. JAN 2 7 2004
Greeley, CO 80631 RECEIVED
FROM: Kirk A. and Jacqueline L. Korth
36285 Appy Rd.
Eaton, CO 80615
RE: Case Number PZ— 1020
Development of Property East of Appaloosa Acres
We are current residents of Appaloosa Acres Subdivision, adjacent to the proposed development area being
considered: Case#PZ-1020. When we purchased our lot in Appaloosa Acres this area in question was a
beautiful field of beans and corn. The view of the perfectly straight rows in the morning sunrise was truly a
testament to the care of the farmer who so carefully tended to the ground. Without doubt a wonderful place to
live and raise our children, making this in fact a wise choice in making this a long term investment.
As owners in Appaloosa Acres subdivision we would like to express our concerns of a decrease of value in our
property for the following reasons. The proposed development to the east of our subdivision would deprive us
and future owners of this view and in its place give us the view into backyard/lot areas where homeowners of
the new development would store R.V.s,trailers, auto's etc. as well as the possibility of raised leach fields for
the septic systems as the area has a high water table. Fences along back lot boundaries would certainly be lined
with tumbleweeds that we fear will be prominent in the open space areas proposed to be native grasses. In
addition another concern relating to the decrease in property value is the type and quality of the proposed
development. What is the reasoning a developer would purchase and propose a highly populated subdivision in
a agricultural area? Are the guidelines less stringent then if this type of development would be built inside the
city limits, causing a lower property value.
The proposed development indicates a relocation of the current bridle path to an area adjacent to wcr 74 on the
south most boundaries. This bridle path easement belongs to and is owned by all property owners in Appaloosa
Acres and is maintained and insured by Appaloosa Acres Home Owners Association, moving the bridle path
next to wcr 74 would increase risk to all residents using the path by subjecting them to the heavy traffic on wcr
74.
Traffic on WCR 74 at times is very heavy and concentrated and travels at a high rate of speed, creating a
difficult, and at times a dangerous challenge to turn onto WCR 74 form WCR 41. The proposed development
will definitely contribute to the traffic load already carried by WCR 74 and will impede its flow. The entrance
for the proposed subdivisions is close to the intersection of WCR 74 and 41. Acceleration/deceleration lanes
proposed on 74 for the purpose of speeding up to merge in traffic and slowdown to leave traffic will only
provide a dangerous passing zone for those many drivers to impatient to be courteous and slow down. Also
keep in mind that this area will also be a school bus stop to pick children up for the new subdivision.
Mother matter of concern is drainage. The area being considered for development has flooded on the south
end during several storms over the past couple of years.
The development of 22 new residences in this area would alter the natural drainage toward the south ditch
increasing the risk of flooding to resident of Appaloosa Acres Subdivision. Current topographical maps
idicate only a 10' drop in elevation from the proposed area to Lone Tree Creek and less than that amount over
the area proposed to be developed.
(I EXHIBIT
I IC
In closing I would like to share my opinions on development of agricultural land outside the urban growth
boundaries. It is alarming to see good farm ground bought with the sole intention of selling the water rights off
and drying up the land in order to pass it off as non productive farm ground. A disturbing trend to which many
Northern Colorado rural communities can confirm has gone on already in this area.
rgincere y
�,. irk , t a L.
Korth
� v
Ki A. and Ja a K
Weld County Planning De,' en,
GREELEY OFFICE
Weld County Department of Planning Services JAN 2 7 2004
1555 N. 17th Avenue
Greeley, Colorado 80631 RECEIVED
January 22, 2004
Dear Planning Committee:
My name is Bridgette Muse and I am writing this letter in regards to the upcoming
hearing on February 3`d for a change of zone from agricultural to residential for lot 15c of
Gilbaughs Appaloosa Acres, case number PZ-1020. My husband, Mark Muse and our
two daughters reside at 36341 Appy Road, on the north end of Appaloosa Acres. I have
many concerns regarding this proposed development:
1. The development calls for houses to be centered around one large center road.
This places the rear of the homes facing our existing homes on Appy road and
will not be a pleasant view.
2. The developer proposes to use and cross our bridle path without permission
from the legal owners, each homeowner in the original replat of Appaloosa
Acres.
3. The plan put forth by the developer places a retention pond on the north end
near my property. This will be a haven for mosquitoes. I am also concerned
about so many septic systems in an area that has been known to form a large
lagoon during heavy rain on the south end.
4. Traffic pulling out onto road 74 so close to the intersection of 74 and 41 will
become a safety concern.
5. Another concern is that the homeowners in the new development may use our
roads to access the rear areas of there properties.
I hope that the planning commission will take all of our concerns into consideration.
Sincerely,
,1
'
v r
Mark &Bridgette Muse
ITT
Weld County Planning Department
GREELEY OFFICE
FEB 0 2 2004
„_, January 26, 2004 RECEIVED
Department of Planning Services
1555 N. 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: Case No. PZ-1020
To Kim Ogle, Planner:
We are strongly opposed to the development of Lot 15C to be known as "Appaloosa
Acres Estates"for the following reasons:
1. The preservation of these 60 acres as"prime farm ground" should be seriously
considered. When we bought our home 3 years ago,there were beans growing on
this ground, and we were told it was farm ground and would remain so. During
the following year, Mr. Moody bought this acreage, and immediately sold the
water rights, leaving the ground to require rented water to be farmed or to be
developed. He was very abrasive, and managed to turn the residents of
Appaloosa Acres against him immediately. At that time we formed Appaloosa
Acres Homeowner Association to get our road deeded to us as a subdivision so
we could present a"united front"to protest his negotiations. Our home was built
in 1974, and to my knowledge is the first home built in Appaloosa Acres. I know
at that time, it was the intent of Ivan and Joanne Gillbaugh to have these homes,
with the bridal path surrounding the east lot, to remain open space.
2. We are confused over the statement in the sketch plan issues "addressed or
resolved" that 50% of Lot 15C will be used for"open space to graze horses",
when there are "no equestrian facilities other than the existing bridal path". This
proposal is showing moving our bridal path on the south side right next to
Highway 74. We have not been approached, nor given any consent to move this
path. It is our understanding per our attorney John Barry that our existing bridal
path cannot be moved or crossed without our consent as a Homeowner's
Association.
3. We have issues with the geographical location of this development, since this is in
low-lying land that has a history of flooding on the south end. If this new
development is allowed, there is a possibility of creating a dam effect that could
possibly threaten our homes. My home already has evidence of the crawl space
being flooded, and I am told that was within the last 7 years.
4. Depending upon the size, style, and type of homes, this could actually decrease
our home values. We have a very nice and unique setting that is rural, with all the
conveniences of town that was established 30 years ago. We do not wish to
expand this opportunity two-fold in our"front yard" so to speak.
5. The additional 75-100 people residing very close to us would impact all traffic,
noise, crime and litter. One of the main attractions to our small, intimate rural
area is the openness and quiet of the country. We truly enjoy our spectacular
sunrises to the east. If this development is allowed, we will be looking at people's
(1 s
EXHIBIT
P
t
back yards (vehicles, fences, storage sheds, RVs, etc.) That was not the original
intent of our neighborhood. Also, we protest the using of our name "Appaloosa
Acres" associated with the new subdivision.
6. In review, we sincerely hope you will recommend denial for this development.
Sincerely,
Diane`Druitt
President,�� Appaloosa Acres Homeowner's Assn.
v r sLri —tip
Robert Druitt
36169 Appy Rd.
Eaton, CO 80615
r ', i
Joanne Gilbaugh
20085 WCR 74 (970)454-2337
Eaton CO. 80615
February 3, 2004
Weld County Planning Commission
1555 North 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO. 80631
RE: Appaloosa Acres Estates
Dear Commission Members:
As the owner of the land under consideration from 1972 to 2000, and the
continuing owner of Lot 17, I would like to say that for the most part, I think the
plan being presented is a good one. We tried every method of land use for 28
years and never found a way to make the land pay it's way, even when it was free
and clear.
It was obvious to us that some type of housing development would be the highest
and best use for the balance of the farm. The proposed plans will allow several
more families to enjoy the benefits of country living and yet allow much of the land
to remain open space.
I have three concerns which I will outline briefly.
1. The bridle path was designated on the 4th replat and all previous plats as
running straight east and west instead of dropping south along my property line.
This would have made a very troublesome thing to contemplate: my home, worth
approximately $345,000 would have been the only one with the potential of 54
horses riding by on two sides. Mr. Clifford Clift has assured me they will keep the
bridle path as it is currently designated on the 4th replat.
2. It appears that the taper of road 74 for the entrance into the subdivision will
begin about 1/2 way down my south property line. While I understand the county
has a road easement in place, I would like to know how the barrow pit will be
handled to accomodate the taper not only in front of my lot but for the remainder
of the area up to the subdivision entrance.
4. EXHIBIT
•
r
414.
Joanne Gilbaugh
Page -2-
3. My greatest concern is the way the houses are planned to face. I can easily
envision looking out my north windows and seeing the corrals, horses, gaudy
play equipment, etc. for at least five of the lots. If the houses were placed facing
to the outside, they would more easily enjoy looking out on the open space and it
would keep their messier areas hidden from not only my view but the view of the
16 owners of property in Gilbaugh's Appaloosa Acres. When we did the original
subdivision, that was our plan: face the homes toward the farm land and keep
the back yards out of our view. A good drive along road 41 will show evidence as
to why this was a good plan. New covenants and proposed county enforcement
notwithstanding, I am not hopeful that the view will be pleasant. Perhaps more
trees to screen their back yards would also be a solution.
Again, I commend the planning of the developers.
Sincerely,
Joanne Gilbaugh
February 3, 2004
Dept. of Planning Services
Re: Case# PZ1020
We are writing this letter as we are opposed to the subdivision of 22 homes being
proposed for the area northeast of our home.
Our family purchased the home where we currently live in 1977. We have lived in this
house since 1991. In this amount of time we have seen a tremendous increase in traffic
along Road 74 and Road 41. An increase of 22 homes in this area would have a terrific
impact on the increased traffic, as well as the number of accidents experienced at the
corner of Roads 74 and 41.
We are specifically concerned that this subdivision is outside of the growth plan for
Eaton. There would be too many houses in our area that take away from the rural setting
that we enjoy. With this comes noise, traffic (as mentioned above), and people who will
be moving in "from the city" and don't appreciate the rural life, and the responsibilities
that come with it ie: farm machinery on the roads during planting &harvesting periods,
livestock on or near roadways. They will soon have complaints about the"smell of
animals"that we so often hear about. This subdivision would also add to the increase in
school population.
We are also concerned about the amount of septic systems it would take to support a
subdivision of this size outside of the Town of Eaton and what the environmental impact
would be.
Please let it be known that we are NOT IN FAVOR of this subdivision in our area.
Sincerely, \\ , 4 j Nkkily,„Timothy P. Swain and Charlene E. Swain
35921 WCR 41
Eaton, CO 80615
454-2340
4. EXHIBIT
I
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' SIGN POSTING CERTIFICATE
THE LAST DAY TO POST THE SIGN IS.ktn I LC CU THE SIGN SHALL BE POSTED
ADJACENT TO AND VISIBLE FROM A PUBLICALLY MAINTAINED ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY.
IN THE EVENT THE PROPERTY BEING CONSIDERED FOR A SPECIAL REVIEW IS NOT
ADJACENT TO A PUBLICALLY MAINTAINED ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, THE DEPARTMENT
OF PLANNING SERVICES SHALL POST ONE SIGN IN THE MOST PROMINENT PLACE ON
THE PROPERTY AND POST A SECOND SIGN AT THE POINT AT WHICH THE DRIVEWAY
(ACCESS DRIVE) INTERSECTS A PUBLICALLY MAINTAINED ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY.
I, VONEEN MACKLIN, HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER PENALTIES OF PERJURY THAT THE
SIGN WAS POSTED ON THE PROPERTY AT LEAST TEN DAYS BEFORE THE PLANNING
COMMISSIONERS HEARING FOR-Pc: IUD -; IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE
DISTRICT.
VONEEN MACKLIN
Name of Person Posting Sign
e Li
Signature of Person Posting Sign
STATE OF COLORADO
)ss.
COUNTY OF WELD ) /
The foregoing instrument was subscribed and sworn to me this ) 7 day of -._kind i ti , 200f
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: law"
EXHIBIT
Petition Opposing the Development of Appaloosa Acres Estates
The members and property owners of Appaloosa Acres are presenting this signed petition opposing the
development of Appaloosa Acres Estates case number PZ-1020. We are opposed to this development
for the following reasons stated below:
Bridle path: The bridle path on the proposed plat has been moved. We as homeowners of Appaloosa
Acres strongly oppose this, because the developer would move the path directly next to highly traveled
WCR 74. The developer has not had any communication with AAHOA in the redesign of the bridle
path.
The bridle path is for non motor vehicle use only; residents of AAE would have to cross the
bridle path to enter AAE. This will cause obstructions to those using the path as intended.
AAHOA is responsible for the liability insurance on the path, and would be liable for others
using the path with or without our consent.
Urban growth boundaries: This development is outside the boundaries of the urban growth area. We
have invested in our properties with the understanding this area was well outside the growth area. Some
of us moved to the country for the open space and others have moved to, or have lived in the area, to
continue to farm the land.
Open space: This land has been designated open space. This land was a very productive farm
until a few years ago when the land was purchased and the water was sold. The land is still farmable
with the option of renting water.
Many of the homeowners of Appaloosa Acres bout their properties with the understanding and
verbal assurance from Ivan Gilbaugh that this property would also always be open space used as pasture,
crops or as shown on the current plat only 1 home on it.
The developer proposes the new development will not have equestrian facilities but also states
the open space will be used for grazing horses.
The developer also proposes to plant the open space with native grasses. Our concern is this
would be overtaken by nocuous weeds. = EXHIBIT
Traffic: WCR 74 is a heavily traveled road with speeds reaching well over the posted speed limit.
We feel this is a dangerous situation with an increase of population will increase the number of
accidents. The plan for pull-outs, deceleration and acceleration lanes look like a good option on paper,
but this is still an increase of traffic at the intersection of 74 and 41. There would also be an increase of
traffic directly to the private road in Appaloosa Acres. People looking for access in AAE would become
confused not knowing the area. Property owners from AAE would try to access their back yards using
our private road, again crossing our bridal path with motor vehicles.
Noise: We feel that the impact of an additional 22 homes in such close proximity would generate
unwanted noise. We bought here for the quiet, country feel of the area, which will be compromised with
this development.
Property value: We as property owners fear that our property would decrease in value. We will
loose our open space, which is what makes this area desirable to many.
View: The front of our properties would be facing the back yards of the development.
Backyards are usually used for storage sheds, vehicles, trailers, RV's animal kennels, corrals etc.
Currently we have a beautiful open field with wonderful sunrises.
Drainage: The south end of the proposed development property is a low spot. When heavy rains
have occurred, as they have several time in the last few years, this area is covered in water for a long
period of time. Not only is that a haiard for the proposed new residents of AAE but also to the residents
to the east and west. If the water were to drain onto the adjacent properties and roads, it could possibly
flood foundations in the development. Water diverted to a retention pond would increase the dangers of
insects and insect diseases.
•
SIGNATURES OF THOSE OPPOSING DEVELOPMENT OF AAE
CASE NUMBER P7>1020
142 //�, I
i 2�/ os� '' T a //241/or
t date Signature date
S z31/412 d . 142_011-,244-0(4 —7--Ct.c i.,H>. � I /24-joy
ii:edate Signature date
36: z85 4Poi Romp Env./ Co 3432-1 .4*5 £4. 6)t hM C-ti
Address Address
(9 76) 145Y - //3 e et le' fry 2rf4
Phone number Phone number
/ a U_o el 724e&'t /, —mot
Si date Si date
Ai- ` -g- 40-(____ /7r -� cum %r i/a i-410c/
Signature ' date/ Si date
3623?/ /A pro, K1 Ea.-4o,A Lo awl 'e T. L
97o - ysv - a3ao Q70 - (11544- oZso9
Phone number Phone number
_-N r
Si date Signature date
due- 7'40114;u 1-25-0f
Sigraature date Signature date
c zc5 �' �z� !
Address T / ;' Address
770- YS `f — Io /
Phone number Phone number
Si date Signature date
• Signature
� 1 a date
6 Z//C-
Address /f Address
Q70 - 9S7 - 3//7
Phone number Phone number
SIGNATURES OF THOSE OPPOSING DEVELOPMENT OF AAE
CASE NUMBER PZ-1020
1 (af C ezt,Q"._ / -,;27-/2r
-- S‘na - date date
it '/3,
Signature date Signature date
5 Co ( (o`j /Viol Rd--r CtDv (c 3609/ Apt &i &al io $0415--
Address Address
Ltc2 ( - c ( j 970— µ54-oV2
Phone number Phone number
*t )k- WI-air-4j
Si dafe Si date
n
i,`3t /` - 1- ;4,-ol f ox 4 tit e--c-€ .
Signature date Signature date
-i Zc'7 , ezt, ? 70 , VrV,zer7
Address Address
yf21-53th 2-
Phone number Phone number
-- -C, - 2-\ - . p-date i Datireli�ff -,-. . a7-0 C
Y / OL
Signature date ignature e
&X/51 Apt/ 4d, fah ii Address
w 3 �p� ZO(
Address CPW- 75-V 7/7,i 970-- ii4F 0So ()
Phone number Phone number
��:.ti et-lir ' /- dS -d
Si // date Signature date
g e \. C (,{/ ! O�datf ignature 1. Signature date
,7t; 7,17 H��/yat el id I
Address Address
T
Phone number Phone number
Petition Opposing the Development of Appaloosa Acres Estates
The property owners of the surrounding area are presenting this signed petition opposing the development of
Appaloosa Acres Estates case number PZ-1020. We are opposed to this development for the following reasons stated
below:
Urban growth boundaries:
This development is outside the boundaries of the urban growth area. We have invested in our properties with
the understanding this area was well outside the growth area. Some of us moved to the country for the open space and
others have moved to, or have lived in the area, to continue to farm the land.
Open space:
This land has been designated open space. This land was a very productive farm until a few years ago when the
land was purchased and the water was sold. The land is still farmable with the option of renting water.
The developer proposes the new development will not have equestrian facilities but also states the open space
will be used for grazing horses.
The developer also proposes to plant the open space with native grasses. Our concern is this would be
overtaken by nocuous weeds.
Traffic:
WCR 74 is a heavily traveled road with speeds reaching well over the posted speed limit. We feel this is a
dangerous situation with an increase of population will increase the number of accidents. The plan for pull-outs,
deceleration and acceleration lanes look like a good option on paper, but this is still an increase of traffic at the
intersection of 74 and 41.
Nye:
We feel that the impact of an additional 22 homes in such close proximity would generate unwanted noise. We
bought here for the quiet, country feel of the area, which will be compromised with this development.
Property value:
We as property owners fear that our property would decrease in value. We will loose our open space, which is
what makes this area desirable to many.
Drainage:
The south end of the proposed development property is a low spot. When heavy rains have occurred, as
they have several time in the last few years, this area is covered in water for a long period of time. Not only is that a
hazard for the proposed new residents of AAE but also to the residents to the east and west. If the water were to drain
onto the adjacent properties and roads, it could possibly flood foundations in the development. Water diverted to a
retention pond would increase the dangers of insects and insect diseases.
SIGNATURES OF THOSE OPPOSING DEVELOPMENT OF AAE
CASE NUMBER PZ-1020
o _, tit &. z/zlztj4
Si C_l to Signature date
S' lure date Signature date
3592A V C (Z ti.\ ga+cn, Co8oeoIc
Address Address
4.5 (4-)34O
Phone number Phone number
Signature // date��JJ Signature date COJ tAAA-L , ? l42 nJ ---b7
Signature date Signature date
a/5
Address Address
glo —H54 -3& D7
Phone number Phone number
Signature date Signature date
Signature date Signature date
Address Address
Phone number Phone number
Signature date Signature date
Signature date Signature date
Address Address
A—
Phone number Phone number
WITWER, OLDENBURG, BARRY & BEDINGFIELD, LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
822-7TH STREET.SUITE 760
STOW L.WITWER.JR. GREELEY, CO 80631 TELEPHONE+(970)352-3161
R.SAM OLDENBURG FACSIMILE(970)352-3165
JOHN J. BARRY SENDER'S E-MAIL ADDRESS'
JEFFREY T. BEDINGFIELD
JACQUELINE JOHNSON lbarry@WOBB-LLPcom
PATRICK M.GROOM
TIMOTHY V.CLANCY
January 23, 2004
Appaloosa Acres Homeowners Association, Inc.
Atten: Dan Foster
37329 Appy Road
Eaton, CO 80615
Dear Dan:
As you have requested, I have reviewed once again the issue of a potential developer's proposal to make
changes to the existing bridle path in which all of the Appaloosa Acres' Homeowners have an interest. As
you know, I have some familiarity with this issue, as I have addressed it over the past several years when
various developers have expressed some interest in developing the acreage surrounded by the bridle path.
I am enclosing herewith a copy of the letter which I sent to Rick Troxel, one of the Appaloosa Acres
Homeowners,who requested that I review the issue concerning the bridle path in April 2000. As my letter to
Mr. Troxel set forth,the covenants which were recorded on December 30, 1974 at Reception No. 1651101
provide that"each and every one of these covenants, conditions, reservations and restrictions is and are all
for the benefit of each owner of land in such subdivision..." Paragraph 5 of the recorded covenants makes
reference to the "bridle paths shown on the replat of Gilbaugh's Appaloosa Acres as recorded in Weld
County Records." Thus, when the covenants were recorded, and when the plat was recorded, each of the
approximate 15 owners of lots in the Gilbaugh's Appaloosa Acres subdivision had vested rights in the bridle
paths as well as the other property rights referenced in the covenants. The bridle paths were are as shown on
the replat of Gilbaugh's Appaloosa Acres recorded with the Clerk and Recorder's Office. In other words,by
recording the plat and referencing the covenants, Mr. and Mrs. Gilbaugh placed every homeowner in the
subdivision with individual vested rights in the bridle paths. I do not see anywhere in the covenants or on
the plat that the Gilbaughs reserved any rights in the bridle path area to allow them or their successors to
utilize or convey any of the bridle path. Thus, it appears to me that the only persons with any rights in the
bridle path are those who are owners of the lots in the Gilbaugh's Appaloosa Acres.
Presumably, when each owner acquired his or her interest in a lot in Gilbaugh's Appaloosa Acres, such
purchaser relied upon the covenants and the assurance that they would have an unobstructed use of the bridle
paths when making their purchase decision. As a vested property right, I do not believe that either the
Gilbaughs or their successors have any right to attempt to change the location of the bridle paths,to alter the
use of the bridle paths or to attempt to allow other persons or parties to make use of the bridle paths in any
way. I do not even believe that the Gilbaughs or their successors would have the right to authorize other
-- parties to utilize the bridle paths even if solely for bridle path purposes.
EXHIBIT
I
WITWER, OLDENBURG, BARRY &BEDINGFIELD, LLP
Appaloosa Acres Homeowners Association, Inc.
Atten: Dan Foster
January 23, 2004 Page
As with other covenants granting each lot owner within a subdivision certain vested rights in property, I
believe that any change in the location or use of the bridle path would take the unanimous written consent of
each of the owners of lots in Appaloosa Acres. The Homeowner's Association was created to undertake the
job of owning, insuring and maintaining Appy Road and Appaloosa Lane, which are roads which merely
provide the private access to the Appaloosa lots in question. The Homeowner's Association itself does not
have any interests in the bridle paths, and it would certainly not have the ability to grant to any person or
party the right to move the bridle path or alter its use or allow any additional use thereof.
As you may be aware, J. Moody, who acquired the acreage surrounded by the bridle path from the
Gilbaughs,attempted a development of the property by proposing to the homeowners that the bridle path be
moved in order to suit his development plans. I understand that such proposal met with no acceptance from
the Homeowners, and that Mr. Moody thereupon abandoned any such development plans. I enclose
herewith for your reference a copy of the letter of April 17,2001 which Mr. Moody apparently forwarded to
a number of homeowners. I also enclose herewith a copy of the letter of May 10,2000 to Mr.and Mrs. Rick
Troxel from Charles Connell, who was Mr. and Mrs. Gilbaugh's attorney referencing a plan to move the
bridle path in order to allow Moody to attempt development of the property. I believe in those letters you
can see that both the Gilbaughs and Mr. Moody were aware of the fact that the homeowners had vested
rights in the bridle path and that,despite the developer's threats,the developer could not force any relocation
or other alteration of the bridle path. I do not believe that the circumstances have changed since Gilbaugh
and Moody attempted to address that issue.
I hope that the foregoing is helpful to your understanding of the rights in the bridle path as I understand them
and what has transpired over the past several years. If I can be of any additional help or if you should have
any questions which you believe I can answer, please feel free to contact me at your convenience.
Yours very truly,
WITWER, OLDENBURG,
BARRY & JOHNSON, LLP
r
John J. Barry f,f 7
t
JJB:mmv
Enclosures
WITWER, OLDENBURG, BARRY & BEDINGFIELD, LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
822-7TH STREET,SUITE 760
STOW L. WITWER,JR
PATRICK M.
R.SAM OLDENBURG GREELEY, CO 80631 TIMOTHY V
CLANCY
JOHN J. BARRY
JEFFREY T.BEDINGFIELD (970)352-3181 CHARLES A.KAROWSKY
JACOUEUNE JOHNSON RETIRED
FACSIMILE(970)952-9165
April 12, 2000
Rick Troxel
36265 Appy Road
Eaton, CO 80615
Re: Review of Gilbaugh's Appaloosa Acres Covenants
Dear Rick:
As you have requested, I reviewed the recorded instruments which you furnished me concerning the
covenants recorded in December, 1974 affecting the property commonly known as Gilbaugh's
Appaloosa Acres. I have similarly reviewed the various blueprints which you furnished me, which
I believe were recorded with the Weld County Clerk and Recorder's Office. I examined these
documents with particular regard to the rights of the various owners of lots in Gilbaugh's Appaloosa
Acres in and to the bridle path which is referenced in the recorded covenants and is more particularly
reflected in the recorded plat.
The recorded covenants, at the second paragraph thereof,make specific reference to the fact that the
covenants and conditions are for the benefit of each owner of the land and each subdivision or any
interest therein and shall, in essence, run with the land. Accordingly, each owner of a parcel within
the Gilbaugh Appaloosa Acres Subdivision has the right and ability to enforce the covenants,
reservations and restrictions which were recorded in December, 1974. Specific reference is made
to the bridle paths in paragraph 5, by making specific reference to the paths as shown on the replat
of Gilbaugh's Appaloosa Acres. Effectively, the recording of the replat and the reference within the
covenants affixes each parcel owner's right to rely upon the dedication of the bridle path and its
location as shown on the replat. Additionally, it is my understanding that the bridle path has been
used for a number of years, and, at least to some lot owner's belief, adds significant enhancement
to the beauty, use and value of each lot in the subdivision.
Paragraph 13 of the recorded covenants sets forth the remedies for any violation of any of the
covenants and restrictions set forth in the document. It naturally describes that each lot owner
individually or collectively has the right to enforce those rights. Such can be done by either a suit
for damages to each lot owner as may be measured by a Court of Law, or, alternatively, each lot
owner has the right to enforce the covenants by seeking an injunction, enjoining any breach of the
WITWER, OLDENBURG, BARRY &BEDINGFIELD, LLP
Rick Troxel
April 12, 2000 Page 2
covenants. These remedies are consistent with what would be available to a lot owner at common
law for enforcement of his or her rights.
In sum,it is my opinion that each lot owner within the Gilbaugh's Appaloosa Acres Subdivision has,
individually or collectively,the right to seek appropriate relief in Court to enjoin any obstruction of
the use of the bridle path, alteration of the path or location of the bridle path, or any other significant
change or adjustment affecting the use of the bridle path as it is shown on the recorded replat. As
additional strength to each lot owner's position, a Court would consider the nature of the continuous
use of the bridle path and in particular whether that use has continued without interruption or
objection for a considerable period of years.
I trust that the foregoing is helpful to you in evaluating your rights as a lot owner in the subdivision,
and in assessing your position with regard to any proposed change in the use or location of the bridle
path. If you should wish to discuss this further, or if you should have any questions with regard to
what I have said, please feel free to call upon me at your convenience.
Yours very truly,
WITWER, OLDENBURG,
BARRY & BEDINGFIELD, LLP
Joh J arry
JJB:mmv
t`o`+s�A Y.. x .i3��„raE•r k, " . . „;. -lf .. - ,'
1 y -
µ 729 ,y
ti.,.�.,i at •>3— rem. Q ,aDEC 30 .9)4
t'
4 r p.c. „a 1651101 s t.. 9 h_ Retadwr
S_I
V I KNOW ALL hr: 3Y THESE PRESENTS, Ivan G1lbaugh and
ttiry E Joanne L. Cilbaugh being the owners of all of the following described
�rl
premises situated within the County of Veld, State of Colorado TO WIT:
All of Lots 1 through 14, inclusive in rapist of Gilbaugh's ".
Appaloosa Acres, located in the west half of the Southwest Quarter
:/-1.*:
.•}�` -, o" Section 33, Township 7, North Range 65, weal of the 6th PM, -
+- 'k; weld County, Colorado, have established a general plan for the
improvement and development of such premises and do hereby
;'h establish the covenants, conditions, reservations and restrictions
upon which and subject to which all lots and portions of such lots
- 'i
S t� shall be improved or sold and conveyed by them as owners thereof.
.5t C '
Each and every one of these covenants, conditions, reservations,
and restrictions is and all are for the benefit of each owner of land •
in such subdivision or any interest therein and shall inure to and .,
s
pass with each and every parcel of such subdivision and shall bind ti
v .
the respective successors in interest of the present owner thereof. -
:410j.e These covenants, conditions, reservations and restrictions to be
L0 construed as restrictive covenants running with the title to such
� 1
T � lots and with eech and every parcel thereof to wit:
{F�
1. Residential use - Such lots and each and every one
; thereof are for single family residential purposes only except
"' I• Lot 1 which is for a duplex. No building or structure intended for
or adapted to business purposes and not apartment house, lodging
house, rooming house, hospital, eanitorium, or Doctor's Office shall
m. t "
be erected, placed, permitted or maintained on such premises or on
_
r ..
any part thereof. No residences shall be constructed with a floor
area of less them 1,400 sq. ft. exclusive of any garage or open
!.i - porch.
is 2. Construction Requirements - Each private dwelling - a
house erected upon any such lot shall have at least 75% of exterior
wall finish of crick, stone or masonry and no building shall have
a roof with a pitch of lean than 3 to 12. All roofs shall be of -
lea e .. L. �. e: t F s.'ffi.+ ?ee t1Cree£ ee, ' kg.: yCw.lm .' r �e.ww^ — ..
K .
t) *Cl. �• 44" 729;77 1651101 -
in
` t shake shingle or tile. No basement house, tent, shack, garage or
s y x19: trailer, pre-fabricated structure, or any other out-buildings shall.
. . 9` ` . ae
be occupied or used as a residence either temporarily or permanently - q
Yfr,Jy and no corrals, out-buildings or facilities to house animals on any
y A
lot shall be erected, except each lot owner may construct a horse
j.
barn not to exceed 12 x 24 feet and a corral not to exceed 20 x 20
t
�'"` feet. The construction of which mi.:a.. ''e of new materials compatiable
t
J,• with the design of the residence.
%!t
e 3. Nuisances - No lot will Se used for storage of lumber,
*t automobiles, trucks, or any other me.erials except during the -
construction of a dwelling. No noxious or offensive trade or
activity shall be conducted upon any lot. LNo fowl, sheep, or ewi
i ..,
: Le/,4r//
swine may be kept on any lot, except six (6) chickens may be kept /
re
1j on any one of the lots if used for a !,-H project./I No livestock
y JJJ
or fowl may be raised commercially on any of the lots. No signs
r " cr other advertising shall be displayed on any lot. No weeds,
t
underbrush, or other unsightly growth shall be permitied to grow
or remain upon the premises and no refuse pile or unsightly objects
e r kC
$f� shall be allowed to be placed or suffered to remain anywhere thereon.
n, l,` {{4„ 4. Subdivision of Lots - ?one of the lots shall at any
s •' .;c time be divided into two or more building sites.
-ler-. 1 ...••
i• q
•
( 5. There are hereby reser ,d for the purpose of installing
.
�' and maintaining public utility facilities and for such purposes
,:.1 .,
, + inc._ential to the development of the property, the easements for
�
the utilities and the maintenance of utilities and bridle paths shown •
-
",;• a on the replat of Gilbaugh's Appaloosa Acres as recorded in Weld County
i i( -
' ' •• Records. No building or fence shall be erected over a utility - We
or bridle path easement. All claims for damages, if any, arising
y e et a '`
out of the construction , maintenance. and repair of utilities or on --.
T,-�1, account of temporary or other inconvenience caused thereby against •
fj the subdivider or any utility company, or any of its agents or -
7
e. servants are hereby waived by the uwners. . ,
t M •
, v
sl a .
•I • _
r
I •-` , •,
.. , 4 'j
a 4," A,4 a ii .;: Jaif." :: * y.t, ^� r --,:.--7:7--; ',
-, y f.. - - .1—
�n_
°- r�.� YY ♦Y• �� `h; .ay ifr, .si'S, w+ .w�r+ tF � . ,.� '.i, � ,.
Z' 16101 - . --
ti
'.. t '.. retbeck !nes - 10 pnrttoe o.` + balldimg shell be ..
y loafed on any lot nearer then hO feet to the front lot line or _
.
e nearer than 80 feet to any side street line in the case of corner
lots. No portion of any dwelling or attached garage or carport
shell be located nearer than 15 feet to any interior side lot line
or rear lot line. [!
7. No more than two horses ray be maintained by the
F over of any lot except upon obtaining permission of the committee
, .; hereinafter provided for or as provided in Paragraph 8, u .
,!:.' 18. i-8 prof rots are encouraged iimitad to horses with
one per child, but not to exceed four per lot or permission of the
41_V(Sh4L-iar of the pasture. 1
✓
e ? 9. Fences - If lots are fenced, said fences to be pole- �/
r '- , /
tongue-and-groove, for= feet high and kc good repair.
10. Approve of Plan - For the purpose of further insuring
the development of the la..md so platted an en area of high standards,
subdivider reserves file power to control the building structures and
n' +
° - other improvements placed on each lot as well to make sue' exceptions
e. -. - . to these reservations and restrictions as the subdivider or committee . .
s •; ',1 :� hereinafter designated shall deem necessary and oroper.
.
'dhether or not provision therefore is specifically stated
5 ry rim in any conveyance of a lot made by the subdivider, the owner or - o A.
°- �. gg occupant of each and every lot by acceptance of title thereto or by _p
-' ;l taking possession then Aof covenants an,: agrees that no building, wall,
or other structure shall be placed upon such lot unless and until the
..5 plans and specifications therefore and the plot plan have been epproved
a• in writing by the committee hereinafter provided.
u ? _ Foch such b•,aiding, wall or strrot;:re shall be placed on the • � ' � .
premises only in accoruance with the plan and specifications.
n 11. Plot Plan So Approved - Refusal of approval of plane N
and specifications by such committee may bn based on any ground
�'. . including purely aesthetic grounds which !A. the sole and uncontrolled
- ,. uiscretion of the committee seems sufficin No alteration in the
0
;y ' `` 23 •
4, 1651101 I
,g 5.♦
'c,
'.-..% exterior ap,earence of the buildings or str - shall be fade
n
';-1,47 without i_te approval. If no committee exi f the committee
r
:".-I';.- shall shall fail to approve or disapprove the pie pecifications
.. .-.11,
41',4:'ft within thirty days after written request th - then such approval
:1';`-':.;.; . -
w shall not be required provided that no bull other structures
IT Y-4
V
,t shall be erected which violates any of the ".a herein contained.
24�:•. 12. Committee - The subdividers .. appoint one or more , ,
s il
> x ! persona to the committee heroin referred to ,,,d a successor
• , committee or committees shall also be appal rd by the subdivider.
H.11.1:::
Iii
.4i After January 1, 1985, all privileges, powt , rights and authorities
114.51 z shall be exercised by and vested in a comm.: .. e to be selected by
the owners of a majority of the lots in thy - .bdivision.
. - 13. Remedies for Violations - Fr " violation or a
breach of any of these reservations and res' - '..ctions by any person .
EY
};y claiming by, through or under the subdivide :r by virtue of any
..:.,-.a- judicial proceedings, the subdivider and th- :ot owners or any of
o-..
, . them severally shall have the right to proc ! at law or in equity .
w
` to compel the compliance with the terms her ' or to prevent the r
rei' violation or breach of any of them. + '�
All of the foregoing covenants, c itions, and reservations -
•` and restrictions shall continue and remain full force and effect
IV 0 , at all times as against the owner of any lo' .n such premises...-‘1.4T
pl•
regardless of now he acquired title until t. commencement of the ` ,_.
F
calendar year 1985 at which time said cover."- is shall be automatically
extended for successive ten-year periods utioss on or before the end
` of one of such extension periods or the base period t1... owners of
ct
u`14-qfifiq__ the majority of the lots in the subdivision shall by written ��°-, '• f�1•
:1.'1..5'4 _,
b, instrument duly record declare a termination or modification of the same. .
>'3 Provided further than in the event any one or more of
the foregoing covenants, conditions, reserve•t.Lons or restrictions J•- � '
'�
shall be dcciared for any reason by a Ccurt -:C competent jurisdiction -
to be null and void, such judgnint or decre- shall not in any
mo 't"'et` .'s i .--.c t_ .__t._ -41,44.» S^"°^ __ - __ ._•,mac
729 1651101
4}y.
manner whatsoever affect, modify, change, abrogate or nullify any
tr.A,, of the covenants, conditions, reservations and restrictions not so
iA
declared to be void. But all of the remaining covenants, conditions,
6#L reservations and restrictions not so e-'ressly held to be void e.
rv&
:dMs shun contince unimpaired and in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF Ivan Gilbaugh and Joanne L. Gilbaugh
MY
have herein to set their hand and seals this 30th day of
de
December , A.D., 1974•
.
•_a 1Yai,p,,..f_ I N GILBADGH
"4"r' ,' .../711/44,,,/.4//J'�/lvG
' SL. GILBADGH
`y � _
CRSubscribed to before me this 30th day of December ,
n4 �L i•t t 1.4974 by Ivan Gilbaugh and Joanne L. Gilbaugh. •
, tf „07q yr"k\ a Witness my hand and official seal.
1 ,
• /)' ��C''i)w My commission expires: 7-9—7
w .
1, No Public \ 'A
'S
1.,'
, .
:',..-.,--,•: .t.
v r
t __ .
- • 1 i '":7+ h dll„. ,t l•
M ,' 1 a,i.. a : •
+" f 4 - 'h.}}•�,..�t' .�r.d i1^t'y"y"V t• . x .t\ �':a 1 r Y - _
^fir Jf,° {�-�4.,..�Pr , a�'+. JL r•+S °;
i
�, L•y <t r...,Si•'Ja
o secs �-
3a._._ o'deck _( M JUN 2 9 1976
R.cmdd at
U �! !0 169,7. ,90_ s. L.. Sheba, Jr., Mcordsr Page 1 of 2
. iiirt it• 0.K Na
r
^�, I AMENDMENT TO THE PROTECTIVE COVENANTS OF CILBAUGH'S APPALOOSA ACRES .. i
As exocutod the 30th day of December, 1974, and recorded the 30th day of
December, 1974; Book 729, Rec. No. 1651101, with the Clerk and Recorder
of Wold County, Colorado.
'i 4 a' Paragraph 3 NUISANCES shall be emended to read as follows;
3. NUISANCES - No lot will be used for storage of lumber, auto-
'Ax mobilise, trucks, or any other materials except during the construction
of a dwelling. No noxious or offensive trade or activity shall be conducted
l° o upon any lot. No fowl, sheep, or swine may be kept on aay lot, except as
•," provided in paragraph 8. No livestock or foul may be raised commercially
:, rn
N •
.;.. on any of the lots. No signs or other advertising shall be displayed on
1 4
any lot. No weeds, underbrush, or other unsightly growth shall be per-
witted to grow or remain upon the premises and no refuse pile or unsightly
Pf; objects shall be allowed to be plaoei or suffered to remain anywhere thereon.
}
•i Paragraph 8 shall be amended to read as follows: _ .
a. 4-N projects are encouraged and lirited to ono hone, six
r chickens, one lash, or one calf per child per lot. .
e
A.ngraph 9 FESCS ."all be emended to read as follow's;
Ir i- 9. rT:1Oy_4 - All fence. and fencing met be approved by the rub-
*" diridar before being installed and must be kept in good repair at all time.
eLLML161 ,• anions •'•••
a ic J
, .r
C4'Trr C1 bfl ee.
a ysD. rt D..! ►-( ►.n.o before me this .2r!,y raa7 of ��(/A{ - s
1%'1,, `.q :n, :::hags ui :ccr. L. Qiltough• AO) se �.t v!tr r.. e7 i,..-4 cat ^tr<:al seal. ,�//�;G 1.� t OO .
It' Mae.!M!-et trig ray es(...-.. "ii ewaa 6 ea n • '� 1./raj
a LRAtLr 1l taaja4
tar? Nita , •�` ; 4.
a
loot 16992490 -
/'S�/� /��' I
T J
r`_. /,. ,% f. ,
Sa�z'a E. Fohar ,
fit—
�.Q - H. Labwr
e ?hrie Der --
e
•r:•
STATE OF COL.ORADOss
COUNT! OF WELD
Subscribed and sworn before me this e 7 day of .Qpr!/ ,
1976, by 121aPILITLXInan •• inning Norman H. Label', and Rose
Marie Laber. •••��••�•0,.••••.,
Witness my hand and seal , .•... '��;'
Hy oommiesion expires! My Csmablbe"P"143X 71#f9ea •, 7%1a fQl r• 1
s` ..0.,t_4., a Notary Public
,,,con
t
STATE OF COLORADO as.
COUNTY OF WELD .
Subscribed and ;worn before me this 24th day of Jtme ,
1976, by Ralph B. Foster and Sandra E. Foster.
Witness my hand and seal' r May il,•i980•- .. -.
Fy commission expires! M1 coim f' .
, TOJ ♦O3 r.z
ntl c
Notary Public t . .1'vvioS" ';
i1
•
SD •
AR2309790 RESOLUTION
RE: APPROVE CE'IICELLATION AND RELEASE OF DEMAND NOTE IN AMOUNT OF
$1,580.00 FOR GILBAUGH'S APPALOOSA ACRES SUBDIVISION
i. iA i� '
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, • E. '
.-4 o pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is
o c.) vested with the authority of administering the affairs of Weld County, ,"
o Colorado, and
H O ,
O WHEREAS, on March 22, 1973, the Board did approve a Subdivision
o Agreement with Ivan Gilbaugh and Joanne L. Gilbaugh, concerning property -
w described as a tract of land located in the W/2 of the SW/4 of Section 33,
3
a Township 7 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado,
o ? .
N w and
A -
oWHEREAS, pursuant to said Agreement, a Demand Note dated April 23,
W ]973, in the amount of 51,580.00 was submitted to Weld County, and
"� Weld has conducted a
- m WHEREAS, Drew Sche ltinga, County Engineer, �
o a visual inspection and recommends release of said collateral.
re a NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners
C...) of Weld County, Colorado, that the Demand Note in the amount of $1,580.00 $ "r .t;
`^ z concerning said Subdivision Agreement for Gilbaugh's Appaloosa Acres, be, ' •
O H
w and hereby is, canceled and released.
H co '
aw The above
and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and ": _
o o seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 20th day of May, A.D.,
cn n2r W1991.
;'
cn e.
n y BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1 .' <v 2 !t /�� Q.fr G11 WELD COUNTY, COLORADO •
o AT'(E:iTI
r s:
U r4 ti l;.. .- i
w We, tI County Cle-C}r,-to the Board EXCUSED DATE C SIGNING - (AYE) •
, lI
: Gordon E. Lacy, Chairman
r m ^ ,V
n In By:1 EXCUSED DATE OF SIGNING - (AYE) . -
Depul lerk to the Board Geory/p Kennedy, Pro-Tem
w . .
APPROVED AS 9 FORM: / i(LA'
Constance . Harbert
---Y"CCCoou`nnt`yy Attorney C. W. Kirb r
/A
, W. H. Webster
-- •
r`
910425
( ..e., r • O.4 t ,•1 !1 1 , If
Lip :> e M ..
. , . �.
• t{.1, 411 ,,, 'r
•„ f' '- 't i id. 1 ,•: I, ‘ii•o_ 1j '1NWgqM r1t Are,tf—,ott
�f�f "1f rn ..g. °.�. 1 .•+ �u iL�'.•.,.✓)F.�t7e • ,,.. . ..•t t
- '785 ( 7
* ' l Rrccrded at `-`-o'clock —1../A DEC 2 31976 r
x• ~ Rn No. . .1.YncA47 Mn,v Ono F..ie' hi, Rmnrrtn
! t1'�. RESOLUTION �' I ._ <
1 ry
79ii '
1. f 1
" ifs WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on October 16, 1072, in the •
.,
. �2; chambers of the Board of County Commissioners, Weld County, Colorado, _'+{
•r,^.. yG- for Ow: pu rposc of hearing the petition of Ivan Gilbaugh, 014 9th Avenue, t
•�.v Greeley, Colorado, requesting change of zone from "A" Agricultural ;y
; District to 'A-UD' Agricultural Unit Development of a tract of land as ,t
•
' _ '- ':�.1:. here inane; recited, all as appears on plat as submitted and made a part
- .-_— _-
hereof by reference, and
:{! lviii lEAS, the petitioner was present and represented by counsel, •
. .
', _, William E. Ilohlendcr, and ±
W 113REAS, there was some opposition to the change of zone, and
.
•" `' WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners heard all the
ze testimony and statements from those present, and
t ' p :R WillF:A`, the Board of County Commissioners has studied the
,.•. 1F �,- recom mend c,nonc of the Weld County Planning Commission as submitted, '
iY:
{+n and having been fully informed;
f •
NO11', 'rIlEREF'ORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Hoard of County 0
,+` J Commissioners, County of Weld, State of Colorado, for change of zone ♦
! jr from •
f "A" Agricultural District to "A -UD" Agricultural Unit Development
'` of a tract of land as appears on plat, said area being more particularly •
,r described as follows:
,ly • . .
,''• , The West One-Half (\V ) of the Southwest One-Fourth (SW})
i• ': `tt:.. ,,,,A of Section Thirty-three (33), Township Seven (7) North, -
Range Sixty-five (65) West of the Sixth Y. M. , Weld County,
it Ot. ,
tt Colorado, and
{
r. r ,•`.i •
All that part r' the Southwc+t Quarter (S 14',) of section 33, a'
11t .
'i-o"n'-hip 7 North, flange 65 West of the Gth P. M. , Wcld
County, Colorado, more particularly described as follows:
1
4 -- r.• 1
"+l Ieginning at the So' thw, ?t Corner (SW C'or) of said Section
33, Tn•.enship 7 .`forth, Range 65 West of the Gth P. M.
‘: , . r and considering the West line of .said Section 33, as bearing i
North 000 3]' 00" East and with all other bearings con-
,4f
tamed herein relative thereto:
i .
• - Thence North 00° 35' 00" East, 2, 489.00 feet along the .
West 'me of said Section 33; Thence North 890 30' 00"
r East 1, 384. 00 feet; Thence South on° 35' 00" West
a=-...- -.+•. '� 2, >t7. to feet 4. a point on the South line of said Section 33; _ .-.
r21 Thence North 88° 05' 00" West, 1, 384, 00 feet along the .
f1
South line of Section 33 to the point of beginning, said
- r •' 'j.( described parcels containing 79. 995 acres, more or less,
.
is hereby granted under the conditions following:
6
} 1, That any water and sanitation facilities to he installed shall be
approved by the State Health Department. •
_ ._-_ .___
..X 2. All applicable subdivision regulations and zoning regulations
1 shall be followed and complied with in accordance with the zoning resolutions
of Weld County, Colorado.
1
r4
it 1� �v-�iri cr . + ' Yl ry '� r;h t t> 'il ,`y L. � 'a tor tkc i .5..),> .
-r,+ „ r J 1 ♦X Sr r.,nK444291.7 take 4 rT"� r >• ':. 9 s
`j,i "f. 1F r lg f: J ' • x Z T.-4,A,P3,-4, �"7y It "+ r .... .''•;t1 •• t =
i�%�,t '-vi Tx s >i s) 1' '�'c r"" l. fNt"�S�..'44+al'�i.sg s a..
)t.4 iK l i • ,.N t�i f.td —.44,,-,..s s w.. } .e:r t ' t • .e t•Ls Y F. • 4'
'r ''fix 3 r 1 r,- Jt• it C > Is s . 4,-, 5,7.7.„,-. � y- ' < • fr, iw"1 �♦a a . . j
4 dk ,,,,•:•.-•:-...--•...,:•,-.,-..,•.,..• ! `f tl(l J vy ee .iµ y' d _.+-,+ lY- ,t }w }
';',41.
M {{44 iiJ y .> l (.l1....t‘.•-\--;-?., 7 .k. •r1 G va{r -,n.�t^SMA 77. -t -,) /-jni i/f ,•... x
„„„0„,..„4,.„,c7-4,7,-.4.'544,20• +•Cie ty n sj�a • r :. •ai is .
3 x ,:....,...,:i., .„
+. r i.'''''f, s s;l ,t'n A ) Y "•, a, . Y' i Y3v t +.,_;a ], . l O
eiste. • . > •.' " .:.. -1 ti' rte% of s ir t s rt T„_ a a. e�xws'. 'in"•.w: 1t Ri! _
e _ p 5706847
*) , . /'�,i
785 �•'� 1, ?--2 _
3
cr.
3. That all official unit .'<=vr_lopment plans and standards shall be
followc_d and compile.] with in accr rdance with the official unit development i. y
't o
plan as submitted. {�'. h-
d
' day .,f December, A.D. , 1912. -
Dated this �_
• BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS � ,, s.'
k WELD COUNTY, COLORADO 5 ` o
? t
r
4 et
Y N
r r i /—,
lt r 1,--,
sYT AI ILSI Ss
.
y i
..ty,•`. %}
l , ClErk of the 13oarc. _
} Deputy County Clerk1•
�r'kSil 5r r . , "-- �6it.,2 y
..x1 _ • '
w 4koc,;i, l,3 ' O��FORM:__ _,
4rF e
w
l
is
rte.+ ,
4_
x7
a . , • • `.
0
_• s
L:v< -
ri t 6
Weld County Referral
111kDecember 8, 2003
COLORADO
The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review:
l
Applicant Clifford Clift, Appaloosa Case Number PZ-1020
Acres Estates PUD
Please Reply By January 8, 2004 Planner Kim Ogle
Project Change of Zone from Agricultural to PUD; Estate for a 22 lot residential
development outside of an IGA and UGB; east of the Town of Eaton.
Legal Lot 15C; Fourth Replat of Gilbaughs Appaloosa Acres; being in the W2 SW4 of
Section 33, T7N, R65W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
Location North of and adjacent to CR 74; east of CR 41. -
Parcel Number 0709 33 001026
The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you
consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may
give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be
deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions
regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new
information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to
examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services.
Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) February 3, 2004
•
❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan
❑ We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests.
❑ See attached letter.
Comrygnt /&df_tX- >Zlvn2. .-o
Signature CaLLA- >�o,�q_ Date --24/6 V
Agency ///!J4�_D lJ c.'2dt
+Weld County Planning Dept. +1555 N. 17th Ave.Greeley,CO.80631 +(970)353-6100 ext.3540 +(970)304-64 a EXHIBIT
APPALOOSA ACREA ESTATES PUD Developer: Clifford Cliff
Case #PZ-1020 (Change of zone from Ag to PUD) Planner: Kim Ogle
PT W2SW4 33-7-65
ZONED PUD/ESTATE
IS NOT IN FLOOD PLAIN (0489C)
IS NOT IN STORM WATER PROJECT AREA
RIF AREA #2
NORTH WELD COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
ENGINEERED INDIVIDUAL SEPTIC SYSTEMS
NATURAL GAS - ATMOS ENERGY
XCEL ENERGY
QWEST COMMUNICATIONS
EATON RE-2 SCHOOL DISTRICT
EATON FPD
EATON PO
STANDARD ESTATE ZONE BULK REQUIREMENTS
22 RESIDENTIAL LOTS W/ 32 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE
PRELIMINARY ADDRESSING:
BLOCK 1
BUS STOP 20181 Leola Way
Lot 6 20185 Leola Way
Lot 7 20187 Leola Way
Lot 8 20189 Leola Way
Lot 9 20191 Leola Way
Lot 10 20193 Leola Way
BLOCK 2
Lot 11 20195 Leola Way
Lot 12 20197 Leola Way
Lot 13 20199 Leola Way
Lot 14 20201 Leola Way
Lot 15 20203 Leola Way
Lot 16 20205 Leola Way
Lot 17 20207 Leola Way
•
BLOCK 2
(cont.)
Lot 18 20204 Leola Way
Lot 19 20202 Leola Way
Lot 20 20198 Leola Way
Lot 21 20196 Leola Way
Lot 22 20194 Leola Way
BLOCK 3
Lot 1 20192 Leola Way
Lot 2 20190 Leola Way
Lot 3 20188 Leola Way
Lot 4 20186 Leola Way
Lot 5 20184 Leola Way
Detention / 20182 Leola Way
Monument
Lin Dodge
WC Building Tech
2/3/04
Hello