HomeMy WebLinkAbout810515.tiff ORIGINAL FILE AT
MISSILE SITE .
ARCHIVE BOX
MISSING AS OF
12/ 19/2017
„6,u ' soy, 90w11 oj'W1iidso e
* t
01 -nr , pai
P.O. BOX 627 WINDSOR, COLORADO 80550
September 29 , 1981\' C
Weld County Commissioners
P .O. Box 758
Greeley, Colorado 80632
Commissioners :
The Town of Windsor, having learned that you have
gone against our recommendations concerning the Assembly
of God Church to be located west of Windsor, would like
for you to reconsider your action granting a conditional
use and recorded exemption for that parcel of land.
We feel your action is contrary to the county
comprehensive plan. By allowing the church to hook onto
a water district when a municipal water line is located
on that parcel of land is in possible violation of your
urbanization policy. The decision that you have made
places a greater burden on the municipality because the
Town will have to work out some agreement with North
Weld Water District when we annex the area in which the
Assembly of God Church wishes to locate . These arrange-
ments cast the Town additional revenue , thus driving up
the cost of government, which you must know is something
that all of us that serve the public must keep under
control.
The County planning policy has been to request
recommendations from municipalities when faced with an
event that will cause pressure on the municipality. We ,
the Town of Windsor, believe that city and county govern-
ments must work in a spirit of cooperation in order to
maintain the standards expected of the towns and counties
in which. we live. We would like to continue in this vane.
However, your decision concerning the Assembly of God
Church sets a precedent that will do nothing except to
place an added burden on our town and its future growth
plans.
Therefore , we respectfully ask that you reconsider
your action on the Assembly of God Church allowing them
to connect to North Weld water.
J10515
r
Weld County Commissioners
September 29 , 1981
Page 2
It is our view that the Town of Windsor is more
capable of servicing the church and is also better
equipped to follow the Town of Windsor comprehensive
growth plan.
We thank you for your consideration. We hope that
we can continue with the spirit of cooperation the Town
has shown in the past.
Sincerely,
TOWN OF WINDSOR
Donald E. Sandoval
Town Administrator
cc : Ton. Honn, Weld County Department of Planning
Assembly of God Church
John Huisjen, Town Attorney
Intergovernmental agreements
• will eventually provide city-type ser-
by Nona Thayer vices.
Larimer County • Logical ways to phase development
Commissioner need to be determined within this
Mt' designated service area.
The following article by Nona Thayer, yt' • Urbanization should be orderly and
Latimer County Commissioner, is m- ¢ the provision of services coordinated
printed from the August 1981 issue of with development in a timely fashion
Colorado Front Range Project News- }+s to reduce costs and minimize potential
letter. *°- '" "` -'�- , negative effects.
• The county must not accept develop-
As the Front Range becories more majority of taxpayers. ment applications which are eligible
urbanized, the idea of intergovernmental • Without intergovernmental coopera- for annexation.
cooperation takes on a new meaning and tion the mode is frequently competi- • There must be mutual agreements
relevance. There are some good examples tive. Too often the scenario is a devel- on development standards and allow-
of cooperative agreements between gov- oper playing a municipality against able densities within the service area.
ernments along the Front Range, but the county. "If you (city) do not • Local governments should develop
there are also long-standing problems and approve this development as i have compatible comprehensive plans.
stumbling blocks which must be over- conceived it, I will develop in the • Use of intergovernmental cooperative
come. county." Agreements are made that agreements will result in better and
• As municipalities expand their boun- distort comprehensive plans and allow more effective working relationships
daries, they annex areas that have concessions that may be costly to the among local governments. The agree-
developed in the unincorporated part taxpayers. Many local governments ments will help to improve the quality
of the county where development are mandating that development must and reduce the costs of development
standards for streets, drainage, and pay a higher percentage of the costs of that occurs in both the incorporated
utility systems may be inferior to the growth. There needs to be uniformity and unincorporated areas. •
standards established for the urban in front-end fee structures and in
pattern of the municipality. development requirements and sten-
• It is more costly on a per cabita basis dards, or else development will be
to provide urban services at very low biased toward the county's lower fees
densities. Development in th'a path of and non-urban standards, resulting in
annexation is frequently at a density sprawling patterns of development.
that is much lower than the prevailing • The municipality may be thrust into
density in the municipality. These unwanted expansion of its boundaries
areas will be more expensive to serve to gain control of what is happening
and maintain. there. If county development is per-
• Cities have broader authority to provide ceived as a threat to the city's future
city-type services and more latitude in or implementation of its comprehen-
funding these services (particularly in sive plan, uneconomic defensive an-
home rule municipalities)than counties. nexations may result.
Special districts may be organized to • Citizens in the unincorporated peri-
to provide services that counties have phery of a municipality may feel
traditionally not provided. I'lowever, abandoned and unrepresented by their
low visibility to the voter and low County commissioners.
voter participation rates lead to a • Special districts are fearful of how
lack of political accountability in agreements will affect their ability
special district decision-making. to pay for facilities. Paying off bond
• The citizens of municipalities are also issues frequently depends on realizing
citizens of a county and pay the same projections for growth.
level of county taxes as people living Recommendations for Preparing Inter- '.
in the unincorporated areas. County governmental Agreements:
commissioners have a responsibility • Cities and counties must be encouraged
to all the citizens to minimize the pub- to develop intergovernmental agree-
lic costs of providing urban services. ments. Developing the agreements will
If this can be done cooperatively with require give and take on both sides.
the municipalities and special districts, Together, the governments should
long-term savings should accrue to the define an area where the municipality
5
Hello