The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20002358.tiff BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Moved by Bryant Gimlin that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning Commission. Be it resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the application for: CASE NUMBER: Town of Mead IGA • • APPLICANT: Town of Mead PLANNER: Anne Best Johnson • REQUEST: An Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld County. be recommended favorably to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons: It is the Planning Commission's recommendation that the above mentioned Intergovernmental Agreement meets the intent of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan as follows: 1. Comprehensive Plan UGB.Goal 1 states that Weld County will encourage and assist each municipality in establishing an intergovernmental urban growth boundary agreement. The following UGB.Policy 1 states, Weld County recognizes that municipalities can and should plan their own futures in terms of the nature and rate of growth. The Town of Mead has worked with Weld County in establishing this proposed Intergovernmental Agreement. Through this agreement, the Town of Mead has indicated their interest in planning for responsible growth. The Town of Mead is assisting the Department of Planning Services in conducting land-use research in the proposed Urban Growth Boundary Area. A direct outcome of a commitment to conserve natural and managed resources while directing growth and enhancing economic development through efficient use of infrastructure. (Comprehensive Plan, page 3-1). 2. Comprehensive Plan UGB.Goal 2 and UGB.Policy 2 indicate that Urban development shall be concentrated in or adjacent to urban growth boundary areas that provide an official designation between future urban and non-urban uses. These boundaries shall be established through an intergovernmental agreement between the municipality and the County. The Town of Mead has delineated their Urban Growth Boundary on the attached map. Through this Intergovernmental Agreement, the Town of Mead has specified the future growth of their community. Further, it is noted that Weld County recognizes that it is appropriate for its municipalities to plan for growth at their current boundaries and in the surrounding areas. (Comprehensive Plan, page 3-1). 3. Comprehensive Plan UGB.Goal 3 states that the County and municipalities should coordinate land use planning in urban growth boundary areas, including development policies and standards, zoning, street and highway construction, open space, public infrastructure and other matters affecting orderly development. Through this Intergovernmental Agreement with the Town of Mead, these principles will be met. The county recognizes that an intergovernmental urban growth boundary agreement is by far the best tool for coordinating development for municipal/county interface. (Page 3-1, Comprehensive Plan.) It is further noted that the County Commissioners imparted the following criteria to guide the municipalities in developing their urban growth boundaries. These guidelines are the impetus for many communities it establishing an Intergovernmental Agreement with Weld County: 2000-2358 RESOLUTION, Mead IGA Mead I.G.A. Page 2 1. Growth should pay for itself in terms of initial costs, and in the long range, .hrough good design and functional efficiency. 2. Annexation patterns should directly correlate with municipal service areas. 3. Infill of communities is a far more efficient use of land than urban sprawl. As outlined on pages 3-1 and 3-2 of the Comprehensive Plan, the county recognizes that when growth at the municipal/county level is not coordinated, problems arise. Additionally, when a municipality and the County enter into an Urban Growth Boundary agreement, the County agrees to abide by the municipality's vision for future development in the area. Likewise, the municipality agrees to limit its expansion to the defined areas where it plans to provide municipal services. It is understood that urban growth is an ongoing process and Urban Growth Boundary agreements will be subject to revision as needed. 4. The county recognizes that through intergovernmental agreements the municipality agrees to limit its expansion to the defined areas where it plans to provide municipal services, therefore, participating in responsible growth. It is this belief that Weld County and the Town of Mead desire to enter into this Intergovernmental Agreement. The purpose of this Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld County is to establish procedures and standards pursuant to which the parties will move toward greater coordination in the exercise of their land use and related regulatory powers within unincorporated areas surrounding each municipality. The community of Mead exercises governmental authority over the same matter within its boundaries; including annexations. The premise for this Intergovernmental Agreement is similar to the agreement for the seven previous agreements this board has approved. Customized modifications include the following: 1. Section 3.3 (a) The last sentence was modified to include, "The County will not consider such proposal for Development unless the applicant or its predecessor has submitted a complete annexation petition and been denied said annexation by the municipality Board or electorate for a substantially similar development on the same property within the preceding 12 months." This was added to strengthen the coordination in planning between the community's future growth and the development process in the county. 2. Section 3.5 (iii)was removed. This subsection was eliminated because it was redurdant to previous subsections and often provided confusion in Section 3.5. "That the MUNICIPALITY's anticipated zoning classification of the property is unreasonable because of existing or planned uses of adjacent property." It is the opinion of the Planning Commission and at the direction of the County Attorney that this Intergovernmental Agreement be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with favorable recommendation. This recommendation is based, in part, upon a review of the application materials submitted by the applicant, other relevant. information regarding the request, and responses from referral entities. Motion seconded by Stephen Mokray. RESOLUTION, Mead IGA Mead I.G.A. Page 3 VOTE: For Passage Against Passage Fred Walker Cristie Nicklas Arlan Marrs Bryant Gimlin John Folsom Jack Epple Stephen Mokray The Chair declared the resolution passed and ordered that a certified copy be forwarded with the file of this case to the Board of County Commissioner's for further proceedings. CERTIFICATION OF COPY I, Trisha Swanson, Recording Secretary for 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 March 21, 2000. Dated the 21st of March, 2000. Trisha Swanson Secretary SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION March 21, 2000 Page 7 Fred Walker commented that it is getting better, but not all has been done for the people involved. CASE NUMBER: Town of Mead IGA APPLICANT: Town of Mead PLANNER: Anne Best Johnson REQUEST: An Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld County. Anne Best Johnson, Long Range Planner, presented the Town of Mead IGA Anne noted that the changes to all three IGA's presented today were being asked for by the Town of Mead. Bruce Barker noted the following two changes: the removal of Section 3.5(iii)as it was redundant to previous subsections and a time limit of 12 months for submitting a substantially similar request to the county after an annexation has been denied by the town. Mike McDonough with the town of Mead presented information concerning the IGA process from the beginning. The town of Mead has been working on this general idea for several years. 300 survey's were handed out to all the property owners within the growth area,with 72 surveys being returned. Changes were made to the Urban Growth Boundary at the request of specific property owners, some of which wanted to be included in the area. Arlan Marrs commented that he wished Mead had been the first IGA to be presented, that they have done a great job and would have presented an excellent precedence for other towns. Fred Walker asked about the time line for the town to hear an application, that the town should schedule these applications as soon as possible. The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak foi or against this application No one wished to speak. Bryant Gimlin moved that the Intergovernmental Growth Agreement for Mead be forwarded to the Boa-d of County Commissioners along with the Planning Commissions recommendation of approval. Stephen!Mokray seconded the motion. The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Flanning Commission for their decision. John Folsom, yes; Arlan Marrs, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Cristie Nicidas, yes; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously. Arian Marrs commented that language for the city to move within a time line as well as the county should be added. Bryant Gimlin commented that he commended the town of Mead for contacting and working with the property owners as well as putting thought into their Urban Growth Boundary line. Fred Walker commented that Hell doeth froze over with his vote of yes on this IGA. CASE NUMBER: Milliken IGA APPLICANT: Town of Milliken PLANNER: Anne Best Johnson REQUEST: An Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Milliken and Weld County. The Planning Commission commented that they would prefer to have a representative from the town present to answer some questions about the IGA process. The members of the Planning Commission felt this is a more appropriate and detailed picture for the individual IGA. Cristie Nickles moved that the Intergovernmental Growth Agreement for Milliken be continued until April 4, 2000. Stephen Mokray seconded the motion. INVENTORY OF ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION Applicant Town of Mead and Weld County Case Number Ordinance Submitted or Prepared Prior to At Hearing Hearing 1 Staff Comments (2 pages) X 2 Press Release X 3 Coordinated Planning Agreement application (7 pages) X 4 Referral List X 5 Referral Letter X 6 Letter to the Town of Mead X 7 Weld County Public Health and the Environment, referral X received, 2/29/2000 8 City of Longmont, referral received 3/2/2000, FAX copy of X inventory listing #10 9 Mountain View Fire Protection District, referral received 3/2/2000, X FAX copy of inventory listing #19 10 City of Longmont, referral received 3/2/2000. This is the mailed X version of the faxed inventory item#8 above. 11 South West Soil Conservation District, referral received 3/1/2000 X 12 Supply Irrigation Ditch Company, referral received 2/28/2000 X 13 Town of Berthoud, referral received 2/29/2000 X 14 Planning Commission Field Check, received 2/26/2000 X 15 Map prepared by the Town of Mead X 16 Affidavit of Publication in the South Weld Sun X 17 Berthoud Fire Protection District, referral received 2/6/2000 X 18 Division of Wildlife, referral received 3/7/2000 X 19 Mountain View Fire Protection District, referral received 3/7/2000 X 20 Highland Ditch Company, referral received 3/7/2000 X 21 Berthoud Fire Protection District, referral received 2/6/2000 FAX X copy. 22 Department of Public Works, referral received 3/9/2000 X 1 Items submitted at planning commission I hereby certify that the 22 items identified herein were submitted to the Department of Planning Services at or prior to the scheduled Planning Commission hearing. I further certify that these items were fonwa-ded to the Clerk to the Board's office. 7 /2Y27-/2i 4-- Anne Best Johnson Long Range Planner —' STATE OF COLORADO ) COUNTY OF WELD ) s i ` p �� SUBSCRIBED and SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS ., day of / �CR, /'I _ S�2Y4�C/ SEAL 14/ d &kOTARY PUBLIC /�MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 5/9100/ (ragrit;i MEMORANDUM Wilk F OMeAnne County Planning Johnson, Long Range Planner TO: Wld ission DATE: February 28, 2000 COLORADO SUBJECT: Intergovernmental Agreement for Mead and Weld County Since 1995, Weld County has been working with communities in establishing Intergovernmental Agreements. For your consideration, the Mead and Weld County agreement has been prepared. It is the Department of Planning Services recommendation that the above mentioned Intergovernmental Agreement meets the intent of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan as follows 1. Comprehensive Plan UGB.Goal 1 states that Weld County will encourage and assist each municipality in establishing an intergovernmental urban growth boundary agreement. The following UGB.Policy 1 states, Weld County recognizes that municipalities can and should plan their own futures in terms of the nature and rate of growth. The Town of Mead has worked with Weld County in establishing this proposed Intergovernmental Agreement. Through this agreement, the Town of Mead has indicated their interest in planning for responsible growth. The Town of Mead is assisting the Department of Planning Services in conducting land-use research in the proposed Urban Growth Boundary Area. A direct outcome of a commitment to conserve natural and managed resources while directing growth and enhancing economic development through efficient use of infrastructure. (Comprehensive Plan, page 3-1 ;. 2. Comprehensive Plan UGB.Goal 2 and UGB.Policy 2 indicate that Urban development shall be concentrated in or adjacent to urban growth boundary areas that provide an official designation between future urban and non-urban uses. These boundaries shall be established through an intergovernmental agreement between the municipality and the County. The Town of Mead has delineated their Urban Growth Boundary on the attached map. Through this Intergovernmental Agreement, the Town of Mead has specified the future growth of their community. Further, it is noted that Weld County recognizes that it is appropriate for its municipalities to plan for growth at their current boundaries and in the surrounding areas. (Comprehensive Plan, page 3-1). 3. Comprehensive Plan UGB.Goal 3 states that the County and municipalities should coordinate land use planning in urban growth boundary areas, including development policies and standards, zoning, street and highway construction, open space, public infrastructure and other matters affecting orderly development. Through this Intergovernmental Agreement with the Town of Mead, these principles will be met. The county recognizes that an intergovernmental urban growth boundary agreement is by far the best tool for coordinating development for municipal/county interface. (Page 3-1, Comprehensive Plan.) It is further noted that the County Commissioners imparted the following criteria to guide the SERVICE,TEAMWORK,IMf&1RITY,QUALITY ' municipalities in developing their urban growth boundaries. These guidelines are the impetus for many communities in establishing an Intergovernmental Agreement with Weld County: 1. Growth should pay for itself in terms of initial costs, and in the long range, through good design and functional efficiency. 2. Annexation patterns should directly correlate with municipal service areas. 3. Infill of communities is a far more efficient use of land than urban sprawl. As outlined on pages 3-1 and 3-2 of the Comprehensive Plan, the county recognizes that when growth at the municipal/county level is not coordinated, problems arise. Additionally, when a municipality and the County enter into an Urban Growth Boundary agreement, the County agrees to abide by the municipality's vision for future development in the area. Likewise, the municipality agrees to limit its expansion to the defined areas where it plans to provide municipal services. It is understood that urban growth is an ongoing process and Urban Growth Boundary agreements will be subject to revision as needed. 4. The county recognizes that through intergovernmental agreements the municipality agrees to limit its expansion to the defined areas where it plans to provide municipal services, therefore, participating in responsible growth. It is this belief that Weld County and the Town of Mead desire to enter into this Intergovernmental Agreement. The purpose of this Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld County is to establish procedures and standards pursuant to which the parties will move toward greater coordination in the exercise of their land use and related regulatory powers within unincorporated areas surrounding each municipality. The community of Mead exercises governmental authority over the same matter within its boundaries; including annexations. The premise for this Intergovernmental Agreement is similar to the agreement for the seven previous agreements this board has approved. Customized modifications include the following 1. Section 3.3 (a) The last sentence was modified to include, "The County will not consider such proposal for Development unless the applicant or its predecessor has submitted a complete annexation petition and been denied said annexation by the municipality Board or electorate for a substantially similar development on the same property within the preceding 12 months." This was added to strengthen the coordination in planning between the community's future growth and the development process in the county. 2. Section 3.5 (iii) was removed. This subsection was eliminated because it was redundant to previous subsections and often provided confusion in Section 3.5 "That the MUNICIPALITY s anticipated zoning classification of the property is unreasonable because of existing or planned uses of adjacent property." It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff and at the direction of the County Attorney that this Intergovernmental Agreement be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with favorable recommendation. This recommendation is based, in part, upon a review of the application materials submitted by the applicant, other relevant information regarding the request, and responses from referral entities. SERVICE.TEAMWORK,INTEGRITY,QUALITY 1-14-00 COORDINATED PLANNING AGREEMENT This Coordinated Planning Agreement is made and entered into effective as of the 31' day of, January , 2000, A. D. between the County of Weld, State of Colorado, whose address s 915 10th Street, P. 0. Box 758, Greeley, CO 80632, hereinafter called the "COUNTY," and the TOWN OF MEAD, a Colorado Municipal corporation, whose address is 441 3rd Street, P.O. Box 626, Mead, CO 80542, hereinafter called the "MUNICIPALITY." RECITALS A. The COUNTY exercises governmental authority regulating land use, growth and development in its unincorporated areas, which areas include lands surrounding the MUNICIPALITY; and B. The MUNICIPALITY exercises governmental authority over the same matters within its municipal boundaries, and annexations, and is able to provide municipal services and facilities for efficient and desirable urban development; and C. In Title 29,Article 20,Colorado Revised Statutes,the General Assembly of the State of Colorado has granted broad authority to local governments to plan for and regulate the development and use of land within their respective jurisdictions; and D. In said Title 29, Article 20, Colorado Revised Statutes, the General Assembly has further authorized and encouraged local governments to cooperate and contract with each other for the purpose of planning and regulating the development of land by the joint and coordinated exercise of planning, zoning, subdivisions, building, and related regulatory powers; and E. Existing and anticipated pressures for growth and development in areas surrounding the MUNICIPALITY indicate that the joint and coordinated exercise by the COUNTY and the MUNICIPALITY of their respective planning, zoning, subdivision, building and related regulatory powers in such areas will best promote the objectives stated in this agreement. NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual promises and undertakings herein set forth, the parties agree as follows: 1 . PURPOSES AND OBJECTIVES. The purpose of this Agreemen': is to establish procedures and standards pursuant to which the parties will move toward greater coordination in the exercise of their land use and related regulatory powers within unincorporated areas surrounding the MUNICIPALITY. The objectives of such efforts are to accomplish the type of development in such areas which best protects the health, safety, prosperity, and general welfare of the inhabitants thereof by reducing the waste of physical, financial, and human resources which result from either excessive congestion or excessive scattering of population, and to achieve maximum efficiency and economy in the process of development. However, any action taken pursuant to this Agreement that pertains to any land within the municipality, for incorporated areas, and within the County, for unincorporated areas, is subject to final approval by the governing body of the municipality or county, respectively. EXPOSIT 1 2. DEFINITIONS. For the purposes of this Agreement the following terms shall be def ned as set forth herein: 2.1 Development. Any land use requiring regulatory approval by the elected governing body of the applicable party in the Urban Growth Area except for an amendment to a plat or a down-zoning, neither of which creates any additional lots and except for a Recorded Exemption or Subdivision Exemption. Existing agricultural uses,which are lawful uses, either as uses by right under the Weld County Zoning Ordinance, as amended, or as legally existing non-conforming uses, are also exempt from the definition of"Development". 2.2 Non-Urban Development. Land uses which typically do not require services such as central water and sewer systems, road networks, park and recreation services, storm drainage, and the like, and which are generally considered to be rural in nature, expressly including land used or capable of being used for agricultural production and including developments which combine clustered residential uses and agricultural uses in a manner that the agricultural lands are suitable for farming and ranching operations;for the next forty years. 2.3 MUNICIPAL Referral Area. The area located outside of but within three miles of the MUNICIPALITY's municipal boundaries. 2.4 Urban Development. Development which is characterized by development density typical to urbanized areas and requires support services such as central water and sewer systems, road networks, park and recreation facilities and programs, storm drainage, and other similar services which are typically furnished by MUNICIPALITY. 2.5 The Urban Growth Area is hereby established and shall consist of all lands so designated on the map attached hereto and referred to herein as "Exhibit A," EXCEPTING those lands located within the MUNICIPALITY's municipal boundaries. 3. PLANNING COORDINATION. This Agreement is intended to be a Comprehensive Development Plan adopted and implemented pursuant to C. R.S § 29-20-105(2). Following the execution of this Agreement by both parties, COUNTY Development approvals in the MUNICIPALITY's Referral area will be processed and determined in accordance with the following: 3.1 Referral. The COUNTY will refer all proposals for Development within the MUNICIPAL Referral Area to the MUNICIPALITY for its review and recommendation. Such referral will include at least a copy of the written Development proposal and preliminary COUNTY staff summary of the case. The COUNTY will allow not less than twenty-cne (21) 1) days for the MUNICIPALITY to review same and furnish its recommendations to COUNTY staff prior to formulation of the COUNTY staff recommendation. If the MUNICIPALITY does not respond within such time, COUNTY staff may proceed with its recommendation, but any MUNICIPALITY comment or recommendation received on or before the Thursday next preceding the meeting of the Board of County Commissicners or Planning Commission at which the matter will be considered will be transmitted to the Board or Commission. If the MUNICIPALITY submits no comment or recommencaton the COUNTY may assume it has no objection to the proposal If the MUNICIPALITY submits recommendations, the COUNTY will either include within its written decision the reasons for any action taken contrary to the same or furnish such reasons to the MUNICIPAL ITV by a separate writing. 2 3.2 Development Outside Urban Growth Area. To the extent legally possible the COUNTY will disapprove proposals for Urban Development in areas of the MUNICIPAL Referral Area outside the Urban Growth Area. In reviewing proposals for Non-Urban Development in such areas, the COUNTY will apply its Comprehensive Ran and zoning and subdivision ordinances, and, where appropriate, the MUD Plan. 3.3 Development in Urban Growth Area. The following shall apply to proposed Development in the Urban Growth Area: (a) Upon receipt of any proposal for Development of property then currently eligible for voluntary annexation to the MUNICIPALITY, the COUNTY will, in writing, notify the proponent of the opportunity for annexation and notify the MUNICIPALITY of the proposal. The COUNTY will not consider such proposal for Development unless the applicant or its predecessor has submitted a complete annexation petition and been denied said annexation by the MUNICIPALITY Board or electorate for a substantially similar development on the same property within the preceding 12 months. (b) The MUNICIPALITY will require extension of sanitary sewer service to property in the Urban Growth Area, subject to its rules and regulations, which include provisions requiring a written contract for extraterritorial service aid the construction of new mains and other facilities necessary to serve the property with costs assessed in accordance with the MUNICIPALITY'S rules and regulations. MUNICIPALITY agrees to give notice of any proposed change in said rules and regulations to COUNTY 21 days prior to adoption. (c) If The MUNICIPALITY provides municipal water service to properly within its boundaries, subject to its rules and regulations, it will provide water under provisions similar to those indicated above for sewer service.Where water furnished by the MUNICIPALITY is received in whole or in part from an outside water provider such as a water district under a Water Service Agreement dated January 1. 1985, the MUNICIPALITY shall exercise its obligations under this agreement consistent with the terms of the Water Service Agreement. The MUNICIPALITY will negotiate in good faith with the water provider to explore ways in which the extension of water service outside MUNICIPALITY boundaries can be coordinated so as to achieve the purposes stated in Section 1 above while still recognizing the rights and obligations of the water provider and its constituents. (d) In recognition of the availability of public water and sewer service within the Urban Growth Area as indicated in paragraphs (b) and (c) above, the COUNTY will require public water and sewer service as a condition of approval of any subdivision, rezoning or planned unit development and will not approve such Development until the applicant obtains a written contract for same w th the MUNICIPALITY, or water service from Little Thompson Water District if the MUNICIPALITY cannot provide water. This Agreement shall be prima facie evidence of the availability of municipal water and sewer service within the meaning of§ 32-1-203(2.5)(a), C.R.S. (e) The COUNTY will not grant any waiver of current Municipal street standards for any Development without the consent of the MUNICIPALITY (f) To the extent legally possible, as determined by the COUNTY, the COUNTY will deny proposals for Non-Urban Development in the Llrban Growth 3 Area. Nothing in this subsection shall restrict the COUNTY from approv ng. by means of a process such as recorded exemption or subdivision exemption, the isolated partition or division of ownership parcels located in the Urban Growth Area having existing residential improvements served by septic systems, regardless of the size of resulting lots. Nevertheless, the COUNTY will not permit such a concentration of such divisions in any particular area as will frustrate or materially hinder the evolution of genuine Urban Development, as defined in § 2.4 of this Agreement, in the Urban Growth Area. Furthermore, the County shall not be restricted from allowing the expansion of legally existing non-urban uses provided adequate protection for future urban uses is included in any such approval (g) If any MUNICIPALITY recommendation of disapproval of a Development proposal is based upon a conflict or incompatibility between proposed uses in the Development and anticipated MUNICIPALITY zoning classification for the property,the COUNTY will not approve same unless the applicant demonstrates (1) that no such conflict or incompatibility will reasonably occur, (ii) that suitable mitigation measures to be imposed by the COUNTY as conditions of approval will eliminate or adequately mitigate adverse consequences of incompatibility or conflict, or (iii) that the MUNICIPALITY'S anticipated zoning classification of the property is unreasonable because of existing or planned uses of adjacent property. The MUNICIPALITY shall be given notice of, and may appear and be heard at any hearing or other proceeding at which the COUNTY will consider such issues. (h) The parties anticipate that ¶ 3.3 (e)-(g) will be addressed in more detail if a Mutually Acceptable Plan is considered and adopted for the UGA or the referral Area. 3.4 Mutuality of Impact Consideration. The parties recognize that decisions by one party regarding development may impact property outside of each particAar jurisdiction. The parties agree that those jurisdictional boundaries will not be the basis for giving any greater or lesser weight to those impacts during the course of deliberat ons. 3.5 Referrals to County. The MUNICIPALITY will refer proposals for Development which lie within 500 feet of any property in unincorporated Weld County to the COUNTY for its review and recommendation. Such referral will include at least a copy of the written Development proposal. The MUNICIPALITY will allow not less than twenty-one (21) days for the COUNTY to review same and furnish its recommendations to MUNICIPALITY. If the COUNTY submits no comment or recommendation the MUNICIPALITY may assume it has no *objection to the proposal. If the COUNTY subrmts recommendations, the MUNICIPALITY will either include within its written decis on the reasons for any action taken contrary to the same or furnish such reasons to the COUNTY by a separate writing. Where the DEVELOPMENT is proposed as part of an annexation of more than 10 acres, the provisions of this section shall be deemed satisfied by corn oliance by the MUNICIPALITY with the Notice and impact statement provisions of the most current version of the Municipal Annexation Act then in effect. If any COUNTY recommendation of disapproval of a Development proposal within 500 feet of any property in unincorporated Weld County is based upon a conflict or incompatibility between proposed uses in the Development and existing or anticipated zoning classification for the property, to the extent legally possible the MUNICIPALITY will not approve same unless the applicant demonstrates (1) that no such conflict or incompatibility will reasonably occur, or (ii) that suitable mitigation measures to be imposed by the MUNICIPALITY as condit ons of approval will eliminate or adequately mitigate adverse consequences of ircompatibility or conflict. The COUNTY shall be given notice of, and may aopear and be heard at any 4 hearing or other proceeding at which the MUNICIPALITY will consider such issues. 4. ANNEXATION. 4.1 The MUNICIPALITY will give serious consideration to all petitions for annexation of lands within the Urban Growth Area and will consider, in any determination to annex such properties, without limitation, the following factors: (i) the extension of one or more municipal services to the area would place an unreasonable economic burden on the existing users of such services or upon the future residents or owners of properly it the area itself; (ii)the area is not reasonably contiguous in fact to the MUNICIPALITY's existing boundaries, and its annexation would result in disconnected municipal satellites. 4.2 The MUNICIPALITY will not annex properties located outside the Urban Growth Area unless such property is both eligible for annexation and is necessary to the MUNICIPALITY for municipal purposes such as utilities. 4.3 To the extent legally possible the MUNICIPALITY will annex the full width of each COUNTY road right of way contiguous to newly annexed property unless such road serves primarily COUNTY properties rather than existing or newly annexed Municipal properties, in which case the MUNICIPALITY will annex none of such COUNTY road right of way. 4.4 Notwithstanding any provision hereof to the contrary, the MUNICIPALITY is not obligated to annex any property within a Development approved by the County after the execution of this Agreement by both parties which does not conform to the County Urban Growth Standards, unless a waiver or modification of such standards was grantee by the COUNTY and approved by the MUNICIPALITY. 4.5 Nothing in this Section 4 shall be construed to limit the MUNICIPALITY from annexing any land within the Urban Growth Area, regardless whether such annexations are involuntary or result in disconnected municipal satellites. 4.6 In determining off-site improvements to be constructed by proponents of in MUNICIPALITY Development, the MUNICIPALITY will consider identifiable impacts on the COUNTY road system resulting from such Development on the same basis as in MUNICIPALITY impacts. 5. IMPLEMENTATION OF AGREEMENT. Following the mutual execution of this Agreement each party will promptly enact and implement such amendments to its existing regulations as may be necessary to give effect to the provisions of Sections 3, and 4. Each party shall have sole and exclusive discretion to determine such measures and any new ones enabling it to perform this Agreement. Each party's land use regulations as referred to herein are ordinances whose amendment requires certain formalities, including notice and public hearings. The mutual covenants in this section and elsewhere to implement this Agreement promptly are given and received with mutual recognition and understanding of the legislative processes involved, and such covenants will be liberally construed in light thereof. 6. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 6.1 Severability. Should any one or more sections or paragraphs of this Agreement be judicially determined invalid or unenforceable, suchjudgmen:shall nor affect, impair or invalidate the remaining provisions of this Agreement, the intenticn being shat the various sections and paragraphs are severable; provided, however, that the 5 parties shall then review the remaining provisions to determine if the Agreement should continue, as modified, or if the Agreement should be terminated. 6.2 Enforcement. Either party may seek specific performance or enforcement of this Agreement in a Court of competent jurisdiction, but neither party shall have any claim or remedy for damages arising from an alleged breach hereof against the other, not shall this agreement confer on either part standing to contest a land use decision or actor of the other except as a breach of this agreement. This agreement is not intended to rriocify the standing the parties may possess independent of this agreement. This Agreement is between the MUNICIPALITY and the COUNTY and no third party rights or beneficiaries exist or are created hereby. 6.3 Termination.This Agreement will continue in effect until June 30, 2002.The parties shall review the Agreement in June, 2002, and in June of each succeeding year to determine if the Agreement should continue in effect for the period of a year thereafter. The parties may terminate this Agreement at any time if a mutually acceptable Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the MUNICIPALITY referral area or growth area is developed and implemented by both parties 6.4 Amendment. Upon the request of either party, this Agreement shall be subject to amendment according to the same procedures as the original adoption (requiring the written consent of the amendment by both parties); provided, however, that changes in the Urban Growth Area defined in § 2.5 herein may occur by resolution of the MUNICIPALITY concurred in by the COUNTY when the change is a deletion to the UGA or an addition of property which (a) was in common ownership and contained within a common legal description with property previously included in the UGA; or (b) directly adjacent to and contiguous with property previously contained within the UGA and capable of being served by MUNICIPAL services, including water or sewer, within a reasonable period of time. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have executed this Agreement effective as of the date first above written. COUNTY OF WELD, by and through the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF WELD By: Dale K. Hall, Chairman ATTEST: Weld County Clerk to the Board By: Barbara J. Kirkmeyer, Pro Tern By: — Deputy Clerk to the Board By: George E. Baxter By: — M. J. Geile By: _ - Glenn Vaad 6 REFERRAL LIST NAME: Town of Mead CASE NUMBER: Ordinance 216-Town of Mead IGA REFERRALS SENT: February 22, 2000 REFERRALS TO BE RECEIVED BY: March 3, 2000 COUNTY TOWNS and CITIES _X Attorney _Ault _X Health Department _X Berthoud __Extension Service Broomfield Emergency Management Office Dacono Sheriffs Office Eaton _X_F'ublic Works Erie __Housing Authority Evans __Airport Authority _X_Firestone __Building Inspection Fort Lupton __Code Enforcement _X_Frederick STATI= Garden City Division of Water Resources Gilcrest __Geological Survey Greeley __Department of Health Grover __Department of Transportation Hudson __Historical Society Johnstown __Water Conservation Board Keenesbw g Oil and Gas Conservation Commission Kersey Division of Wildlife: LaSalle _X West of 1-25 (Loveland) Lochbuie East of 1-25 (Greeley) _X_Longmont __Division of Minerals/Geology Mead FIRE DISTRICTS Milliken _Ault F-1 New Raymer _X Berthoud F-2 Northglenn __Briggsdale F-24 Nunn __Brighton F-3 Pierce Eaton F-4 Platteville Fort Lupton F-5 Severance Galeton F-6 Thornton Hudson F-7 Windsor Johnstown F-8 La Salle F-9 _X Mountain View F-10 COUNTIES Milliken F-11 Adams Nunn F-12 _X Boulder Pawnee F-22 Larimer Platteville F-13 Platte Valley F-14 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES Poudre Valley F-15 US Army Corps of Engineers Raymer F-2 USDA-APHIS Veterinary Service Southeast Weld F-16 Federal Aviation Administration Windsor/Severance F-17 Federal Communication Commission Wiggins F-18 Union Colony F-20 SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICTS _X Big Thompson OTHER Fort Collins _3X_School Districts RE-1J, RE-2J, RE-5J Greeley _3X_Ditch Companies: Mead Lateral, Highland, and Supply _X_Longmont X Great Western Railroad West Adams COMMISSION/BOARD MEMBER _X_John Folsom I Weld County Referral itiliti;0 February 22, 2000 • COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Town of Mead ease Reply By March 3, 2000 Case Number Ordinance 216 - Town of Mead IGA Please Planner Anne Best Johnson ProjectAn Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld County_ LegalSee attached map. LocationPlease see attached map of area approximately 17 square miles. Parcel Number Please see attached map ur..... ... • 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. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) March 21, 2000 ❑ 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. Comments: Signature Date Agency +Weld County Planning Dept. +1555 N. 17th Ave. Greeley, CO. 8063` +(970)353-6100 ext.3540 +(970)304-6498 fax -1..�- 7 • / 4 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES PHONE (970) 353-6100. EXT.3540 FAX (,970) 304-6498 1555 N. 17TH AVENUE GREELEY, COLORADO 30631 COLORADO February 22, 2000 Town of Mead PO Box 626 Mead, CO 80542 Subject: Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld County. Dear Town of Mead: Your application and related materials for the request described above are being processed. I have scheduled a meeting with the Weld County Planning Commission for March 21, 2000, at 1:30 p.m. This meeting will take place in Room 210, Weld County Planning Department, 1555 N. 17th Avenue, Greeley, Colorado It is recommended that you and/or a representative be in attendance to answer any questions the Planning Commission members may have. It is the policy of Weld County to refer an application to any town or municipality lying within three miles of the • property or if the property is located within the comprehensive planning area of a town or municipality Therefore, our office has forwarded a copy of the submitted materials to the Firestone Frederick, Longmont, and Berthoud Planning Commissions for their review and comments. Please call the town of Firestone at 303-833-3291, the town of Frederick at 303-833-2388, the city of Longmont at 303-651-8330, and the town of Berthoud at 970-532- 3754 for further details regarding the date, time, and place of these meetings. It is recommended that you and/or a representative be in attendance at the Firestone, Frederick, Longmont, and Berthoud Planning Commission meetings to answer any questions the Commission members may have with respect to your application. The Department of Planning Services' staff will make a recommendation concerning this application to the Weld County Planning Commission. This recommendation will be available twenty-four(24) hours before the scheduled hearing. It is the responsibility of the applicant to call the Department of Planning Services' office before the Planning Commission hearing to make arrangements to obtain the recommendation. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please call. Respectfully, v 6 / Anne Best Johnson EXHIBIT` / Long Range Planner 6 (iiitLTh Weld County Referral C February 22. 2❑0C • COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Town of Mead Case Number Ordinance 216 -Town of Mead IGA Please Reply By March 3, 2000 Planner -Anne Best Johnson ' Project An Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld Couny__ Legal See attached map. Location Please see attached map of area approximately 17 square miles. Parcel Number Please see attached map 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 -nay 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. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) March 21, 2000 ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan O.I/Ve have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests '❑ See attached letter. Comments: signature /) O�e/YY!-e �� ` ', Date /a fyi7'(" 0 Agency lit)(._ bill-(Z. + Veld County Planning Dept. •x1555 N. 17th Ave.Greeley, co 80631 c-(970)353-6100 ext.3540 4(970)304-6498 fax :. MAR. 2.2000 9:32AM NO 971. P.InrIr\.. 0 l a(itWeld County Referral !� February 22, 2000 COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Town of Mead Case Number Ordinance 216 Town of Mead IGA Please Reply By March 3, 2000 Planner Anne Best Johrson Project An Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld Courty. Legal See attached map, Location Please see attached map of area approximately 17 square miles. Parcel Number Please see attached ma • 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 qu,est,ons regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (If applicable) March 21, 2000 ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive elan We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our Interests. D See attached letter, Comments: Signature Date Z_(C2c2__ Agency C` �9c- ap-Vr-n3C °Weld County Planning Dept. e1555 N.17th Ave.Greelay,CO.80831 6(970)353.6100 ext,3540 4(970)3048498 fa> V e Mar-02 -00 01 : 28P Mountain View Fire Protec 303 651 7702 P . )1 (___TM it 6 itaiiiIIII Referral Weld County O , February 22, 2000 COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Town of Mead Case Number Ordinance 216 -Town of Mead IGA Please Reply By March 3, 2000 Planner Anne Best Johnson Project An Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld County. Lege/ See attached map. Location Please see attached map of area approximately 17 square miles. Parcel Number Please see attached map v .w. r 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. 'f you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request, Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable March 21, 2000 - O We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan i We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. O See attached letter. Comments: Signature (-----4, Cb_ Mi 1J A_Q,G\ Date 3 -a _ oc.b. ! - Agency •onN \ e.,, -+--: re a�. . ;c_ *Weld County Planning Dept. *1555 N. 17th Ave. Greeley. CO.80631 4(970)353-5100 ext.3540 •>(970) 304-5498 fax EXHUMT 1 9 f &ft.../? ‘, �a �a�t,rlty P''""'n c e� Weld County Referral O February 22, 20CC r COLORADO The T Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Town of Mead Case Number Ordinance 216 -Town of Mead IGA Please Reply By March 3, 2000 Planner Anne Best Johnson Project An Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld County__ Legal See attached map. Location Please see attached map of area approximately 17 square miles. • Parcel Number Please see attached maP......, ... .,. .,..,..,.F..,._ ,.,................_..,.uw.. „.....,...,_......... , ,r....,......... .._. The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendaton jou 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. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) March 21, 2000 ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan 21' We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests ❑ See attached letter. Comments: Signature Date f 3 - — ---- I Agency • +Weld County Planning Dept- +1555 N. 17th Ave. Greeley,CO. 80631 :•(970)353-6100 ext.3540 4(970)204-6498 fax EyHIBIT I ( D \:;t\N , 2. , ft 4,4 . doe °'A' cooWeld County Referral , O �, t4 February 22, 2000 • 9 C COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Town of Mead Case Number Ordinance 216 -Town of Mead IGA Please Reply By March 3, 2000 Planner Anne Best Johnson Project An Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld Count/. Legal See attached map. _ Location Please see attached map of area approximately 17 square miles. Parcel Number Please see attached map .� �,...,..a The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any ccmments 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 questiors regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) March 21, 2000 We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan O We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. ❑ See attached letter. Comments: 0/f L / bs QDes o offer 1O ca ft acct 44 .. f iha [/ A r �v.a.14,vir,71. ---- Signature i- Date 3/t/oO Agency 5vvsli :•Weld County Planning Dept. +1555 N. 17th Ave. Greeley, CO. 8063' +(970)353-6100 ext.3540 +(970)304-6498 fax I7rJ tit ‘ED ;field Country Planning Lea. MAR 02 2000 Weld County Referral o . JIVED February 22, 2000 • COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Town of Mead Case Number Ordinance 216 -Town of Mead IGA Please Reply By March 3, 2000 Planner Anne Best Johnson Project An Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld County. Legal See attached map. Location Please see attached map of area approximately 17 square miles. Parcel Number i"n"se see attached map 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 'urther questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) March 21, 2000 O )fve have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan a' We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests ❑ See attached letter. Comments: �( p(��'A Date Signature �y�t�`►l ev---- Agency S,,Qq 4-'1 14za( (tAT W/a 'D,rc t- Ca •Weld County Planning Dept. +1555 N. 17th Ave. Greeley,CO. 80631 +1970)353-6100 ext.3540 4(970) :04-6498 fa< EYMBIT I , rY ldc /� Mar-O6-OO O7 : 15A fi O? 414t ‘frf Weld County Referral O February 22, 2000 COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Town of Mead Case Number Ordinance 216 - Town of Mead IGA Please Reply By March 3, 2000 Planner Anne Best Johnson Project Legal An Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld County See attached map. Location Please see attached map of area approximately 17 square miles. Parcel Number Please see attached map 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 the' we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date many be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further cue5.inns regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) March 21, 2000 Q 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. U See attached letter. Comments: Signature J Date .3.3' - Q, Agency S .LMw20 ,4d 4 d 'e•_f OWeld County Planning Dept. +1555N 17th Ave. Greeley,CO. 50631 4(970)353.6100 ext.3540 •>(970)304-6498 fax ‘ity II' Planning Le;_ v to t(ti: 0 9 2000 Weld County Referral O February 22, 2000 • COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: • Applicant Town of Mead Case Number Ordinance 216 -Town oi Mead IGA Please Reply By March 3, 2000 Planner Anne Best Johnson Project An Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld County. Legal See attached map. Location Please see attached map of area approximately 17 square miles. Parcel Number Please see attached map The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommerdatior 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 ques*.ions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) March 21, 2000 O 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 interest::. r See attached letter. Comments: Signature 4.-6.,a Date J J' .alcse2_, Agency �3 E,A.eo 4 /<cl6 ./S4.L, u'-`- 4 d/ +Weld County Planning Dept. 4.1555 N. 17th Ave.Greeley, CO. 80631 -•(9701 353-6100 ext.3540 •'x(970):304-6498 fex EXHIBIT I1 (‘t, tm Pt annknLa�.ftet .40d 07 ?o® Weld County Referral Q Rt , February 22, 2000 • COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Town of Mead Case Number Ordinance 216 -Town of • Mead IGA • Please Reply By March 3, 2000 Planner Anne Best Johnson Project An Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld County_ Legal See attached map. Lo;ation Please see attached map of area approximately 17 square miles. Parcel Number Please see attached map . The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation ycu 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. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) March 21, 2000 ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan 6Z1 We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. v See attached letter. Comments: (1 r 1Date p Signature �J� � � -oZ U___ Agency ( n! e +: , e_ ��4;<� +Weld County Planning Dept. +1555 N. 17th Ave. Greeley, CO. 80631 +(970)353-6100 ext.3540 x(970)304-6498 fax EXHIBIT 1 19 (itit4,„ Weld County Referral d County Pi3nnlrig , or February 22. 2O00 • L E- ? '')'I COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: TApplicant Town of Mead Case Number Ordinance 216 -Town of[., Mead IGA Please Reply By March 3, 2000 Planner Anne Best Johnson Project An Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld County. Legal See attached map. _ Location Please see attached map of area approximately 17 square miles. Parcel Number Please see attached map 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. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) March 21, 2000 U We have reviewed the request and find that /does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan )4- We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. ❑ See attached letter. Commen as die , t0 Lv a d Cc w "v1, c i_5 (ci. rp loaf 6:.,_a/.4 / . TJkA^ .2.4,;14.4 /3172 . 11 -- — n g ��r t Date ,2/lt !, Signature �� - .. , —__ Agency . rrynn ,7 ii.:.L. u1-cal +weld County Planning Dept. •'x1555 N. 17th Ave.Greeley, CO. 80631 44(970)353-6100 ext.3540 :•(970)304-6498 fax EMIT I 1 l22 Mar 07 00 02: 14p Division of' Wildlife 303-776-6663 F 1 oft\M, lID Weld County Referral C. February 22, 2000 COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review' Applicant Town of Mead Case Number Ordinance 216-Town of Mead IGA • Please Reply By March 3, 2000 Planner Anne Best Johnson Project • An Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld Coumy Legal See attached map. Location Please see attached map of area approximately 17 square miles. Parcel Number Please see attached map • 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. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) March 21, 2000 X] 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. Comments: • m-4 • alter --- Signature n2 q �,./.e,✓ Date OG mom' ac7cerip—- Agency G Clnul C Eat°. })id. 44.24-44,<G) "Weld County Planning Dept. +1556N. 17th Ave. Greeley,co.806: post-Ite Fax Note 7671 Darteb7�yAy�eail:4 ' TewGZa Ce. 122. From /4,'G iyiq �'e_ EXHIBIT Co/Dept. Cu. G7J G�Lt/� t� Phone M Phone s -— a v ' � — 0-4701.73v3- 77G -6 Fax x — SON-GY P Fax 30;Z- )76-61,6 ' i ili l‘t, \r'C 41414geld County Planning Weld County Referral u.r,F 07 z000 lilt p F:: p \i ! February 22, 2000 ' r , .: COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for revew: Applicant Town of Mead Reply By March 3, 2000 Case Number Ordinance 216 Town of Mead IGA Please Planner Anne Best Johrson Project An Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld Courty Legal See attached map. Location Please see attached map of area approximately 17 square miles. • Parcel Number Please see attached map 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. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) March 21, 2000 ❑ 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. Comments: .�.� /J �-�- . 1 ; c 0,4j) -Q /„ JLR/ nr-C2 Y'_==&-7t,_'L.'1_ ) : .E . 7 i,., -L,J-•.z_ ;Y1.,_t ug'E.Q._ /�v\ ,..-P WI. 'i✓J s>�i' lip n Da &,JC�%'f'' y�% A.✓J -`_ Lt-1-J"'_ I �,,.,,--, Q��.('� T-k' Vti. -{ Ctl`UA r.� o«1tn-•-car I� (`L.t,P�_ I ;signature \.'� obi-x '._ ,, C,I,.-�-i • kDate 4 104- L -- Agency f +Weld County Planning Dept. +1555 N. 17th Ave. Greeley,CO. 80631 +(971 10 ext.3540 •'x(970)304-6493 fax EXHIBIT I / lill if . , FEB 24 70(10 wil ,�,__,_ ;,,,,,,,�v Weld County Referral ii-ii WOflK5 DEPT -�_ ;Veld County Pl.lnning�eoruary 22. 2000 • mgr. 1 7`JUf, COLORADO RFCF V " n The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Town of Mead • Case Number Ordinance 216 - Town of Mead IGA Please Reply By March 3, 2000 Planner Anne Best Johnson Project An Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld County. • Legal See attached map. Location Please see attached map of area approximately 17 square miles. i Parcel Number Please see attached map W.,...,.......,.,, 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 ne deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any :urther questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) March 21, 2000 __ U 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. Comments: Signature �; 42 CG Date p`3 - Cr"\_ vY Agency I. List.. 6-,a42a`-a+ •}VVeld County Planning Dept. +1555 N. 17th Ave. Greeley,CO. 80631 +(970)353-6100 ext.3540 +(970)304-6498 fax lEXHIBIT C/�HIBI� I 22- FIELD CHECK FILING NUMBER: Ordinance 216 Town of Mead IGA DATE OF INSPECTION: ar/a" `. — APPLICANTS NAME: Town of Mead PLANNER: Anne Best Johnson REQUEST: An Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Mead and Weld County. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See attached map of the 6th P M., Weld County, Colorado. LOCATION: Please see attached map of area approximately 17 square miles. LAND USE: N --- - re- E ri i W ZONING: NA (Agricultural) EA(Agricultural) SA (Agricultural) WA (Agricultural) COMMENTS: ./J7.$9i° SEirir ,GCS it/° r /-4/2/c.97,c /y/</ .07e.0,2s P.C. Member SSC _ STAN j i i i i i Ill a a. . ASS Gen I 11 , .a ► Milli I i 1. r r ..r... iI P+ 'S I I • I Imo; se i II i SITS L _ '_ WM__ as i I L es o; ` _ ! ___ _ N ilI I Sr I I i 0w \ 0 M EAD URBAN GROUJTI-4 SOUNDRsi MAP Jassy 21h.3... PCTOW WiiDe (414(e , COLORADO MEMORANDUM TO: Towns of Kersey and Mead April 4, 2000 From: Anne Best Johnson, Long-Range Planner SUBJECT: IGA Board of County Commissioner Hearings Greetings. I hope this weather finds you all well. The following schedule illustrates the three-hearing process for the Board of County Commissioners to hear the Mead and Kersey IGAs. These hearings occur at 9 a.m. and will take place in the Commissioner's Hearing Room, First Floor, Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, in Greeley. It is important to have a representative from your community present at these hearings. First Reading: April 12, 2000 Second Reading: May 1, 2000 Final Reading: May 22, 2000 Effective: May 30, 2000 Please do not hesitate to contact me with further questions. Thanks. 2 ! !IS1T MEAD IGA MAP scale in miles 2 3 4R67W R66W WCR46 LEGEND HWY 56 WCR44 r•-",-....,,,c1 MUD BOUNDARY BE D I U/° 23 24 19 20 WCR42 MEAD UGB 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 GRAVEL ROADS WCR40 \ 31 32 33 4 35 36 31 32 � 6 5 4 ''.N. 2 1 6 5 STATE HIGHWAY WCR36 ME y 7 8 9 a\\10 1 12 7 8 ®_ FEDERAL HIGHWAY `Q WCR34 ‘ CITIES WITHIN 1 18 17 16 14 13 18 17 STUDY AREA WCR32 N. 19 20 21 22 VAV 24 , 20 WCR30 \\ 30 29 28 27 _„ 25 30 e 3 miles WCR28 , t'P I I Planning boundaries are located three miles from 1 32 33 34 32 a municipal boundary. N $`6 WCR1 TICK? WCR5 8 125 WWII WCll`13WCR15WCR 17 WI IC E f = EXMJsIIT rated 16A 0.b: PIM 17. 2000 �— WELD COUNTY ATTORNEY 'S OFFICE S PHONE: (970) 356-4000, EXT. 4391 PHONE (970) 352-0242 FAX (970) 352-0242 ct.Th 915 TENTH STREET P.O BOX 1948 JKEELEY, COLORADO 80632 April 28, 2000 • COLORADO Keith Goshia, Mayor Town of Mead 441 Third Street Mead, CO 80542-0626 FAX: (970) 535-0831 RE: Suggested Modification to Proposed Coordinated Planning Agreement Dear Mayor Goshia: On March 21, 2000, the Weld County Planning Commission considered Weld County Ordinance 215. which puts in ordinance form the proposed Coordinated Planning Agreement between the Town of Mad and the County of Weld. Chair Fred Walker inquired as to whether the neti language requiring the applicant to first petition for annexation could be modified so as to put a time limit on how long Mead may consider the annexation once a complete petition is received. It was my opinion then and now, that Fred's question is a good one. To that end, I asked Assistant Weld County Attorney Lee Morrison to draft language to create such a time restriction I have enclosed with this letter a copy of Lee's suggested language. It is an addition to Section 3.3(a) of the Agreement and is shown by grey highlight. I respectfully request that the Town consider the language and let me know if it is acceptable. The second reading of Ordinance 215 is set for Monday,May 1, 2000, but such change does not have to b_ made until the third reading, which is set for May 22, 2000. Please feel free to call me at(970) 356-4000, extension 4390, if you should have any questions regarding this letter or the enclosed. Sincerely, Bruce T. Barker Weld County Attorney Enclosures pc: Clerk to the Board Rick Sampson EXHIBIT Ot b zi 5 3.2 Development Outside Urban Growth Area. To the extent legally possible the COUNTY will disapprove proposals for Urban Development in areas of the MUNICIPAL Referral Area outside the Urban Growth Area. In reviewing proposals for Non-Urban Development in such areas, the COUNTY will apply its Comprehensive Plan and zoning and subdivision ordinances, and, where appropriate, the MUD Plan. 3.3 Development in Urban Growth Area. The following shall apply to proposed Development in the Urban Growth Area: (a) Upon receipt of any proposal for Development of property then currently eligible for voluntary annexation to the MUNICIPALITY, the COUNTY will, in writing, notify the proponent of the opportunity for annexation and notify the MUNICIPALITY of the proposal. The COUNTY will not consider such proposal for Development unless the applicant or its predecessor has submitted a complete annexation petition and been denied said annexation by the MUNICIPALITY Board or electorate for a substantially similar development on the same property within the preceding 12 months. The COUNTY may consider such a proposal!if,after a period of six months, the MUNICIPALITY has failed to act on a complete annexation petition filed and pursued in good faith by the applicant or its predecessor. (b) The MUNICIPALITY will require extension of sanitary sewer service to property in the Urban Growth Area, subject to its rules and regulations, whicn include provisions requiring a written contract for extraterritorial service and the construction of new mains and other facilities necessary to serve the property witn costs assessed in accordance with the MUNICIPALITY'S rules and regulations. MUNICIPALITY agrees to give notice of any proposed change in said rules and regulations to COUNTY 21 days prior to adoption. (c) If The MUNICIPALITY provides municipal water service to property within its boundaries, subject to its rules and regulations, it will provide water under provisions similar to those indicated above for sewer service. Where water furnished by the MUNICIPALITY is received in whole or in part from an outside water provider such as a water district under a Water Service Agreement dated . the MUNICIPALITY shall exercise its obligations under this agreement consistent with the terms of the Water Service Agreement, The MUNICIPALITY will negotiate in good faith with the water provider to explore ways in which the extension of water service outside MUNICIPALITY boundaries can be coordinated so as to achieve the purposes stated in Section 1 above while still recognizing the rights and obligations of the water provider and its constituen's. (d) In recognition of the availability of public water and sewer service within the Urban Growth Area as indicated in paragraphs (b) and (c) above, the COUNTY will require public water and sewer service as a condition of approval of any subdivision, rezoning or planned unit development and will not approve such Development until the applicant obtains a written contract for same with the MUNICIPALITY, or water service from _ , it the MUNICIPALITY cannot provide water. This Agreement shall be prima facie evidence of the availability of municipal water and sewer service within the meaning of§32-1-203(2.5)(a), C.R.S. (e) The COUNTY will not grant any waiver of current Municipal street standards for any Development without the consent of the MUNICIPALITY 3 05/04/2000 13:28 1-303-77C-5444 THE SAMSON LAW FIRM: PAGE 07 • THE SAMSON LAW FIRM A Professional Corporation • 515 Kimbark Street, Suite 105 P.O. Box 1079 Longmont,Colorado 80502 • Richard E.Samson Telephone P03-775-1169 Facsimile 1303-776-5444 May 4, 2000 BY FACSIMILE: (970)352-0242 '(sent 5/ /00 at : _ .m.by ) Bruce T.Barka Weld County Attorney 915 10th Street P.O. Box 1948. Greeley, CO 80632 • Re: The Town of Mead/'Weld County Coordinated Planning Agreement • • Dear Bruce: • I am in receipt of your letter dated April 28, 2000 to Mayor Goshia. In revierying the most extreme timeline for an annexation,I believe seven months would be the outside time period. A hearing is normally held on a Petition within 60 days after the date of the Resolution of Intent to Annex. The local requirement for an annexation election could be as long as 90 day depending if there is a regularly scheduled or general election. After the election, Mei Town Boargl must adopt an'ordinance annexing the property, and, depending on the date of theelection, ,that could be 30 days out. Finally, an ordinance is effective 30 days after the date of pubhcattor�. Adding up these days, a seven month time frame at the outside seems more appropriate than the sic i months proposed in the Agreement. i i Please let me know if you have any questions. Very truly yours, • •Qc_i2,--Oat Richard E. Samsoofi RES/jac cc: Town of Mead • • • Hello