Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20002453.tiff CAROL Harding - Longmont Weld IGA Page 1 From: Myrna Folsom <myrna_f_2000@yahoo.com> To: <charding@co.weld.co.us> Date: 9/22/00 6:19AM • Subject: Longmont-Weld IGA September 22, 2000 To: Board of Weld County Commissioners: Dear Commissioners: There is a situation developing in the MUD district of Weld County that might be of interest to the Board. Longmont city government is considering expanding its planning area into Weld County between WCR 1 and Boulder Creek and between State Highway 119 to one half section south of WCR 20 J. It is being called the Sandstone Neighborhood Planning Area [SNPA]. In association with Tuttle Applegate there have been meetings with landowners in this area to get a sense of their attitudes for future development. The land owners in that part of the SNPA south of, and isolated from Longmont by, St. Vrain Creek have almost unanimously voiced a desire for their land to remain in agriculture. However, despite any conflicts with Weld County/Es MUD plan, there is nothing to prevent the City to establish such a planning area, annex land [on being petitioned] and propose it/Es own zoning in it. City government has established a ()Council Direction-to pursue TDR program with Weld County(). This would be similar to the intergovernmental agreement [IGA] the City has in effect with Boulder County wherein transferred development right procedures and sending and receiving areas have been designated. These TDR areas lie outside but contiguous to Longmont/Es Planning Area. TDR certificates [banking] for sending areas can be originated from non urban PUDs where permitted densities have not been used, conservation easements and land purchased by the county or city for land preservation purposes. Of course, it is recognized that the situation is different for such an agreement to be reached with Weld County. Weld government has been less aggressive and funding been lacking for land acquisition for preservation purposes. Secondly, the MUD ordinance does not have provisions of land preservation zoning in the MUD district per se. As stated above, if Longmont city government does decide to establish the SNPA, inevitably the zoning densities and types would not coincide with those designated in the MUD district by Weld County. In the face of this potential situation, if Weld and Longmont governments were to negotiate an IGA there would be several benefits not limited to: [1] coordination of zoning in the SNPA or whatever area was included in the IGA, and [2]through purchases of TDRs in receiving areas funding would be available for land preservation in TDR sending areas. Landowners 0-6$— 2000-2453 CAROL Hardin - Longmont Weld IGA Page 2 throughout the IGA area would thus be benefited by making their land more valuable through greater permitted density or being recompensed for preservation of their land. As an example, land south of St. Vrain Creek,which might be designated a TDR sending area, could transfer its development rights to land around, say, the Union Reservoir where there has been interest in developing land. The third player in this situation that has to be addressed is Boulder County government. This relates to the restrictions it has put on the Left Hand Water District for providing water taps in the one mile obuffero between SHs 52 and 119 for one mile east of WCR 1 under HB1041 until Weld County institutes planning for the area acceptable to Boulder County government. It is probably premature at this time to more than consider and anticipate the possible ramifications of this situation and the options for a satisfactory resolution if it materializes that would serve the interests of the citizens of Weld County. If you wish a copy of the Boulder County-Longmont IGA, Boulder County/Es NUPUD and TDR/PUD programs or more information regarding the SNPA, please advise. John S. Folsom Hello