HomeMy WebLinkAbout20003321.tiff BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Moved by John Folsom 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: ORD-201A
APPLICANT: Towns of Erie, Firestone, Frederick; City of Dacono; Weld County
PLANNER: Anne Best Johnson
REQUEST: Amendments to Ordinance 201.
LOCATION: The Dacono, Frederick, Firestone Urban Growth Boundary.
be recommended favorably to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons:
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 communities of Firestone, Frederick and Dacono have been active participants, in the
establishment of Ordinance 201 and are requesting amendments to further enhance this agreement.
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 des gnation
between future urban and non-urban uses. These boundaries shall be established through an
intergovernmental agreement between the municipality and the County.
The three communities have agreed to the Design Standards contained within Ordinance 2')1. The
Urban Growth Boundaries for these communities were established through Ordinance 195 and
adopted on March 24, 1997. Ordinance 201 establishes design standards and amendment
procedures. Weld County recognizes that it is appropriate for its municipalities to plan for growth
at their current boundaries and in the surrounding areas. Ordinance 201 exempli`ies this
commitment of the County that local issues, such as design standards, are best left to local control.
(Comprehensive Plan, page 3-1i.
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.
The intent of Ordinance 201 meets this goal.
The purpose of the amendments to Ordinance 201 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
communities of Firestone, Frederick and Dacono exercise governmental authority over the same
matter within their boundaries; including annexations.
It is the opinion of the Planning Commission that these amendments to Ordinance 201 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.
2000-3321
Motion seconded by Stephen Mokray.
VOTE:
For Passage Against Passage
Cristie Nickles Fred Walker
John Folsom Arlan Marrs
Michael Miller Cathy Clamp
Bryant Gimlin
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 June 6, 2000.
Dated the 6'" of June, 2000.
Trisha Swanson
Secretary
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
June 20, 2000
Page 10
by the Department of Planning Services as a condition of the recorded exemption associated with this USR.
Bill Bird, the applicant, noted that he and his wife wanted their own business and feel there is a market for
trees here and that they could offer better prices. Mr. Bird also noted that the Planning Department has been
very helpful throughout the entire application process.
Bryant Gimlin asked about the animal husbandry mentioned in the application. Mr. Bird noted that tnis is in
case his daughter wants a horse in the future.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this applicaton No
one wished to speak.
John Folsom moved that Case USR-1273 be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with
the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of
approval. Cristie Nicklas seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decis or John
Folsom, yes; Arlan Marrs, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant Gimlin,
yes; Cathy Clamp, yes; Cristie Nickles, yes; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
-- CASE NUMBER: ORD-201A
APPLICANT: Towns of Erie, Firestone, Frederick; City of Dacono; Weld County
PLANNER: Anne Best Johnson
REQUEST: Amendments to Ordinance 201.
LOCATION: The Dacono, Frederick, Firestone Urban Growth Boundary.
Anne Best Johnson, Long Range Planner, presented the changes to Ordinance 201. Anne noted that the
amendments presented remove the town of Erie from the Ordinance and clarify some referral and response
procedures. Anne noted that the Department of Planning Services is recommending approval of this
application.
Arlan Marrs asked if there was a time limit on this Intergovernmental Agreement(I.G.A.). Lee noted .hat this
agreement would have been contingent upon a time set by a baseline but that the agreement did rot have
a time limit without a comprehensive plan. Arlan noted that he feels some of the boundaries set by these
towns can not be reasonably provided by those same towns. He noted that Dacono seems to have
overestimated where they can provide. Anne noted that Dacono has been annexing. Arlan noted that they
have not been annexing to the east where their growth boundary is. John Folsom noted that they nay not
have control over where the water is coming from with the independent districts, but that these towns may be
able to provide police and roads. Arlan noted that this line affects property rights in these areas and the town
may not be able to ever provide for the area. John noted that this contributes to urban sprawl and `lagpole
annexations.
Bryant Gimlin noted that the town of Mead did an excellent job showing how they could provide send;es and
reasons for their border.
Cathy Clamp asked why Erie is being taken out of this agreement and notes that Erie feels they were not a
voice in this agreement. Lee noted that the town of Erie asked to be removed from the agreement and that
Erie wants more changes to the I.G.A.'s.
Fred Walker noted that there is a double standard,that individual property owners are required to show that
they can provide service to their projects,yet the governmental entities do not have to show they can provide
those same services.
Monica Daniels-Mika noted that this ordinance correlates closely with Ordinance 195 and that Erie is in favor
of I.G.A.'s but has difficulty substantiating the standards in Ordinance 210 with the appeals body
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
June 20, 2000
Page 11
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application No
one wished to speak.
John Folsom moved that Ordinance 201A be forwarded to the Board 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 Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Arlan Marrs, no; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Jack Epple, yes; Bryant Gimlin,
yes; Cathy Clamp, no; Cristie Nicklas, yes; Fred Walker, no. Motion carried.
Arlan Marrs commented that he feels this would be an appropriate time to revise the entire document.
Cathy Clamp commented that she feels the same as Arlan Marrs.
Fred Walker commented that he finds the lines on the map inappropriate.
Meeting adjourned at 5:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Trisha Swanson
Secretary
INVENTORY OF ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION
Applicant Towns of Firestone and Frederick, Case Number Amended Ordinance
City of Dacono, and Weld County 201
Submitted or Prepared
Prior to At H ranng
Hearing
1 Staff Comments (2 pages) X
2 Affidavit of Publication in the South Weld Sun X
3 Press Release X
4 Application (6 pages) X
5 Referral List X
6 Referral Letter X
7 Letter to the Towns of Frederick, Firestone, Erie, City of Dacono X
(4 pages)
8 Weld County Department of Public Health and the Environment, X
received 5/16/00
9 Field Inspection from John Folsom, Planning Commission X
Member, dated 5/11/00
10 Map prepared by the Department of Planning Services X
11 Letter from the Town of Erie, received 6/15/00 X
12
13
1 Item submitted at planning commission
I hereby certify that the 11 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 forwarded to
the Clerk to the Board's office.
Anne Best Joh on
Long Range PI nner
MEMORANDUM
O
W �. TO: Weld County Planning Commission DATE: June 2, 2000
FROM: Anne Best Johnson, Long Range Planner
COLORADO SUBJECT: Amendment to Ordinance 201
Since 1995, Weld County has been working with communities in establishing Intergovernmental
Agreements. For your consideration,the communities of Firestone, Frederick and Dacono have requested
an amendment to Ordinance 201. It is the Department of Planning Services recommendation that the
proposed amendments meet 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 communities of Firestone, Frederick and Dacono have been active participants in the establishment of
Ordinance 201 and are requesting amendments to further enhance this agreement.
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 three communities have agreed to the Design Standards contained within Ordinance 201. The Urban
Growth Boundaries for these communities were established through Ordinance 195 and adopted on March
24, 1997. Ordinance 201 establishes design standards and amendment procedures. Weld County
recognizes that it is appropriate for its municipalities to plan for growth at their current boundaries al Id In the
surrounding areas. Ordinance 201 exemplifies this commitment of the County that local issues, such as
design standards, are best left to local control. (Comprehensive Plan, page 3-1).
3. Comprehensive Plan UGB.Goal3 states that the County and municipalities should coordinate and 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.
The intent of Ordinance 201 meets this goal.
The purpose of the amendments to Ordinance 201 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 communities of
Firestone, Frederick and Dacono exercise governmental authority over the same matter within their
boundaries; including annexations.
It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that these amendments to Ordinance 201 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,QUAI.IY
An,
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES
1555 N 17TH AVErUE
GREELEY, COLORADO 80831
C PHONE (970) 353-6100, EXT 3340
WI gO FAY (970)304-6498
WEBSITE: www.co.weld.cr us
COLORADO
July 26, 2000
Mayor Rick Patterson
Town of Firestone
150 Buchanan
PO Box 100
Firestone, Colorado 80520-0100
Dear Mayor Patterson:
The Weld County Planning Commission approved the proposed amendments to Ordinance 201
on June 20, 2000. This morning, the first reading of these amendments were heard by the Board
of County Commissioners. The second reading is scheduled for Monday, August 14. The third
reading is scheduled for Wednesday, September 6. All hearings are at 9 a.m. in the Board nearing
room, first floor, Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10' Street, Greeley.
Enclosed is a copy of the amended Ordinance. Please sign the copies and return to me prior the
third reading, September 6. I would be happy to save your community postage by accepting this
signed copy at the August 21 South Western Weld Mayor's Meeting.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions.
With Sincerity,
Anne Best Johnson
Long Range Planner
copy: B. Kirkmeyer, M. Daniels-Mika, Communities of Dacono, Firestone, Frederick, L. Morrison. E Gesick
a
O/e!d county PIL•nning C'p{
;QUO DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES
1555 N. 17TH AVEN JE
I GREELEY, COLORADO 80f31
r t' ti �. F. PHONE (970) 353-6100, EXT.3!40
a K e = s 111 FAX (970)304-6‘.98
WEBSITE: www.co.weld.cc us
COLORADO
July 26, 2000
Mayor Ed Tagliente
Town of Frederick
PO Box 435
Frederick, Colorado 80530
Dear Mayor Tagliente:
The Weld County Planning Commission approved the proposed amendments to Ordinance 201
on June 20, 2000. This morning, the first reading of these amendments were heard by the Board
of County Commissioners. The second reading is scheduled for Monday, August 14. The third
reading is scheduled for Wednesday, September 6. All hearings are at 9 a.m. in the Board hearing
room, first floor, Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Greeley.
Enclosed is a copy of the amended Ordinance. Please sign the copies and return to me prior the
third reading, September 6. I would be happy to save your community postage by accepting this
signed copy at the August 21 South Western Weld Mayor's Meeting.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions.
With Sincerity,
Anne Best Johnson
Long Range Planner
copy: B. Kirkmeyer, M.Daniels-Mika, Communities of Dacono, Firestone, Frederick, L. Morrison, E Gesick
(eitrie.;
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICI S
1555 N. 17TH AVENI:E
IlDGREELEY, COLORADO 806 U
C PHONE (970) 353-E10O] EXT.3510
O FAX (970)304-64x8
W EBSITE: www.co.weld.co iS
COLORADO
July 26, 2000
Mayor Linda Steipen
City of Dacono
PO Box 186
Dacono, Colorado 80514
Dear Mayor Steipen:
The Weld County Planning Commission approved the proposed amendments to Ordinance 201 en June
20, 2000. This morning, the first reading of these amendments were heard by the Board of county
Commissioners. The second reading is scheduled for Monday,August 14. The third reading is scheduled
for Wednesday, September 6. All hearings are at 9 a.m. in the Board hearing room,first floor,Weld county
Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Greeley.
Enclosed is a copy of the amended Ordinance. Please sign the copies and return to me prior the third
reading, September 6. I would be happy to save your community postage by accepting this signed copy at
the August 21 South Western Weld Mayor's Meeting.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions.
With Sincerity,
/ it
Anne Best Johnson
Long Range Planner
copy: B. Kirkmeyer, M. Daniels-Mika, Communities of Dacono, Firestone, Frederick, L. Morrison, E. Gesick
a DEPARTMENT uF PLANNING SERVICES
bT� PHONE (970) 353-6100, EXT.3540
FAX (970) A304-6498
1555 N. 17TH AVENUEUE GREELEY, COLORADO 80631
C.
COLORADO
May 8, 2000
Town of Frederick
PO Box 238
Frederick, CO 80530
Subject: ORD-201A- Request for Amendments to Ordinance 201.
To Whom It May Concern:
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 June 20, 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 Dacono, Erie, Frederick, and
Firestone Planning Commissions for their review and comments. Please call the city of Dacono at 303-833-
2317, the town of Erie at 303-926-2700, the town of Frederick at 303-833-2388, and the town of Firestone at
303-833-3291 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 Dacono, Erie, Frederick, and Firestone 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,
r
l
/ '1/717%'L J d r,y
Anne Best Johnson
Long Range Planner
I' I
1
Q DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES
cii( PHONE (970)353-6100, E 0
FAX 17TH70) AVENUE
304-6498
1555 N. (9TH
GREELEY, COLORADO 80631
COLORADO
May 8, 2000
Town of Firestone
PO Box 100
Firestone, CO 80520
Subject: ORD-201A- Request for Amendments to Ordinance 201.
To Whom It May Concern:
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 June 20,2000, 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 Dacono, Erie, Frederick, and
Firestone Planning Commissions for their review and comments. Please call the city of Dacono at 303-833-
2317,the town of Erie at 303-926-2700, the town of Frederick at 303-833-2388, and the town of Firestone at
303-833-3291 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 Dacono, Erie, Frederick, and Firestone Planning
Commission meetings to answer any questions the Commission members may have with resoect 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,
�. /'A.-. 'k /fit
n� —��
6�6 /I/&e.
Anne Best Johnson
Long Range Planner
a DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES
bT� PHONE (970)353-6100, EXT.3540
(II'
FAX 17T 304-6 9E
1555 N. 17TH AVENUE
GREELEY, COLORADO 80631
111 1 C.
COLORADO
May 8, 2000
Town of Erie
PO Box 100
Erie, CO 80516
Subject: ORD-201A- Request for Amendments to Ordinance 201.
To Whom It May Concern:
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 June 20, 2000, at 1:30 p.m. This meeting mill take
place in Room 210, Weld County Planning Department, 1555 N. 17th Avenue, Greeley, Coloraco. 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 man cipaiity.
Therefore, our office has forwarded a copy of the submitted materials to the Dacono, Erie, Frederick, and
Firestone Planning Commissions for their review and comments. Please call the city of Dacono at 303-833-
2317, the town of Erie at 303-926-2700, the town of Frederick at 303-833-2388, and the town of Firestone at
303-833-3291 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 Dacono, Erie, Frederick, and Firestone Planning
Commission meetings to answer any questions the Commission members may have with respec. to yoar
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,
7 � /� 7 , 4
C 1KL / 1a /f ;°I
Anne Best Johnson
Long Range Planner \---
Kitea DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES
bT� PHONE (970) 353-6100, E) 1.3540
FAX 1970)7TH 3C4-6498
1555 1555 N. 17TH A'/ENUE
GREELEY, COLORADO 80631
COLORADO
May 8, 2000
City of Dacono
PO Box 186
Dacono, CO 80514
Subject: ORD-201A- Request for Amendments to Ordinance 201.
To Whom It May Concern:
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 June 20,2000,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 mun cipaiity.
Therefore, our office has forwarded a copy of the submitted materials to the Dacono, Erie, Frederick. and
Firestone Planning Commissions for their review and comments. Please call the city of Dacono at 303-833-
2317, the town of Erie at 303-926-2700,the town of Frederick at 303-833-2388, and the town of Firestone at
303-833-3291 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 Dacono, Erie, Frederick, and Firestone 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,
101 d /
Anne Best Johnson
Long Range Planner
FIELD CHECK
FILING NUMBER: ORD-201A DATE OF INSPECTION: =fr,124)U _
APPLICANT'S NAME: Towns of Erie, Firestone, Frederick; City of Dacono; Weld County
PLANNER: Anne Best Johnson
REQUEST: Amendments to Ordinance 201 to include: 1) Clarification to Section 1.1 that.the provisions of
Ord. 195 are not supersede by Ord. 201 except to the extent that the two are in irreconcilable
conflict; 2) Section 8.3.4 shall require a referring juridiction to call out areas where a proposal
does not strictly conform to the design standards; 3) Section 8.5.1 shall require a Commenting
juridiction to respond to the items identified in the sentence added to 8.3.4 within 21 days to lose
the right to object; 4) Items 2 and 3 are inteded to initiate discussion and resolution early in
process; 5)Section 8.9 and 8.8.7 shall be amended to relenquish the participation of the town of
Erie from this areement and require alll members to be present for a quorum which shall require
a 3/4 vote to grant an appeal; and 6)Section 8.9.6 clarifies that the appeal board has the power
to propose mitigation measures in addition to a finding of failure to comply with the design
standards.
LOCATION: Please see attached map, illustrating the Dacono, Frederick, Firestone Urban Growth
Boundary.
LAND USE:
N /y- }Cr?' .1 77"9"97 .-- r.;/-477,2 2OZ1/ Si77i>.de "7C." Tim
E - --
S ,.
W //Je <::,
ZONING: N a (Agricultural)
E A (Agricultural)
S , A (Agricultural)
W )A(Agricultural)
COMMENTS:
7,4/4,5"2- Tvia'A- S ,/712 ) ,'i 4't h I' tom"J/!7 .V/Z Y
o/?2 7vAY4f/S'ifE:_S -2-We/ .J" /.4' J 9/0/'oe2 a' /?AC_` ,± .r
S � 7,7/27 .,-‘7A f_3o�-'iY0,1.*)/f J1 hv�c' 714 2 272)74 2-
/i"f/ /"(2%X71.2 k/Il-Z•"ft 3 s^ J/2i lG /f'g
f.� rye c)` r y
•
P.C. Member
9
Please note that amendments are listed in strikeout text for exclusions, or redlined itali: type for
inclusions. The amendments include the following:
1.0 Uniform Baseline Design Standards
1.1 Third Paragraph addition:
It is not the intent of these standards to replace the Agreement between Dacono, Lirestov
Frederick and Weld County(adopted by Weld County on March 24, 1997 as Ordinance /95)
and that both documents are intended to remain in full force and effect and only in the event
of irreconcilable conflicts between this document and the agreement of March 24, 1 9£'7, .shall
the terms of these standards supercede those of the March 24. 1997 Agreement
8.0 REFERRAL AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
8.3.4 Where the Referring Government is aware that the applicant is proposing development which
does not strictly conform to the Design Standards, the Referring Government shall identify
those variances at the time of the initial referral or, if not apparent at the time of referral, within
10 days of becoming aware of the variance.
8.5.1 Design Standard Comments. Design Standard Comments are comments that the application is
inconsistent with the IGA Design Standards. All such notices must include a statement
identifying the IGA Design Standard(s)that has been violated and specifying why the decision
violates that design standard(s). Where the Referring Government has identified variances
from the Design Standards, Design Standard comments must be made within 2ldays or the
Commenting entity shall have been deemed to have waived any right to appeal basi'd upon
said standards.
8.9 IGA Joint Board of Appeals
8.9.1.2 One representative from the Town of Erie;
8.9.6 Decisions. Following the presentations and any discussion,the Board shall make a decision
at the same meeting as to whether(i)the application as approved by the Review Body was
consistent with the IGA Design Standards, or as consistent as possible in light of unique
constraints of the site not created by the applicant, or(ii)the application as approved by the
Review Body was not consistent with the IGA Design Standards,in which case the So ird may
propose mitigation measures which make the design consistent with the intent of the Design
Standards which may be accepted .
8.9.7 Quorum and Required Votes. All At Lest four members of the Board must be presert before
the Board may act on any Appeal. The votes of fear three out of the five four Board members
shall be required to conclude that any application as approved by a Review Body was not
consistent with the IGA Design Standards, provided,, however, that if one of the, Doatd
members is absent,the vote of three of the remaining four Board members shall be required
for such decision.
EXHIBIT A
Amendments to Plan are Shown in underline and strikeout.
1 .0 Uniform Baseline Design Standards
1.1 Intent: The intent of this intergovernmental agreement is to establish baseline regional
standards and a uniform communication process for new development activities in
a predefined area in unincorporated Weld County. These standards do not
attempt to address every design related issue, rather they emphases eight major
design components. These components were specifically chosen based on
aesthetic and functional value to the region. Much of the emphasis of these
standards is intricately related to major transit corridor patterns.
The success of these standards is attainable only through a recognition of the
value and land use authority of each participating community. Only working
together can a region be developed which will accommodate both the land use
needs of today and tomorrow.
It is not the intent of these standards to replace the Agreement between Dacono_
Firestone, Frederick, and Weld County (adopted by Weld County on March 24
1997 as Ordinance 195) and that both documents are intended to remain in full
force and effect and only in the event of irreconcilable conflicts between this
document and the agreement of March 24, 1997, shall the terms of these
standards supercede those of the March 24, 1997 Agreement.
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS -Jx"
8.0 REFERRAL AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
8.1 Intent: The intent of the referral and enforcement procedures is to establish a mutually
agreed upon process in which all parties agree to abide by. This section delineates
administrative responsibilities and corresponding time frames for proper :enforcement of
the IGA. To resolve disputes over the interpretation of the design standards a Join' Board
of Appeals has been established.
8.2 Recital: For Purposes of this Outline, a "Referring Government" is the government with
which the applicant filed his or her application, and that refers the application to others for
comment; a "Commenting Government" is a government that files comments with the
Referring Government. A "Review Body" means the body that will be reviewing and
making a recommendation or decision on an application for preliminary or final approval,
and includes a Planning Commission, Town Council, City Council, and Board of County
Commissioners. Other terms have the meanings given to them in the Interim Coordinated
Planning Agreement.
8.3 Timeframe for Referrals
8.3.1 Application in the County. For development proposed to the County within the
Urban Growth Area, the County will refer the application to the Municipalities within
7 days after the application is complete.
8.3.2 Application in a Municipality. For development proposed in a Municipality and
located within 500 feet of unincorporated land in County, the Municipality will refer
the application to the County and the other Municipalities within 7 days after the
application is complete.
8.3.3 Multiple Approvals. Where the Referring Government requires an application to be
approved at more than one stage — such as preliminary and final approvals of a
subdivision or PUD — there shall be a separate referral and comment process for
each stage.
8.3.4 Where the Referring Government is aware that the applicant is proposing
development which does not strictly conform to the Design Standards, the
Referring Government shall identify those variances at the time of the initial
referral or, if not apparent at the time of referral, within 10 days of becoming aware
of the variance.
8.4 Timeframe for Comments. Referring Governments will allow Commenting Governments
at least 21 days to comment before preparing staff report to first review body.
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
STREET STANDARDS
8.5 Types of Comments. Commenting Governments shall identify whether each of their
comments is a "Design Standard Comment" or an "Optional Comment", as described
below.
8.5.1 Design Standard Comments. Design Standard Comments are comments that the
application is inconsistent with the IGA Design Standards. All such notices must
include a statement identifying the IGA Design Standard(s) that has been violated
and specifying why the decision violates that design standard(s). Where the
Referring Government has identified variances from the Design Standards, Design
Standard comments must be made within 21 days or the Commenting entity shall
have been deemed to have waived any right to appeal based upon said standards.
8.5.2 Optional Comments. Optional Comments are comments about any other matter
related to the application.
8.6 Response to Comments
8.6.1 Design Standard Comments -- Timely. If Design Standard Comments are
received in a timely manner, the Referring Government shall respond to those
comments by either:
8.6.1.1 Requiring that the applicant change the application to make it consistent
with the Design Standards (either before formal review, or through a
condition attached to any decision on the application), or;
8.6.1.2 Notifying the Commenting Government in writing, no later than the date
of any hearing or action by the Review Body, that it does not agree with
the Design Standard Comment, and the reasons for such disagreement
8.6.2 Design Standard Comments -- Late. If Design Standard Comments are received
late, but before action by a Review Body, the Referring Government shall forward
those comments to the Review Body, and the Referring Government may -- but
shall not be required to -- respond as described in subsection 8.6.1.
8.6.3 Optional Comments. If Optional Comments are received, and regardless of
whether they are received in a timely manner, the Referring Government may --
but shall not be required to — respond as described in subsection 8.6.1.
8.7 Effective Date of Approvals
8.7.1 Seven Day Wait. In order to allow for effective enforcement of the IGA Design
Standards, each Referring Government that has received a Design Standard
Comment regarding an application shall provide that any action approving the
application, or approving it with conditions, shall not become effective until 7 days
after the date on which the Review Body takes its action.
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
STREET STANDARDS
8.7.2 Wait For Appeal. In addition, in the event a Commenting Government initiates an
Appeal pursuant to subsection 8.9 below, the Referring Government shall provide
that any action approving the application, or approving it with conditions, shall not
become effective until the IGA Joint Board of Appeals has made a decision on the
Appeal.
8.7.3 Time lines for Rule 106 Actions. The waiting periods set forth in subsections a and
b above shall not affect the deadlines for filing actions under Rule 106(a)(4)
C.R.C.P. Such actions must be filed no later than 30 days after the date of the
Review Body's decision regardless of whether or not enforcement action is taken
pursuant to subsections 8.8 below.
8.8 Enforcement
8.8.1 Disagreement. If one or more Commenting Government(s) has filed a Design
Standard Comment with the Referring Government in a timely manner, and a
Review Body of the Referring Government has acted to approve the application
with or without conditions, and such Commenting Government(s) believes that the
application as approved is inconsistent with the IGA Design Standards, any such
Commenting Government(s) may notify the Referring Government in writing, within
7 days after the approval action of the Review Body, that it intends to Appeal the
matter.
8.8.2 Timely Notice of Appeal. Notices received more than 7 days after the action of the
Review Body shall not be valid to initiate an Appeal.
8.8.3 Consolidation of Appeals. If more than one Commenting Government files a
notice of intent to Appeal the same action of a Referring Government, all such
Appeals shall be consolidated into a single Appeal for review and consideration.
8.8.4 Review of Appeals. Appeals under this Agreement shall be reviewed by the IGA
Joint Board of Appeals, as defined in subsection 8.9 below, pursuant to the
procedures set forth in subsection 8.9 below.
8.8.5 Decision of Consistency. If the IGA Joint Board of Appeals concludes that an
application as approved or approved with conditions by a Review Body is
consistent with the IGA Design Standards, the Board shall notify the Referring
Government and all Commenting Governments of that fact within 30 days after the
decision of the Review Body, and no Commenting Government shall have the right
to question compliance with the IGA Design Standards or the decision of the
Board through court action.
8.8.6 Decision of Inconsistency. If the IGA Joint Board of Appeals concludes that an
application as approved by a Review Body is not consistent with the IGA Design
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
REFERRAL AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
Standards, the Board shall notify the Referring Government and all Commenting
Governments of that fact within 30 days after the decision of the first Review Body.
If the Referring Government does not act to bring the application into compliance
with the IGA Design Standards (through the imposition of additional conditions on
the approval, or negotiations with the applicant, or any other legal means) within
45 days after receipt of such notice from the Board, any Commenting Government
that filed comments on the matter and participated in the Appeal may file suit in a
court of competent jurisdiction, and may request that the court enforce the terms of
the IGA Design Standards. No such suit may request money damages for a
violation of the IGA Design Standards, but the prevailing party shall be entitled to
recover attorneys fees incurred in bringing or defending the action.
8.9 IGA Joint Board of Appeals
8.9.1 Membership. The IGA Joint Board of Appeals shall be made up of:
8.9.1.1 One representative from the City of Dacono;
3.9.1.2 Ong rcprescntativc from the Town of Eric;
8.9.1.2 One representative from the Town of Firestone;
8.9.1.3 One representative from the Town of Frederick; and
8.9.1.4 One representative from Weld County.
8.9.2 Notice of Membership. The initial representatives from each party shall be named
within 30 days after the approval of these Referral and Enforcement Procedures
by that party. Each party shall notify the other parties of the name, address and
telephone number of its representative, and such representative shall serve until
the party notifies the other parties in writing of the name, address, and telephone
number of a new representative.
8.9.3 Substitute. If a member of the IGA Joint Board of Appeals is not able to attend a
meeting of the Board to review an appeal, the governmental entity shall be
authorized to designate in writing a substitute to attend and take all actions that the
member would be authorized to perform if the member were present. The
substitute may bring the writing designating them as a substitute to the meeting of
the Board, and need to file such writing with the Board before the meeting.
Substitutes designated in writing shall be treated as members for purposes 1 this
Agreement.
8.9.4 Notice of Appeal. When one or more Commenting Government(s) chooses to
initiate an Appeal of the decision of a Referring Government pursuant to
subsection 8.8, the Referring Government shall notify all members of the IGA Joint
Board of Appeals about such appeal in writing no later than 14 days after the date
UNII•ORM BASELINE DESIGN NI ANDARUS
REFERRAL AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
of the Decision of the Reviewing Body. The notice shall set forth the name(s) of
the Commenting Governments initiating the Appeal, and the date, time, and place
of the Board meeting to consider the Appeal. The date of such meeting shall be
not less than 21 and not more than 29 days after the date of the Review Board's
action on the decision being appealed.
8.9.5 Open Meetings. The meetings of the IGA Joint Board of Appeals shall be open to
the public, and representatives of both the Referring Government and the
Commenting Government(s) that appealed the action shall make a presentation as
to why they believe the decision appealed is or is not consistent with the IGA
Design Standards.
8.9.6 Decisions. Following the presentations and any discussion, the Board shall make
a decision at the same meeting as to whether (i) the application as approved by
the Review Body was consistent with the IGA Design Standards, or as consistent
as possible in light of unique constraints of the site not created by the applicant, or
(ii) the application as approved by the Review Body was not consistent with the
IGA Design Standards, in which case the Board may propose mitigation measures
which make the design consistent with the intent of the Design Standards which
may be accepted .
8.9.7 Quorum and Required Votes. All At Icast four members of the Board must se
present before the Board may act on any Appeal. The votes of four three out of
the five four Board members shall be required to conclude that any applicaton as
approved by a Review Body was not consistent with the IGA Design Standards;
provided, however, that if one of the Board members is absent, the vote of three of
the remaining four Board members shall be required for such decision.
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
REFERRAL AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
REFERRAL LIST
NAME:Towns of Erie, Firestone, Frederick; City of Dacono; Weld County CASE NUMBER: ORD 01A
REFERRALS SENT: May 8, 2000 REFERRALS TO BE RECEIVED BY: May 30, 2000
COUNTY TOWNS and CITIES
_X Attorney Ault
_X Health Department Brighton
Extension Service Broomfield
Emergency Management Office _X Dacono
Sheriffs Office _Eaton
X Public Works X Erie
Housing Authority Evans
Airport Authority _X_Firestone
Building Inspection Fort Lupton
Code Enforcement XFrederick
STATE Garden City
Division of Water Resources Gilcrest
Geological Survey Greeley
Department of Health Grover
Department of Transportation Hudson
Historical Society Johnstown
Water Conservation Board Keenesburg
Oil and Gas Conservation Commission Kersey
Division of Wildlife: LaSalle
Loveland Lochbuie
Greeley Longmont
Division of Minerals/Geology Mead
FIRE DISTRICTS Milliken
Ault F-1 New Raymer
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
Mountain View F-10 COUNTIES
Milliken F-11 Adams
Nunn F-12 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-1S
Union Colony F-20 SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICTS
Brighton
OTHER Fort Collins
School District Greeley
Ditch Company Longmont
West Adams
COMMISSION/BOARD MEMBER
_X_John Folsom
X Jack Epple
(lot,15;
Weld County Referral
111111 May 8, 2000
C.
COLORADO
The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review:
Applicant Towns of Erie, Firestone, Case Number ORD-201A
Frederick; City of Dacono;
Weld County
Please Reply By May 30, 2000 Planner Anne Best Johnson
Project Amendments to Ordinance 201 to include: 1) Clarification to Section 1A that tl e
provisions of Ord. 195 are not supersede by Ord. 201 except to the extent tha the
two are in irreconcilable conflict; 2) Section 8.3.4 shall require a referring juridi;lion
to call out areas where a proposal does not strictly conform to the design
standards; 3) Section 8.5.1 shall require a Commenting juridiction to respond o the
items identified in the sentence added to 8.3.4 within 21 days to lose the rignt •0
object; 4) Items 2 and 3 are inteded to initiate discussion and resolution early
process; 5) Section 8.9 and 8.8.7 shall be amended to relenquish the particip2:tion
of the town of Erie from this areement and require all' members to be present for a
quorum which shall require a 3/4 vote to grant an appeal; and 6) Section 8.9.E
clarifies that the appeal board has the power to propose mitigation measures n
addition to a finding of failure to comply with the design standards.
Location Please see attached map, illustrating the Dacono, Frederick, Firestone Urna 1
Growth Boundary.
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 tf is 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) June 20, 2000
❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan
1/4/2 hove roviewori fr' requo ` ?^ find no conflicts witour interests.
6field County Planning � 'H
See attached letter.
Comments: Mpy 6 X000
RECEIVED
•
Signature / 1 �6Y nr`e Date C;//6/,-)-O0 OI MOIST
2/v2
Agency b P If t&
Wield County Planning Dept. 01555 N. 17th Ave. Greeley, Co.80631 +(970)353-6100 ext.3540 4(970)304-6498 fax
TRI-AREA IGA MAP •6 µ6``i*-- I _ ' .8
32 �' I ..P
iN ___ se • NW Fi E' �_ <.'10— I
LEGEND p ,1Q24 C 27 25 30 : 28 27 26 I c ._
2 U 1.. -. _____� et
ffi
--
".\\�'A MUD BOUNDARY '-2 - 34 / ; ,
26 � 'Y —
lollm FIRESTONE UGB �. r
5 4 3 2 # 1 6-I
FREDERICK UGB 4
a
,4
mmilm DACONO UGe FIRESTONE
2.L ;
masii DACONO—ERIE 1-25 i; a8 E 1 i
CORRIDOR GROWTH AREA � ,_3-
i +"
, 2N22 23 24
GRAVEL ROADS
PAVED ROADS \ \\ FRE t RICK �6 ,. e9
I b
STATE HIGHWAY _ ' r --
i4iii NWY ;z � ' t.
_,
FEDERAL HIGHWAY � 6 5 .. ' � I�I --Lg
CITIES WITHIN /2 ---- - DACONO
STUDY AREA - e e t 12 7 e 9 ,2 P
;c
r
,-, +F 15 !d !l 40 I '.7 I „ +c a .�I
f I N ERIE
3 miles I Planning boundaries are _ 19 20 2 I 22. 1 !P + 2^ 21 22 4 •
W n`Trno`
_ .
located three miles from b .
a municipal boundary. I �� ? l-
N ll
.I I ill L-_i
_.IlllL 's
`__
W L E 1' L,-
W U
Wilk % . -•Mv .- iiev '✓/1PN rM. oo:n
?F
4T scale in miles
MY: eo'mbe b. 1911? I"A 1�„I 1 2 3 4 a
Weld County Planning Dep.
• ti tt?.
' .JUN 15 2000
wrh r� RECEIVED
June 14, 2000
Anne Best Johnson, Long Range Planner
Weld County Department of Planning Services
1555 N. 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Anne:
I apologize for the late date of this response to your referral regarding ORD-201 A
Request for Amendments to Ordinance 201. I'll fax this to you to allow as much review
time as possible before the 6/20/00 Planning Commission meeting.
We have limited comment regarding the proposed Ordinance/IGA amendments. I'm not
certain of the origin of the proposed ordinance amendments, and the referral packet wt
received did not contain specific language for Sections 8.3.4, 8.8.7 or 8.9.6 referenced in
the project summary on the referral sheet. Since the Town of Erie is not a party to the
IGA (a condition the proposed amendments acknowledge and intend to correct by
relinquishing Erie's participation from the IGA), our comment is probably of little
significance. As 1 trust you're aware, our review of the IGA last year identified severa I
provisions of the IGA that we thought were problematic; however, since we didn't
receive support for changes from any IGA participants, we didn't pursue official
amendment of the IGA. Based on the referral project summary, it appears the proposed
amendments are appropriate.
That said, I would like to update you on the status of a variety of Town of Erie activities
indirectly related to Ordinance 201.
I. Last fall the Erie and Frederick Boards of Trustees met to discuss the desirability of
entering into an intergovernmental agreement. Although our intention was to achieve
a tri-party agreement among Erie, Frederick and the County, we thought it
appropriate that the municipalities reach agreement in principle prior to asking for
County participation. To that end, the Erie Town Attorney, Mark Shapiro, prepared a
draft agreement that was subsequently approved by the Erie Board and forwarded 1O
the Town of Frederick Board for consideration. To date we haven't had any response
from Frederick; however, our newly elected mayor, Tom Van Lone,has reaffirmed
his desire to pursue the IGA and has directed staff to again contact Frederick officials.
2. In addition to the tri-party agreement, Erie would like to pursue an agreement with
Weld County regarding a variety of issues of common interest, particularly growth
and development in the Weld County portion of our planning area. To that end, we
requested and received from your department a copy of your most recent IGA with
the Town of Mead. We arc reviewing that document, and have asked our Town
Attorney, Mark Shapiro, to contact the County Attorney to initiate work on a draft
IGA.
3. We experienced a great deal of controversy last year regarding the update of the Eric
Comprehensive Plan and the failed Northfield annexation. Last month the Vista
Ridge annexation was approved by Erie's residents. Last week our Board supported
the proposal that we complete the Erie Stakeholders Assessment Program, a program
intended to achieve community consensus and support for a detailed Eric Vision
Statement, a detailed Growth Management Program and review the Comprehensive
Plan and amendment if necessary. We intend to coordinate appropriate aspects of the
Plan review with your department and upon completion of the Assessment Program,
to formally present our Plan to the County.
4. Earlier this year we received proposals from qualified firms to prepare commercial
design standards to assist Erie in review of non-residential development proposals.
Our intention is to take the Uniform Design Standards contained in Ordinance 201 to
the next level. Although we've placed that project on hold pending completion of the
Erie Stakeholders Assessment Program, we're eager to share the design standards
with the County when complete.
When we've achieved the IGAs referred to in 1 and 2 above, Erie will have agreements
with all our neighboring municipalities (except Longmont) as well as Weld County and
Boulder County. This is a high priority goal of our Board, and we look forward to
working with your department to make it happen.
The referral notice regarding Ordinance 201A states that the Weld County Planning
Commission will consider the proposed amendments on June 20, 2000. Unfortunately,
I'll be out of town on vacation; however, Deb Bachelder is familiar with Ordinance 201
and the reasons Erie elected not to participate in the IGA. Please feel free to contact her
at 303-926-2770 if you need to further discuss this or want Erie to be represented at th,
Planning Commission hearing.
Sincerely,
TOWN OF ERIE, COLORADO
Dennis A. Drumm
Director of Community Development
Hello