HomeMy WebLinkAbout921293.tiff V.`:11 D COL ' II
November 27, 1992
1t-:1 f,-^ - 1 R1 9: 18
C_EF';C
TO THE t.'9,' `
Honorable George Kennedy
C. W. Kirby
Gbrdon E. Lacy
W. H. Webster Case #RE 1456
RE 1457
Hearing of 11/24/92
Dear Commissioners ,
Around the first of September we went to Weld County regarding
division of this land. We asked what our options were and for
direction. We were given page #27. Paraghaph 7, Item A was
highlighted and forms were given us, as were are retiring.
Following, we seemed not to be able to get straight answers
from staff and we wanted a hearing date set. Because of this
we went to see our attorney. He informed us of Colorado Law
S.B. 35 and said he would find out what was taking so long.
Finally on Nov. 12th we heard a hearing date had been set for
Nov. 18th, but would probably be denied. I requested a later
date as this did not give us enough time.
S .B. 35 was never mentioned by staff until the hearing before
you commissioners . Neither was the county rule rescinding
S.B. 35.
If you read the letter from the State of Colorado, Div.
of Water Resources . Mr. John Schurer P.E. , he recommends
"splitting the tracts into 35 acres or more" . In talking to
him before the hearing, he inferred no problem, we would
have 3 acre feet for each 10 acres, which would be plenty of
water for both lawn and garden.
Tax payers and farmers should not be treated like this . We
need not have spent the time nor expenae, had we been given
correct direction at the start.
Please resolve this apparent conflict and instruct your staff
to give future applicants proper written options, information,
and instructions to enable the applicant to follow clear and
proper proceedure.
6 921293
page 2
We were told after the hearing, the staff would probably
recommend approval if the property were within three miles
of a town. Asked what our options were, the answer was,
"see an attorney" .
Under these circumstances we want a refund of check #269 in
the amount of $1, 500. 00 and all records destroyed on this
case, as if the case were never started.
Sincerely,
Yea Q�
Miriam J. Bromley
6507 E. 104th Ave.
Northglenn, Co. 80233
encl/pg 27 Weld Co.
that adequately project the indirect and direct current public impacts,
public costs, potential revenue, and other impacts an the County's tax
base.
5. If it is determined that public facility or service improvements or
_ maintenance. re. .required—by-- a devsloptant."rthe eeveloper will be
required to pay for the costs of the public facility and service
improvements and maintenance. The methodology for compensation shall
be determined during the land-use application review process.
The developer shall submit the following: ,
FAY'mm.,.m. 4-, .�,
(1) information which accurately identifies all users of the
infrastructure improvements and maintenance;
(2) a proposal which equitably distributes the costa of infr
astructure
improvements and.maintenance by user share; and
(3) a proposal that identifies the appropriate time that
infrastructure improvements and maintenance charges should be
applied.
This information shall be reviewed by the Board of County Commissioners
in determining an equitable means of distributing infrastructure costs
among the County at large, direct users, and the developer.
5. A municipality's adopted comprehensive plan goals and policies will be
•
considered when an agricultural business is op d
Pr r.ae,. to be located
within an urban growth boundary area.
7. A process that allows a lot in the agricultural district to be divided
into two separate lots will be established. The intent of this policy
is to:
A. Enable the property owner who is retiring an opportunity to live
on or sell the existing farm improvements.
B. Enable the property owner to sell off agricultural land that is
nonproductive for one single family dwelling bozesite.
C. Enable the property owner to provide a residence for direct
members of the farm family and also for workers employed at the
farm.
Agricultural districts located outside of an urban growth boundary
area or the- 1-25 mixed-use development corridor are expected to remain
predominantly agricultural. Low density single family residential
development may be permitted but is not encouraged. These rural
homeowners will nnr bravo rnr.ninrt nkn.,• *U.,
Hello