HomeMy WebLinkAbout931375.tiff ORDINANCE NO. 147-C
AR247406J
IN THE MATTER OF THE REPEAL AND RE-ENACTMENT, WITH AMENDMENTS TO CERTAIN
MAPS TO ORDINANCE NO. 147, WELD COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ORDINANCE, AS
CURRENTLY AMENDED
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF WELD,
STATE OF COLORADO:
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Weld, State of Colorado,
pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority
of administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has the power and authority under the Weld
County Home Rule Charter and Article 28 of Title 30, CRS, to adopt planning goals and policies for
the unincorporated areas of the County of Weld, and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, has previously
adopted Ordinance No. 147, Weld County Comprehensive Plan, establishing a comprehensive
revision of the planning goals and policies for the unincorporated areas of the County of Weld and
has adopted amendments in Ordinance No. 147-B, and
WHEREAS, the proposed Comprehensive Plan revision has been reviewed by the Weld
County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners, and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County hereby finds and
determines that there is a need for a revision of the Comprehensive Plan for the County of Weld, and
that this Ordinance is for the benefit of the health, safety, and welfare of the people of Weld County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of the
County of Weld, State of Colorado, that the existing Urban Growth Boundary map of the Weld
County Comprehensive Plan be repealed and re-enacted to show the reduced size of the Urban
Growth Boundary areas and is incorporated by this reference.
2474068 B-1529 P-581 01/31/96 11:36A PG 1 OF 3 REC
DOC
00
Weld County CO Clerk & Recorder
931375
ORD147
RE: ORDINANCE NO. 147-C
PAGE 2
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED by the Board, that certain existing Sections of Ordinance 147,
as amended, are repealed and re-enacted, with amendments, and the various sections are added,
revised, or deleted to read as follows:
Amend the second paragraph of the URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES Section of the
Comprehensive Plan on Page 30 to read:
An Urban Growth Boundary area is located in close proximity to a municipality. Within
urban-growth boundaries, municipal-type uses and services are planned, and annexation
may occur. Urban Growth Boundary areas are shown on the County's adopted Urban
Growth Boundary map. The size of urban growth boundaries has been set at one-half mile
from an area which a municipality is providing required utilities such as public water and
public sewer. Annexations which extend beyond the municipality's ability to provide these
utilities shall not be considered in the urban growth boundary area. Goals and policies within
the urban growth boundaries are intended to address the development of land on the border
of a municipality. They are also intended to promote harmonious and mutually beneficial
uses of land among the various jurisdictions in and around Weld County.
Delete the third paragraph of the URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES Section of the Comprehensive
Plan on Pages 30 and 31.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED by the Board that this Ordinance No. 147-C, insofar as it is the
same as Ordinance No. 147, as amended, is intended to be a continuation of the prior ordinance and
not a new enactment.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED by the Board that all land use applications received by Weld
County after the date of the first reading of Ordinance No. 147-C (November 17, 1993) shall be
reviewed and considered by Weld County in accordance with the newly re-enacted map as ordained
herein and text as adopted in this Ordinance No. 147-C.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED by the Board, if any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence,
clause, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held or decided to be unconstitutional, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions hereof. The Board of County
Commissioners hereby declares that it would have enacted this Ordinance in each and every
section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, and phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that
anyone or more sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases might be
declared to be unconstitutional or invalid.
2474068 8-1529 P-581 01/31/96 11:36A PG 2 OF 3
tii1375
ORD147
RE: ORDINANCE NO. 147-C
PAGE 3
The above and foregoing Ordinance Number 147-C was, on motion duly made and
seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 22nd day of January, A.D., 1996.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
7jetejil�: •,. \`
t �it Lief l �, _ '(NAY)
,� SrBarba J. Kirkmeyer, it
y ( Id • y Clerk to the Board
i � „ ��F*�>/�f (NAY)
Ie ore Baxter, ro- m
U����j �( uty Clerk the Board (NAY)
Dale K. Hall
APPROV,E=D AS TO FORM: 2 /"2f.fria-0 we/ ��? o�se" (NAY)
Const ce L. Harbert
ounty fit me� C/ v / / d �% '1 12 i (NAY)
Webster
First Reading: November 17, 1993
Publication: November 25, 1993, in the Windsor Beacon
Second Reading: December 6, 1993 (Tabled for revision of Comprehensive Plan)
Second Reading: December 27, 1995
Publication: January 11, 1996, in the North Weld Herald
Final Reading: January 22, 1996 (Denied)
2474068 B-1529 P-581 01/31/96 11:36A PG 3 OF 3
931375
ORD147
Memorandum
To: Board of County Commissioners
CC: Carol Harding, Bruce Barker, and Lee Morrison
From: Monica Daniels-Mika
Date: January 10, 1996
Subject: Ordinance.>'nt /1/7
Recently, there has been some confusion over the second reading of Ordinance
j 9 '7& LZ3a- This Ordinance proposed a change to the definition of Urban Growth
Boundaries, however instead of hearing this Ordinance the Commissioners moved,
at the first reading, to table this issue until after the completion of the Weld
County Comprehensive Plan.
As you know, this issue was addressed in the Comprehensive Plan, so it is no longer
necessary to continue the second reading. Therefore, in order to maintain
consistency with the New Comprehensive Plan, a response of Nay"No" to a motion
to approve on third reading would be appropriate at the hearing on January 22,
1996. The intent of this memo was to provide clarification for Ordinance LZSC- / q P7G .
I73c
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
ORDINANCE NO.147-C
IN THE MATTER OF THE REPEAL AND RE- STATE OF COLORADO
ENACTMENT,WITH AMENDMENTS TO CERTAIN SS.
MAPS TO ORDINANCE NO. 147,WELD COUNTY COUNTY OF WELD
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ORDINANCE, AS
CURRENTLY AMENDED - I, Bruce J. Bormann, of said County of Weld, being duly
Mt IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY sworn, say that I am Publisher of
COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF MELD,
STATE OF COLORADO: THE NORTH WELD HERALD
WHEREAS, the Board of County
Commissioners of the County of Weld, IMP, el a weekly newspaper having a general circulation in said
Colorado,H,pmersu le to Colorado Is v statute and WIDIMM County and State, published in the Town of Eaton, in said
Cooly Home Rule chador,a vested ash the
el administering the affairs of Weld County,CAS. County and State; and that the notice, of which the annexed is
NW
a true copy, has been published in said weekly newspaper for
WHEREAS, the Board of County -
pelnmlaewraM hes the power and aulhapy milet Me OW successive weeks, that the notice was published
NNW County Home Rule Charter and Adds 25 M TM in the regular and entire issue of every number of the paper
SE,CRS,to adopt Mewing goals and posctee Mr the
P P
wikorporat dareasoftheContyofWeld,Ma. during the period and time of publication, and in the
WHEREAS, the Board of ceanty newspaper proper and not in a supplement, and that the
Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, has publ'cation of said notice:
glwiousy adopted Ordinance No. 147,Weld Cai my
Comprehensive the Plan, establishing a comprehensive
for
, /f _ A o ///%_ /_ /f
NMelon.of the planning goals and polkas for Ito /l�J(,(/r'ld! �(J 7/ (.� �(Q+ ivy
unlmoorporated areas of the County of Weld and has
adad amendments In Ordinance No.147-B,and was in said newspaper bearing the date(s) of:
WHEREAS,the proposed Comprehensive / ,.r/ ')�'_�`.'`�_'�J
PMI revision has been reviewed by the Weld Coffey Thursday,the t ry day of / , 1996
Pynaing Commission and the Board of County
Ca Isslonen'and Thursday,the day of , 1996
WHEREAS, the Board of County
Co missioners of Weld County hereby finds and Thursday,the day of , 1996
dstesaines that there is a need for a revision of the
CMMwailelwNe Plan for the County of Wald,and that Thursday,the
SSS Ordnance is tor the benefit of the health,salary,and y, day of , 1996
wuhes of the people of Weld County.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED by
the Board of County Commissioners of the County of and that the said THE NORTH WELD HERALD has been
Weld,State of Colorado,that Me existing Urban Growth published continuously and uninterruptedly for the period of 52
Boundary mop of the Weid County Comprehensive Plan
be repealed and re-enacted to show the reduced size of consecutive weeks, in said County and State, prior to the date
the Urban Growth Boundary areas and is incorporated by
this reference. of first publication of said notice, and the same is a newspaper
within the meaning of an Act to regulate printing of legal
notices and adverti ments, approved a 18, 1931, and all
prior acts so far force.
BRU J.BORMANN, PUBLISHER
Vol ' tit -)
Subscribed and sworn to before me this /5th day
ERIKA C. of anucul.�, , 19 Ala
rat' BAGLEY
F o , o a
f COO N TARY�11 PUBLIC
My commission expires OCt06R 2/ /999
BE K PINKIE*O1rAMiO try Os t9eest world his eieWad Ws Ordnance M emir sad emery
OW ceSin MINN,Seem et Or/Mhpr 147,as NN*sae bale t fomOapq a eases area,eled
t
aarsadee, ase /s!!Pafed anal ss aMelsd, with more
a noweet IubsectM d IM Mein*tt see
amendments,and the various sections are added, mat ions, rases might be declared
Wielailla
revised,or deleted to read as follows:- deeeas, or phrases be declafMd.'M kW
m remelt Uiorud or invalid.
Amend the second paragraph d the URBAN GROWTH
BOUNDARIES Section of the Comprehensive Plan on TM Wove and foregoing Oaths*NNW
___
Pepe 30 to read: - 1474 was,on motion duly made and seconds*Sped
bathe blowing vole on the 22nd day of damamwY.14D.,.
An Urban()novaBoundary area M tooMMin MN.
close proximity to a municipality. Siln
uroan-growlh boundaries,WinkleBOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
uses and services are.planned; iMFiDCOIrdTY,COLORADO
annexation may occur. Urban BambaaJ,Keeney*,Boundary arms am shown on themlamsyar,Chair(NAY)
adopted Urban Growth Bou day my, �teaser,
Y)
er,Pm-Tam(NAY)
site of urban grown boundaries MP Maas L.
Hatt
set a one-half mis from an area ! Condemn t..Herbed(NAY)
municipality Is providing required w'µ Webster(NAY)
such as public water and public ATTEST:
Annexations which extend.beyo bed Weld C6unly Clakb the Board
nspdcipaMy's ability to provide these
shed not be c/rrsidsrsd in are urban�/1Is SY:
boundary ares. goalsand policies rafts Ospuy Cork N the Bob urban growth boundaries are intender is
address the.devetomnenLOMOCLallt APPROVED AS TO FORM:
border of a-municipality. They are
Intended to promote harmonious ant Owen*Attorney
mutually bearclaruses at land rr
various jurisdictions in and around Fair Pleading: November 17,19S3
County. PrEtieetbn: November 25,1993,In the Windsor Beacon
Ithe.Wra Paragraph of 11N URBAN GROOM Second Reading: December 8,1993(Tabled for million
S Section d the ComprehvpMe P en d Comprehensive Plan)
♦ UNN and 31.
Second Reading: December 27,199S
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED by the Owe Publication: January 11,1998,h the None Weld Herald
$l Ids Ordruncs No. 147-C,Nobs ae a is the sap
.•Qewnbe No.147,as amended,le Wendel Mira a Final RaMbg• r.mary oo toe Marshal
aMdsraalion of the prior ordinance and not as
4afYrant. ...
BE K FURTHER ORDAINED by Me BNB
Nd el land use spplbHas flatted by.Mid Ow*
INN Da de d the find road*of*Soo No.tom{)
Elsuerfbsn 17,1003)MS be Sowed end tonal*
WS County in Woordenoe oath the newly re.epyad
IIMP a ordained herein and text as adapted b Ala
OraWce No.147-C.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED by the Board,
I any section,subssebn,paragraph,semanco,Sues,
a Ms of Ibis ordinance le for any reason held or
OBM1ad to be uncenwpdbnai,mob(Nolen elea nor
Baal BM validly al the re nalNna patio:MIna The
Board el County Commissioners hereby flaws riot H
Continued to next page....
PMn ter ate Corr N Dos tia third
Ordnance Ia ter MN Wass GROWTH
IN THE MATTER OF bentit eat ttie taithh, BOUNDARIES Section
Aye eery,and welkin of of the Comprehensive
THE 1IIMEAL A lYlTf H s• people of Weld pop on Pages 90 and AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
panty.
AMENDMENTS TO se.
CERTAIN MAPS TO HOW, THEREF M IT FURTHER STATE OF COLORADO
ICANCE Nft. IT ORDAINE 1NED by the ss
WELD the Board of C that land-use COUNTY OF WELD
COMMIEHE .siE commissioners a�ulions received
alterBrt•as first wading
C UIR p E N I. V eWradoW that ea Ordinance 147-C, I, KEITH HANSEN, of said County of Weld, being duly
MEWED eaadng Urban 1hM N reviewed and sworn,say that I am publisher of
Nandary map eeeeldered i^
DE IT QRD,AINW$Y Weld • Cam Ce5dance with the WINDSOR BEACON
THE BOARD OF Cenprehengve PlOS newt re-enacted map
C O O NTY was andre end adopted text"
COMMEMIONEM I OF to show the reddJ�1}�a ossared herein. a weekly newspaper having a general circulation in said
THE COUNTY OF Dab
b the County and State, published in the town of WINDSOR,
WELD. STATE OF Growth Boundary area M IT FURTHER
COLORADO: and is incorporeal, ORDAINED by the in said County and State; and that the notice, of which
amierence• seed that this the annexed is a true copy, has been published in said
WHEREAS,the BRAN sow us i No.a same weekly for_ successive weeks, that the notice
of CeMtty � IT FURTHER sow a a is the carts
Ceausaionera of the ORDAINED by 'tine r Ordinance No. 147, was published in the regular and entire issue of every
Coney of Weld.Stela d Bond, that carsta asrasnded,is intended number of the paper during the period and time of
cargo,pursuant la elating Seething el to be•continuation of publication, and in the newspaper proper and not in a
Celeesdo statute end Ordinance 147, as De prior ordinance and
Maid County Spa ambrlded are repel not a new enactment. supplement, and that the first publication of said notice
Rau Ohartn,Is Veal and re-enacted,Mr was in said paper bearing the date of the
with the authorial of amendments,ant a BE IT FURTHER
onalli 2 ace County.
various section Dr• O by the �l,,�
el weld County, oda. revised, Or eel land uw day of P "C.ern-µ�Z" , A.D., 19 and
Oat-'b.and dealed to fe t s waived by the last publication bearing the date of the
as Ina
WHEREAS,the BUN l the first rearing
Wort
W CMMty Amend the aril deli a as fi day of A/)., 19_ and
Cemesawners he is pMe�rap" of Ma W OHNertee Nc l /° that the said WINDSOR BEACON has been published
parer and auto eW yREdiD' GRD/[N 4 !e5.b•r t7, hasp continuously and uninterruptedly for the period of 5
udder tM Weld t el dr AR pr denies ;aliened reviewed ant
time Skis etas sad Mcite ComPrshsawa by aid consecutive weeks,in said County and State, prior to the
Ana 20 of Title Rr, ilen'on Page M M County in accordance date of first publication of said notice, and the same is a
t�71Mla adopt planing uss : with the newly re- newspaper within the meaning of an Act to regulate
a a1:�
Ilia end policies be mated scum am tag printing of legal notices an advertisements, approved
arena we of theotpa Coact
An Urban area
Is • �
Sind ci Is Nd in 8f a titan Or adopted in . May 18, 1931,and all prior cts ter as in force.
Ordinance No.1a7C.
AS,are BUNparity pality. t R an BE IT FURTHER 21 //
el Cont_ u ru r b a n-growth ORDAINED by the
�L�./..(
Om to elon•fe of IMM- beandwiee,mutti - Band,If any section. ' P LISHER
CaatM,Colorado-kin pip use ant aoS MA•ection,paragraph,
prentusb ado►Nl sa• planned. .and sentence, clause, w 7Ift
G•""'"" No, lag, lemoodpn may Sit at••o•of this Ordhrwo Subscribed and sworn to before me this /U day
Went cou• Udtbiw Grant BoutiMpy a for any reason holder of 'b.€O itthtt 19
Cewsrehensive Pa•, mugs sn shown an too decided to be
e egaashing • adopted unconstitutional,web ����� ._S� �/,..mry�
ores decision chap not Meat .Y iJ}
d ng gateTaa •`a of � the validity of the NOTARY PUBLIC
and policies for the awwak bound•dUtM5 remaining portions '
tsarraerP•n�area M of u oneaMlBdiph tlteol. The BoaN N My commission expires ^ 2� y
Commiseiews
hU now of adopted a municipcillry_ �haerseebdy declares Ns OF ph!N HT M%
sdUUments MSara in each el Isil RYan�ler lA>_
Orrrance No. t 4T-B. packing� prima sectits. VELD C •don:No~
and wadi and public OItD1r. a _1 M area
a
A^rauations tsWh radon,Para?•Mi. CCEORnoo W�
WHEREAS, ate sentence, clause.ant
eaa, , „..„.bey a lit• thereat O•aotance L. H
p..r P o s e d sal' diryy au . phnae ad"' Bansnd Rearms:
Comprehensive vsion Pan prUlds thee—uti •s Mu t anyone
of the l l W.N. ^ a.HIM
revision has bare tilt nisi to constant sect anyone reor all W.H. Webster. i4 Deana
revloard by the Wald Macs urban grawsi sections,aubeacdeae. TM i' , -Skirt woe
Gamy manse, area. ass paragraphs,seniors, Ma lie E.Baxter .-
lard Coati as ion
Corny and Ise sad,ryudea wino b elan t be er phiromis Dalt Digdeclared wife aria Ridings*' _
peMiaewa,and b-1es we h repaid unconstitutional or Final R
iIETEST: ` A._ 20,1
te address f tIa YrwYld• Mew County motto teMERE:AS, the owinBODO dasAt/border rt of kills a WE n the I.
et - Cowin pr of a The above and reward - I.
Coniesionere of RIZ ssyssyhy, Thep ace foregoing Ordinano
COOMISIdy link anf eon intended te Number 147.O was,et
tes it*at Dec Y,ff.
made or Et
ty Clerk
a nett w eBwwHn w �;�'y dsA aBeN .• "MH ,:
the Gnh
mpeeetw vies of lens M the Nita to you an as ales
eta as a mi dg er moos. 'A} p1tED sll'n se so an r e
and around- Weld AD.,UM. OweAWNS N•vawbr
Cosh. BessrBv to 2a,/Ma.r
ORDINANCE NO 147- safety, and welfare of 4Iet1 the third
a the people of Weld �''' r�seraph of the
County.
�IItBAN GROWTH
IN THE MATTER OF R NDARIES Section
THE REPEAL AND RE- NOW, THEREFORE, of the Comprehensive
ENACTMENT, WITH BE IT ORDAINED, by Plan on Pages 30 and
AMENDMENTS TO the Board of County 31.
CERTAIN MAPS TO Commissioners of the AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
ORDINANCE NO. 147, County of Weld,State of BE IT FURTHER
WELD COUNTY Colorado, that the ORDAINED by the
COMPREHENSIVE existing Urban Growth Board that land-use STATE OF COLORADO
PLAN ORDINANCE,AS Boundary map of the applications received ss
CURRENTLY Weld County before the first reading COUNTY OF WELD
AMENDED Comprehensive Plan be of Ordinance 147-C
repealed and re-enacted ll be reviewed and
BE IT ORDAINED BY to show the reduced Ibaidered In I, KEITH HANSEN, of said County of Weld, being duly
THE BOARD OF size of the Urban .,aordance with the sworn,say that I am publisher of
C 0 U N T V Growth Boundary areas *goy re-enacted map
COMMISSIONERS OF and is incorporated by oil adopted text
THE COUNTY OF this reference. fillijainedherein. WINDSOR BEACON
WELD, STATE OF
COLORADO: BE IT FURTHER .4. IT FURTHER a weekly newspaper
ORDAINED by the a Pap having li a general the of in said
WHEREAS, the Board Board, that certain GMDdINEth by the County and State, published in the town of WINDSOR,
bad that this
of county existing Sa 147,a af E�1Aklanee No. 147-C,earns in said County and State; and that the notice, of which
Commissioners of the Ordinance as tint as it is the same the annexed is a true copy,County of Weld,State of amended, are repealed p,, has been weeks, that thin notice
Colorado, pursuant to and re-enacted, with •ordinance No; 147, weekly for __successive that the notice ieheta continuation
intended
Colorado statute and amendments, and the he be a continuation of was published in the durin and entire issue of every
the Weld County Home "various sections are Syior ordinance and number of the paper during the period and time of
Rule Charter, is vested added, revised, or
with the authority of deleted to read as sane,enecanem. publication, and in the newspaper proper and not in a
with etarine the affairs : RE IT FURTHER supplement, and that the first publication of said notice
of Weld County, Q RAINED by the was in said paper bearing the date of the
Colorado,and Amend the second Bard that all land use n
paragraph of the �ipons received by c -Sdft) � , A.D., 19 f 3
WHEREAS, the Board URBAN GROWTH weld county before the day of - r {aµ.ng the and
c• County BOUNDARIES Section of the first reading the last publication bearing date of the
Commissioners has the of the Comprehensive lance No. 147-C
power and authority Plan on Page 30 to Ileelrember 17, 1993) day of
under the Weld County read: flag be reviewed and y A.D., 19 hed
Home Rule Charter and detaltldered by Weld
that the said WINDSOR BEACON has been published
Article 28 of Title 30, An Urban Growth qty in accordance continuously and uninterruptedly for the period of 5
CRS, to adopt planning Boundary area is 1e1M the newly re- consecutive weeks,in said County and State, prior to the
goals and policies for located in close esetetl ma
the unincorporated proximity to a p as date of first publication of said notice, and the same is a
an`eted herein and text newspaper within.the meaning of an Act to regulate
areas of the county of municipality. Within es adopted in this
Weld,and urban - growth Oe/aanee No 147-. printing of legal notices an advertisements, approved
boundaries, municipal- pp
WHEREAS, the Board type uses and services 7.7--
M ay 18, 1931, and all prior cu ar as in force.
of County are planned, and
IT FURTHER
Commissioners of Weld annexation may occur. ORDAINED by the
County, Colorado, has Urban Growth Boundary EMS. if any section,
Milmectio
previously adopted areas are shown on the alancen, paragraph, c „( i
Ordinance No. 147, County's adopted Urban phisbaYnoe
Weld County Growth Boundary map. lib.i of this Ordinance
Comprehensive Plan, The size of urban du fed reason held e
establishing a growth boundaries has aflq�{etl to be r
Subscribed and sr Orn to before me this .�rP t day
comprehensive revision been set at one-half
n shall not affect 19, 3
of the planning goals mile from an area which tM validity of the .p`
and policies for the ■ municipality is ramelnine portions �`unincorporated areas of providing required hat The Board of w NO �z1w�
the County of Weld and utilities such as public 4afaY Commissioners
. PUBLIC
has adopted water and public sewer. bra,declares that It �n
amendments in Annexations which My commission expires .a �f Q�
Ordinance No. 147-B, extend beyond theOrdina have enacted this P �-r�t r /
and municipality's ability to
^ce in each and /
• provide these utilities every section,
WHEREAS, the shall not be considered subsection, paragraph,
proposed in the urban growth
phrase thereof sentence,clause, and
M94eetber
BOARD OF GOUN7'Y T4T: Lcr.1 b ale
Comprehensive Plan boundary area. Goals A Beata
revision has been and policies within the thatirres anyone of the fact COMMI$$IONERi, i�ounry Nrp
reviewed by the Weld urban growth that or more WELD cOUNTr. f� bty "
County Planning sections, subsections, DORADO Second. Reading:
boundaries are intended December e,1993
Commission and the to address the paragraphs,sentences, BY: Publication: December
Board of County development of land on clauses, or phrases Constance L. Harbert, Depute Clete rg t 9, 1993,ine Windsor
Commissioners,Co p might be dedared to be Chairmen Boar
the border of a unconstitutional or W. H. Wishner, Pro- Beacon
municipality. They are invalid. T
WHEREAS, the Board also intended to - APPROVED AS" To Final Reading:
:
of County promote harmonious The above and Dila K HO Decetnba[20.1993
Commissioners of Weld and mutually beneficial foregoing Ordinance Barbra J. Publication: December
County
do erminerres dtaby fi thernds e s uses of land among the Number 147-C was,;gn � M 23,1993,in the Windsor
various jurisdictions in motion duly made sad A++rfM: Beacon
a need for a revision of and around Weld mooed, adopted by
-
County. YNl wing vote an the E6ective: December
Plan for the County of 2B,199e
Weld, and that this Mlb day of December, - -
Ordinance is for the AD.-1993. Publi bM its. the
benefit of the health, ovem
N inns en
November 26,
Dame t a fait
—..
1
V
IM
YI
VU'
November 18, 1993
Lee Morrison
Asst. Weld County Attorney A
h
V
Dear Lee, 4
I agree to either return or replace the Waste Water Systems map
which I have entered as evidence for the Board of County
Commissioner's hearings.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Since
Ed Orr
"Let us help you put your brand
�V on a ranch or farm."
ORA LAND i
CO11/IPANY
801 8th Street, Suite 230
Greeley, Colorado 80631
(303) 351-8777 i
'.•. J - -.S_i'aia`+►�a-�aas�tl.-<�FIE�tEe��lEttwi��:�'
December 6 , 1993
To: Weld County Commissioners
From: Bob Winter , President
Weld County Farm Bureau
Dear Commissioners:
As I have had a previous commitment prior to your December 6 ,
1993 hearing on Urban Growth Boundaries. I would like to
express some of my concerns to you about the change in the Urban
Growth Boundaries from three miles to one-half mile.
Thanks to you Mrs. Kirkmeyer and Mrs. Harbert I have a copy of
the Weld County Comprehensive Plan dated March 24, 1992. After
reading these guidelines, and that is what they are; I don ' t see
any reason to change the Urban Growth Boundaries at all . It
does seem that in the previous hearings that the planning
department is ready and willing to do whatever it takes to limit
growth in Weld County . As stated in your comprehensive plan, one
can always apply for whatever one wishes and it is left up to the
planning commission to make any recommendation is sees fit , for
or against .
Farmers and Ranchers have planned their retirements on the future
growth to allow for the appreciation of their farms which would
allow them a decent retirement. Not only have the farmers
planned for the future, the water districts have purchased water
to handle future growth . Fire Districts have purchased Fire
Apparatus and other equipment to handle growth in their
respective municipalities. Every entity has planned for future
growth and now is not the time to arbitrarily deny the people of
Weld County the opportunity to benefit from such growth.
Your planning department continues to arbitrarily be authorities
on what is considered PRIME AGRICULTURAL LAND. I wonder if they
are certified Agriculturalists from any University or Company to
know what is PRIME AGRICULTURAL LAND is?
It states in your comprehensive plan that consideration of
highest and best use is a portion of the criteria for determining
the out come of any development . This is a little bit of a grey
area, as it seems to be left op to the discretion of the planning
department .
(4-..1Xiiiiiirte,
off, i '-mod
If there is to be a limit on growth , there are many other factors
that will limit growth. Water availability for growth. Jobs for
the people to purchase the new housing . The number of company' s
entering Weld County with a need for more employees. Changes in
major infrastructures in the state within Weld County . Utilities
capability or capacity to handle growth . These are only a few
examples of limiting factors that will limit growth . We in Weld
County don' t have to be following the federal government ' s lead
in trying to know what is best for the people. We don' t have to
have the planning department know what is best for Weld County.
We need to let FREE ENTERPRISE work efficiently to create the
needed growth for all of the people of Weld County .
Weld County Farm Bureau has one thousand twenty-six members which
equates to over two thousand voters. Our policy in Farm Bureau
is to allow FREE ENTERPRISE to work efficiently in all aspects of
agriculture and other businesses. We in Farm Bureau believe that
government is to be run of the people, by the people, for the
people. Not of the government , by the government , for the
government. Creating more hurdles for farmers, developers, and
other entrepreneurs to get through , will only allow more
bureaucracy to perpetuate itself.
You have been asking for people to help the planning department ,
and to become involved in the rewrite of the Comprehensive Plan .
Then it would seem appropriate to wait until it has been
rewritten before you change your requirements and limitations for
a new Urban Growth Boundary .
Another consideration, of this moving of the boundary is the
possibility of a Taking of Private Property Rights without Just
Compensation. As in the Lucus case in South Carolina last summer
the Supreme Court awarded the state to give Mr . Lucus "Just
Compensation" for the loss of value to his real-estate because of
a change in governmental regulation. We have enough regulations .
Let' s just leave this alone until the new revised Comprehensive
Plan is rewritten.
Thank You .
Sincerely ,
Bob Winter , President
Weld County Farm Bureau
EXHIBIT-3,
i
Ord /'/,7--GJ
November 15, 1993
To: WELD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
As a concerned citizen and landowner in Southern Weld County,
I request that the Commission and Planning Commission not
redefine the urban growth boundaries for Minor and Estate
Subdivisions from the existing 3 mile radius of an incorporated
City or Town to within k mile of an existing incorporated City
or Towns ' sewer service as has been proposed.
I believe this step takes away more of the ownership rights
as well as the devaluation of properties. The proposed change
will also affect the planned growth within the County. The
existing criteria is reasonable and has not created any adverse
effects.
Signed: A concerned Citizen & Landowner
j?1,-Z2sr C,/tig-Let h (rte.
Sam S. Funakoshi
6757 Weld County Road 23'/2
Fort Lupton, Colorado 80621
EXHIBIT
oiG/
November 16, 1993
To: Weld County Commissioners
Weld County Planning Commission
As a concerned citizen and homeowner in Southern Weld County,
I am requesting that the Commission and Planning Commission not
redefine the urban growth boundaries for Minor and Estate
Subdivision from the existing 3 mile radius of an incorporated
City or Town to within mile of an existing incorprated City
or Town sewer service as has been proposed.
I believe this step will take away more of the ownership rights
as well as devaluation of property. The proposed change will
also affect the planned growth within the County. The existing
criteria is reasonable and has not created any adverse effects.
Signed: a concerned citizen and homeowner,
X T\Cb . V OJI4-
Brenda K. Kast
160 Kahil Place
Fort Lupton, Co 80621
EXHIBIT
November 15, 1993
Ofd
To : Weld County Planning Commission
Weld County Commissioners
The undersigned concerned citizen request the Weld County
Planning Commission not to redefine the urban growth boundaries for
Minor and Estate Subdivisions from the existing three ( 3 ) mile
radius of an incorporated city or town to within 1/2 mile of an
existing incorporated city or towns sewer service as has been
proposed.
The effect of this proposed change will virtually stop all
planned growth within the County. The existing criteria is
reasonable and has not created any adverse effects.
As an owner of a 80 acre farm I feel my ownership rights of a
property have been violated by backdoor tactics . In the future I
hope the County officials will be more considerate about informing
the people of Weld County of such important issues .
Respectively Submitted,
/
Donald Rosenbrock
3286 WCR 23
Fort Lupton, CO 80621
ilre2.4
si ice
1 , ,
pf y
t ® November 15, 1993 i EXIT
1 J;" • I
x• Ccl ( p-C
Weld County Planning Dept •
Weld Administrative Office
1400 N 17th Avenue
Greeley, Co 80632
Pax: 351-0978
Gentlemen:
Concerning the proposed change to Weld County Comprehensive Plan,
"Minor Subdivision" in an Urban Growth Boundary now defined as a
distance of 3 miles from the boundary of an incorporated city or
town.
It in my understanding that the Planning Department and County
Commissioners are considering reducing the 3 mile radius to a 1/2
mile of the outermost boundary of a towns sower service or boundary.
I feel very strongly that the current 3 mile limit is reasonable to
control development and handle concerns of growth within the county.
I understand and agree with the concerns of controlling development
in order to maintain the agricultural demands and needs of the
county. The county also offers a rich history and friendly small
town environment that needs preservation.
As an active Realtor in Weld County and a past resident of the Port
Lupton area, I have experienced the demand for properties in Weld
County and the concerns of rapid growth. We must be reasonable and
wise in the approach of limiting or controlling development. The
Current proposal seems neither reasonable or wise.
We can all agree that the demands of development are knocking at
Weld Counties door. This is a very serious issue that requires much
study. I believe the current 3 mile boundary is fair and reasonable
and that better planned subdivisions or other reasonable regulations
on development should be studied. Example: if one of the concerns
is Water for domestic use, then a study of this concern should be
implemented; would a community well to service the development be
beneficial, maybe, maybe not, but the idea is to continue some
reasonable growth and address the issues one by one in order to
create better communities.
•
��y-yl��pr��1
•''�� 1° norlhwosl,inc.
12000 pocos stroel
wosiminstor,colorado 80234
ofico phone: (303)457.4000
•
rach Olncu Indopondonlly Owned•,.J Opel Nod
The majority of purchasers for small acreage properties, want the
rural environment either for lifestyle or the enjoyment of a few
horses, ' 4-H projects, etc. These new residents to the county
increase revenues for the cities, large and small business within
our cities and even increase revenues for small and large farmers
and ranchers in the community as well as the counties tax base.
Livestock is a multi-million dollar industry and an active part of
Weld Counties agricultural base, with wise• decisions that are
reasonable to control development all industries in our county will
prosper. The current proposal wilr?Io more harm than good over the
long run and I am confident that Weld County Planning Department and
County Commissioners can implement a new proposal working with the 3
mile boundary currently in place and that a new creative and and
progressive plan is at our fingertips.
Thank you,
Toni L. Thiemuu
Broker Associate
RE/MAX Northwest, Inc.
(303) BBB-1555
•
EXHIBIT
•
5
i Zadel & Associates Realty, Inc.
311 Grant Avenue • P.O. Box 90•Firestone, Colorado 80520
(303) 833-3012 •Metro (303)659-0092 • FAX (303) 833-3054
if
u.'
Greg Zadel
CRS-GRI i
Broker
Licensed Appraiser
Tuesday, November 09, 1993
Weld County Board of County Commissioners
P.O.Box 758
Greeley, Co. 80632
Dear Commissioners:
RE: Minor Subdivisions
I understand that you will be discussing a proposed change to the Weld County Comprehensive
Plan regarding the development of minor subdivisions. The current 3 mile boundary is adequate
and should not be reduced. The demand for these type of properties is high and the County
should not artificially impose barriers to the marketplace. I encourage you to deny this proposed
change.
i
Sincerely,
4
Gre Zadel
i
X
N 8%1
j e. e
m Q `
I._ MSS =
o� "Professional Real Estate Service" - =" r
Zadet & Associates Realty, Inc.
311 Grant Avenue• P.O. Box 90 • Firestone,Colorado 80520
833-3012• Metro 659-0092• FAX 833-3054
November 12 , 1993
Weld County Board of County
Commissioners
P. O. Box 758
Greeley, CO 80632
Dear Commissioners:
I am writing in connection with the Planning Commission
hearing scheduled for November 16 & 17, 1993 concerning a
change in the Weld County Comprehensive Plan affecting
minor subdivisions in the county.
To restrict the urban growth boundary to within one-half
mile of the outermost boundary of a town's sewer service
will deny future home ownership to a very large number of
potential tax payers in Weld County. People who buy in the
minor subdivisions do so because they want to live in
"rural" Weld County, not within the confines of a town or
city! Restriction of growth should remain at the current
three-mile boundary. That is adequate and definitely should
not be reduced.
Thank you for your consideration.
Al The Bes ,
Dula jase'X2----/
Carralee Somers
Sales Associate
Y E it,IT
w 75,757
[ ® Q
kit "Professional Rea Estate Service"
Zauel & Associates Realty, Inc.
311 Grant Avenue• P.O. Box 90• Firestone,Colorado 80520
833-3012•Metro 659-0092• FAX 833-3054
November 12, 1993
Weld County Board of County
Commissioners
P. O. Box 758
Greeley, CO 80632 I
Dear Commissioners:
I am writing in connection with the Planning Commission
hearing scheduled for Tuesday, November 16, 1993 concerning
a change in the Weld County Comprehensive Plan affecting
minor subdivisions in the county.
To restrict the urban growth boundary to within one-half
mile of the outermost boundary of a town's sewer service
will deny future home ownership to a very large number of
potential tax payers in Weld County. People who buy in the
minor subdivisions do so because they want to live in
"rural" Weld County, not within the confines of a town or
city! Restriction of growth should remain at the current
three-mile boundary. That is adequate and definitely should
not be reduced.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
.-&zt- Ginza -
Betty D. Close
Sales Associate
EXHIBIT f
e ?
ad/97
I
^^ ° I
ML$ "Professional Beal Estate Service" �,�•
November 16, 1993
Weld County Board of County Commissioners
Centennial Services Building
P. 0. Box 758
Greeley, CO 80632
RE: Proposed Urban Growth Boundary Change
Dear Commissioners :
As a Weld County property owner and taxpayer, I have a big
concern about the proposed change from three miles to one-half
mile for the Urban Growth Boundary. It appears that Weld County
Government is trying to "close the gate" and stop all further
growth. Without growth, my property values are destined to
remain constant and at agricultural values .
It is important that the County have controlled growth, but
is it fair or equitable to stop virtually all growth? America
was built upon the spirit of freedom, but the direction I see
with this change is to take one more right away from the
individual and his property rights .
If this change is allowed to pass, I would encourage you to
look seriously at reducing your staff in the Planning Department.
Our taxes should not be used to pay salaries for people not
being productive.
Please accept my thoughts in the spirit intended.
Sincerely,
EN
k Qt
David C. Conner
EXHIBIT
J. L.
SEARS & ASSOCIATES
INC. REAL ESTATE
November 16, 1993
Weld County Board of County Commissioners
Greeley, CO
Greetings:
I am writing to express my concerns over a proposed change regarding
the defined urban growth boundaries established in Weld County. The
current boundary is a 3 mile radius from the limits of an incorporated city
or town. I understand that the proposal is to reduce this boundary to a
radius of 1/2 mile from the town's sewer system.
This proposal seems to be overly restrictive and not particularly
conducive to "controlled" growth in the county; rather, it appears to be an
effort to kill this type of development completely. If enacted, a developer
would have little choice but to apply for annexation to the nearest town,
effectively allowing the county officials to wash their hands of the issue.
I realize and support the goal of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan to
preserve productive agricultural lands. A defined urban growth boundary
of 3 miles seems adequate and reasonable, 1/2 mile does not. There is a
reasonable balance between development and preservation of
agricultural lands. Let's try to manage growth rather than kill it.
Sincere ,
Kirk Goble
Broker
J.L. Sears &Associates, Inc.
EXHIBIT
ly 7-c
303/857-2930 - 303/629-0432 - 303/785-2291
140 DENVER AVENUE-FORT LUPTON,COLORADO 80621
November 15, 1993
Weld County Board of County Commissioners
Centennial Services Building
P.O. Box 758
Greeley, CO 80632
Dear Commissioners,
This letter is to protest the proposed change to the Comprehensive Plan to allow Minor
Subdivisions only within 1/2 mile from a city's sewer line.
I cannot imagine where an idea like this originated. I am sure that this proposal did not
come from the land owners in the county. Here we go again, the government is taking
away more of the land owners rights. I am a professional in the real estate field who
has been dealing with farmers and land owners for 30 years and I have never talked to
any land owner who wanted more restrictions to have to deal with.
Every time that a land owner has to give up one of his rights, it reduces the value of his
property.
When dealing with a proposal like this, I first like to ask myself 'how would all of the
land owners who own land outside the city limits would vote on this, if they had the
opportunity?' These are the people that you represent. What are their desires? Has
the public really been notified? Have the land owners been asked for their input?
I hope that you will realize that South Weld County is in for a period of growth. Not
everyone wants to live in the city. We need rural subdivisions to meet the needs of our
citizens.
Our present method of regulating subdivisions seems quite restrictive enough as it is
now. It is working adequately now, so I urge you to leave the rules on subdivisions
alone and do not change them.
Sincerely,
Burl Van Buskirk
Associate Broker Phone 785-2291
J.L. Sears & Associates, Inc.
140 Denver Ave.
Fort Lupton, CO 80621 EXHIBIT
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES
PHONE(303)353-3845, EXT. 3540
WELD COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES
1400 N.• 17TH AVENUE
GREELEY, COLORADO 8063131 COLORADO
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Weld County Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing on Tuesday,
November 16, 1993, at 1:30 p.m. , to review a request for approval of an amendment to
the Weld County Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendment will repeal the existing
Weld County Urban Growth Boundary map and re-enact a new Urban Growth Boundary map.
The size of the Urban Growth Boundaries are proposed to be reduced from three miles
from a municipality' s incorporated boundary to one-half mile from an area that a
municipality is providing required utilities such as public water and sewer.
The text of the Urban Growth Boundaries' Section of the Weld County Comprehensive
Plan is also proposed to be amended to reflect the reduced size of the Urban Growth
Boundary areas.
Notice is also hereby given that land-use applications received after the date of the
final Planning Commission decision regarding the newly re-enacted Urban Growth
Boundary area map and amended text in the Comprehensive plan shall be reviewed and
considered in accordance with the newly re-enacted map and adopted text.
The public hearing will be conducted in the Weld County Commissioners' Hearing Room,
First Floor, Weld County Centennial Center, 915 Tenth Street, Greeley, Colorado.
Comments related to the above map or amendments should be submitted in writing to the
Weld County Department of Planning Services, 1400 N. 17th Avenue, Greeley, Colorado
80631, before the above date or presented at the public hearing on November 16, 1993.
Copies of the proposed amendments and map are available for public inspection in the
Department of Planning Services, 1400 N. 17th Street, Greeley, Colorado, - Phone -
353-3845, Extension 3540.
Judy Yamaguchi, Chairperson
Weld County Planning Commission
To be published in the Windsor Beacon.
To be published one (1) time by November 4, 1993.
Received by:
Date:
3038333054 'ADEL REALTY 433 P01 N0V 12 '93 12:55
Zadel 8 Associates Realty, Ina
311 Grant Avenue•P.O.Box 90•Firestone,Colorado 80520
833-3012•Metro 659-0092•FAX 833-3054
November 12, 1993
Weld County Board of County
Commissioners
P. O. Box 758
Greeley, CO 80632
Dear Commissioners:
am writing in connection with the Planning Commission
hearing scheduled for Tuesday, November 16, 1993 concerning
a change in the Weld County Comprehensive Plan affecting
minor subdivisions in the county.
To restrict the urban growth boundary to within one-half
mile of the outermost boundary of a town's sewer service
will deny future home ownership to a vary large number of
potential tax payers in Weld County. People who buy in the
minor subdivisions do so because they want to live in
"rural" Weld County, not within the confines of a town or
city! Restriction of growth should remain at the current
three-mile boundary. That is adequate and definitely should
not be reduced.
Thank you for your Consideration.
Sincerely,
Betty >;. Close
Sales Associate
kik „professional Real Estate Service"
N0V 12 ' 93 12: 58 3038333054 PAGE . 001
3038333054 ?ADEL REALTY 436 P01 NOV 12 '93 16:37
Zadel & Associates Realty, Inc.
311 Grant Avenue•P.O.Box 90•Firestone.�
520
833-3012 Metro 6594092•FAX$33-3054
c-,
November 12, 1993
Weld County Board of County
Commissioners
P. O. Box 758
Greeley, CO80632
Dear Commissioners:
I am writing in connection with the Planning Commission
hearing scheduled for November 16 & 17, 1993 concerning a
chan a in the Weld Count com rehensive Plan affectin
m nor su visions in a coun
•
To restrict the urban growth boundary to within one-half
mile of the outermost boundary of a town's sewer e ruservservice
ce
will deny future home in WeldhCounty.to a very People who buy in the
potential b tax pay
minor subdivisions do so because they want to live in
"rural" Weld County, not within the confines of a town or
t the current
r Restriction ofThha is Should adequaterandin definitely Should
three-mile boundary.not be reduced.
Thank you for your consideration.
All The Best,
Carralee Somers
Sales Associate
C
• AILSQ "Professional Real Estate Service"
NOV 12 ' 93 16: 40 3038333054 PAGE . 001
mEm®RAn®urri
WI`Dۥ Chuck mentiofe
To Department of Planning Serm�ces November 16, 1993
COLORADO From Bruce T. Barker, Weld County Attorney
Subject. Ordinance Number 147-C
I recommend the following language for the ordinance "BE IT FURTHER
ORDAINED" :
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, by the Board that all land use
applications received by Weld County before the date of
the first reading of Ordinance 147-C (November 17 , 1993)
shall be reviewed and considered by Weld County in
accordance with the newly re-enacted map as ordained
herein and text as adopted in this Ordinance 147-C .
If you have further questions, please feel free to call me on
extension 4390 . Thank you.
��7 1
Bru�T C rker f
Weld County Attorney
BTB/db
Ordinance, 147-C
Page 2
Amend the second paragraph of the URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES Section of the
Comprehensive Plan on Page 30 to read:
An Urban growth boundary area is located in close proximity to a
municipality. Within urban-growth boundaries, municipal-type uses
and services are planned, and annexation may occur. Urban growth
boundary areas are shown on the County's adopted Urban Growth
Boundary map. The size of urban growth boundaries has been set at
one-half mile from an area which a municipality is providing
required utilities such as public water and public sewer.
Annexations which extend beyond the municipality' s ability to
provide these utilities shall not be considered in the urban growth
boundary area. Goals and policies within the urban growth
boundaries are intended to address the development of land on the
border of a municipality. They are also intended to promote
harmonious and mutually beneficial uses of land among the various
jurisdictions in and around Weld County.
Delete the third paragraph of the URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES Section of the
Comprehensive Plan on Pages 30 and 31.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, by the Board that land-use applications received
before the first reading or Ordinance 147-C shall be reviewed and considered in
accordance with the newly re-enacted map and adopted text contained herein.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, by the Board that this Ordinance No. 147-C, insofar
as it is the same as Ordinance No. 147 as amended, is intended to be a
continuation of the prior ordinance and not a new enactment.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, if any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence,
clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held or decided to be
invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portion. The Board of County Commissioners hereby declares that it
would have passed the ordinance, and each phrase thereof irrespective of the fact
that any one or more sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or
phrases might be declared to be unconstitutional and invalid.
3038333054 ?RDEL REALTY 417 P01 N0V 09 '93 09:20
Zadel & Associates Realty, Inc.
311 Grant Avenue•P.O.Box 90•Firestone,Colorado 80520
(303)833-3012•Metro(303)659-0092•MX(303)833-3054
"S.
Greg Zadel
CRS-on
8bker
Limited Appraiser Tuesday, November 09, 1993
r Weld County Board of County Commissioners
P.O.Box 758
MC/
r Greeley, Co. 80832
Dear Commissioners:
RE: Minor Subdivisions
I understand that you will be discussing a proposed change to the Weld County Comprehensive
Plan regarding the development of minor subdivisions. The current 3 mile boundary Is adequate
and should not be reduced. The demand for these type of properties is high and the County
should not artificially impose barriers to the marketplace. I encourage you to deny this proposed
change.
Sincerely,
Id
El
MiS "Professional Real Estate Service"
N0U 9 ' 93 9: 23 3038333054 PAGE. 001
RE/MAX NORTHWEST TFI No .303 252 8133 Nov 16 ,93 9 :22 No .002 P .02
i _,
,r4'r - .,, rn
^'Is�_o' November 15, 1993
Weld County Board of commissioners
centenial Services Building
P.O. Box 958
Greeley, Co 80632
Fax: 352-0242
Gentlemen:
concerning the proposed change to Weld County Comprehensive Plan,
"Minor Subdivision" in an urban Growth Boundary now defined as a
distance of 3 miles from the boundary of an incorporated city or
town.
It is my understanding that the Planning Department and county
commissioners are considering reducing the 3 mile radius to a 1/2
mile of the outermost boundary of a towns sewer service or boundary.
I feel very strongly that the current 3 mile limit is reasonable to
control development and handle concerns of growth within the county.
1 understand and agree with the concerns of controlling development
in order to maintain the agricultural demands and needs of the
county. The county also offers a rich history and friendly small
town environment that needs preservation.
As an active Realtor in Weld County and a past resident of the Fort
Lupton area, I have experienced the demand for properties in Weld
county and the concerns of rapid growth. We must be reasonable and
wise in the approach of limiting or controlling development. The
current proposal seems neither reasonable or wise.
We can all agree that the demands of development are knocking at
Weld Counties door. This is a very serious issue that requires much
study. I believe the current 3 mile boundary is fair and reasonable
and that better planned subdivisions or other reasonable regulations
on development should be studied. Example: if one of the concerns
is water for domestic use, then a study of this concern should be
implemented; would a community well to service the development be
beneficial, maybe, maybe not, but the idea is to continue some
reasonable growth and address the issues one by one in order to
create better communities.
WAIN( northwest,Inc.
12000 pSoos Street
westmtnster,colorado 60234
office phone:(309)457-4800
Lieu.Mee k d,p.nd..wy Owned and°W OW
N0V 16 ' 93 9: 18 i I 303 252 8133 PRGE . 002
- 7
RE/MAY NORTHWEST TFL No .303-252-8133 Nov 16 .93 9 :22 No .002 P .03
The majority of purchasers for small acreage proeerties, want the
rural environment either for lifestyle or the enjoyment of a few
horses, 4-H projects, etc. These new residents to the county
increase revenues for the cities, large and small business within
our cities and even increase revenues for small and large farmers
and ranchers in the community as well as the counties tax base.
Livestock is a multi-million dollar industry and an active part of
Weld Counties agricultural base, with wise decisions that are
reasonable to control development all industries in our county will
prosper. The current proposal will 3o more harm than good over the
long run and I am confident that Weld County Planning Department and
County Commissioners can implement a new proposal working with the 3
mile boundary currently in place and that a new creative and and
progressive plan is at our fingertips.
Thank you,
Toni L. Thieman
Broker Associate
RE/MAX Northwest, Inc.
(303) 888-1555
N0V 16 ' 93 9: 19 I� 303 252 8133 PAGE . 003
BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Moved by Bud Clemons 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 proposed amendments to the Weld County Comprehensive Plan and
Urban Growth Boundary Area Map, be approved as amended to show the size of the
Urban Growth Boundaries be set at one-half mile from a municipality' s boundary.
Motion seconded by Bill O'Hare
VOTE:
For Passage Against Passage
Bill O'Hare
Shirley Camenisch
Juliette Kroekel
Tom Rulon
Bud Clemons
Ron Sommer
Marie Koolstra
Richard Kimmel
The Vice-Chairperson declared the resolution passed and ordered that a certified
copy along with the proposed amendments and map, be forwarded to the Board of
County Commissioners for further proceedings.
I, Becky Schoenfeld, 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
November 16, 1993.
Dated the 16th of November
Becky Schoenfeld
Secretary
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES
Each municipality in the County, together with the urban uses located on
its border, is in reality a single community requiring an extensive system of
urban services. The most efficient method to plan for and provide required urban
services at the lowest cost to the taxpayer is for urban development to occur in
the municipalities , thus avoiding the duplication of services and discouraging
the formation of special districts and . other authorities to provide urban
services. Also, municipal governments are accountable for most services required
to support a developed area, whereas, it may require several special districts,
each accountable for a specific service, to support the same developed area
outside of a municipality.
An urban growth boundary area is located in close proximity to a
municipality. Within urban-growth boundaries, municipal-type uses and services
are planned, and annexation may occur. Urban growth boundary areas are shown on
the County' s adopted futurc land use URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY map. The siae of the
urban growth boundaries have been set at three (3) miles to eonform with Weld
County' s policy of referring land use proposals for review and comment to any
,;yz *[₹k'2131t*A*M$NIMAi4f1*$5*I 2OV*I#I*7fO*
REPTY142439,*IYPIritivillkli *Sifeli*AS*FINNAC*MAZERHANDk*R114141,G*S&Tdig&***ANNEW110-141>*44-idaik
i+Lt4Ot' THE*MWN₹@IBAkf'€fS*Palki51le-cniiS&PRAWAIDEmTME$E*WTI'IITIES*SUALL '&*B,**
*Ia*T&E*WggQA7akgelall* ANN*;AF,4* Goals and policies within the
urban growth boundaries are intended to address the development of land on the
border of a municipality. They are also intended to promote harmonious and
mutually beneficial uses of land among the various jurisdictions in and around
Weld County.
46C MEMORAnDU
luRe Planning Commission Members November 9, 1993
To Date
Chuck Cunliffe, Director C ��^ Q' ' 1
COLORADO From '••�nJI `�`
Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Subject: -
The Department of Planning Services' staff recommends that the proposed amendment
and revised map be approved for the following reasons:
1. The existing Comprehensive Plan is in need of revision as proposed. Urban
uses continue to develop further and further from areas served by
municipalities. Municipalities continue to annex property that is not
serviced by the city's infrastructure. The reduction of the Urban Growth
Boundary areas will reduce the potential for conflicts between
agricultural uses and residential, commercial, and industrial uses. Urban
uses and development will be directed toward the existing municipalities
which can provide urban services.
2. The proposed amendment will be consistent with existing and future goals,
policies, and needs of the County. This amendment encourages the existing
commitment expressed in the Comprehensive Plan to conserve natural and
managed resources while directing growth and enhancing economic
development.
3. The proposed amendment will not place a burden upon existing or planned
service capabilities. The reduction of the Urban Growth Boundary areas
encourages and promotes the most efficient method to provide urban
services at the lowest cost to the citizens of Weld County.
Infrastructure expenditures will be reduced by directing urban uses and
development toward existing municipalities. This amendment will also
discourage the formation of special districts and other authorities to
provide urban services outside of a municipality's existing and special
service area which could result in a duplication of services with extra
costs to the citizens of Weld County.
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES
Each municipality in the County, together with the urban uses located on
its border, is in reality a single community requiring an extensive system of
urban services. The most efficient method to plan for and provide required urban
services at the lowest cost to the taxpayer is for urban development to occur in
the municipalities, thus avoiding the duplication of services and discouraging
the formation of special districts and other authorities to provide urban
services. Also, municipal governments are accountable for most services required
to support a developed area, whereas, it may require several special districts,
each accountable for a specific service, to support the same developed area
outside of a municipality.
An urban growth boundary area is located in close proximity to a
municipality. Within urban-growth boundaries, municipal-type uses and services
are planned, and annexation may occur. Urban growth boundary areas are shown on
the County' s adopted future land use URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY map. The ai.c of the
urban growth boundaries have been set at three (3) miles to conform with Weld
County' s policy of referring land use proposals for review and comment to any
jurisdiction within 3 miles of the proposal. THE SIZE OF URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES
HAS BEEN SET AT ONE-HALF MILE FROM AN AREA WHICH A MUNICIPALITY IS PROVIDING
REQUIRED UTILITIES SUCH AS PUBLIC WATER AND PUBLIC SEWER. ANNEXATIONS WHICH
EXTEND BEYOND THE MUNICIPALITY' S ABILITY TO PROVIDE THESE UTILITIES SHALL NOT BE
CONSIDERED IN THE URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY AREA. Goals and policies within the
urban growth boundaries are intended to address the development of land on the
border of a municipality. They are also intended to promote harmonious and
mutually beneficial uses of land among the various jurisdictions in and around
Weld County.
A potential for land use conflict is created when jurisdictional boundaries
become the source of differentiation for landuses. For example, this may-occur-
when the County refers a request for mineral extraction-or livestock confinement
to a municipality that has anne-x-e4 beyond the range e£ i-ts eap4-tel improvements
program schedule and its ability to provide uti e-s such a^ public water and
newer. When a land use referral rs made to a municipality heeauoc of an extended.
annexation, eounty representatives may-consider, in part, the -type -of -public
utilities and schedule for placement of the pubic utilities when reviewing the
land use proposal.
Urban service infrastructure expenditures represent an important investment
in the future growth of the region and a commitment to the quality of life in our
municipalities. Adequacy, efficiency, and economy of road construction, road
maintenance, water supply systems, sewage disposal, storm drainage, and
facilities for schools, fire, and police protection are fundamental concerns in
evaluating uses within urban growth boundary areas.
WELD COUNTY 1 ) .j ^,;`z`r� i I i t 'h • �
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY 1 {. A-. i —T
MAP
PREPARED SY .^t S _ °y1 1
WELD COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF
PLANNING SERVICES
1993
EXISTING INCORPORATED AREAS I'^S` I r { yA. { `r' ' ♦ -
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES r • - '2'
��1 • —i N 1 ( - t .
NOTES
Lrovier -
specific mmM eincerninu teem miens miler le im + '
Comity NO Poe' 1 l_ }-`I Fee MI.land use within wt.erme(elm le the
I mn emnan e1 P . e(e
n l rr n,....ma
1.9. 1 .. 1O `l T
I
hI __1 _ .r,
J. ���q1 , ! IY /
O 2 ] 5 Il '‘‘ @415 E .y.--(...r__ EATON 1
MILES
t9�6J�,4 1 1 t •1 urE. _
U O J•. -..._t .'L 'C_
< 1
1
ti= 1 -aF P
EXHIBIT 'An 'N.,1 lit>tr t ••-',1_, 'ar
L` _. A_UUE / 1
] Ir V N �- f 1 �1 .. � r 'S V I
°.y�� 1 17 irt�
� � 1 r.�-_ I/ h � II..1±:-,t -1 _
u
Id/
jJY C WVlEVL E. t �,
o � ' 14 i 11 4 e -
L „?...0__e__
L-1
}u �� E E Fr-r-T'"' 15 7 r ` r
0. • f.2_1,17 t }
~L 1Y.EEaf3
fs1 OED 1 '' ( e - ,a 45Y w nN_\1. mx --, I I
ono f
1 r.. '1.) U Iv I:.
kcv
..-
••
'"j,v.,: "- 'i• . ''t-:1:_••: f:-C`.::tom. -1'•:: y iii: ' .';'•C • `
• WELD COUNTY n, \-- •fir:•�'+•.1•.,, ). e:Nsi' '1 ...} r. ,.,r, i'•'r r'11v- v • .. 1
URBAN• GROWTH BOUNDARY -"=r•I`, j \ ':.:, ) _ ; ;j. .__ _ "_V`-.:•� •t r
MAP •
l�,••1 r1! -.L.i .\r, _.r}lrL. h• `a::.l' If:: 5..<:.;1`' t—r'I}'' 'i;' '!'",
,,,.;'+''S.:• -;,.•1 h-•� _ :•1:-•;V-• . / I _'...••• !: i 1.•4'''V^ - 1.1
!ROWED BY •1�i,"\ { �.` ..1. \ ,•�-I` , �"Pt 4i!'.,,) •• .Jw'. ;'<'• •' .•''.\ -,'•
' WELD COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF :4•14,:,• 1...,
+�7•,• `.' r, .., I _ __ 1 _ ••/' ] e s�''. +; _'I
PLANNING SERVICES :�rf. �• .r,_. •• . it : .1. "1. 1 , ,.. �J'.,-• -n'Y jr- -i'• �'
1506 'M 0..:t). ,.l..' •?1'•' A• Air', i{.'. .F ... jN\1 '4•\ },•:17,E— j~ `I
r •U. a • _ l � � • P f
EXISTING INCORPORATED AREAS •�f',* rat•rte-'••!t:.^H( `i..\-:..-'r1 -. :�'"''I. :lia .' j. I • ,• . . ` — �' ice1 �-. ' .' !
URMN 1Nf Ol)!!DA IES �.' r'1 �., +' �:`� _ - t" `��r' '•E •
, C; •
GAO N B R l� • l r: „!. , ,f2•-.....c .:1. .:- :p • \. L' o)., • •.._} i.'I. E• ,
• L _ rj
�s7ll � � t -_�� ?t. :�. � .
I•. 11.....a...4- ..4 1 t `. • -i ''•,♦..f• ,.\tiw'•1' ..
eoeor;c nb..eibn w.c Ppi Ina,.b.,Hier a On 1',' ,.. r- n ' F2.7);I•:•� -t '.i '.S•,S:�\rT _.1.._. :�:�•17I:7
\ rr•�.. S:
v..a.,'+V..w.i carte.e. ,•.else,.PPP rte:... 't .1?'\'lsiii4i,;)1:1..2`.4%J' 1 ;. .0;.,- Ira' :%�• , Il' "s ;,.��:+. • ,1 -i. .i' ,\t t li •:_, •j.,�`.
rer 4.c. �.e.+e.41144,e.ee•., r.nr rol me L1 ..F ;'firi!1.•. ':,�' '—^ . �� l ,l 1., _ _..
.r..,rk.�.•p.n.-.;. pen P 4n..w»awury in'Allier, 1r'{. :a':• f. ,}I!\. 1r _ t' , i� ,••;,. .-.-1...I.•.`
-`I ^; % �„• .I.
i/.. :.',; :1:.. el : 1•). .t; f .1 IV. •.^ c.I:.•if • ;U-t ,), , j c,S- �,-.i.*/•
• ,� �n •'1 (-� � Iilrr >�• . ' � _i
O . •-c.
•
o f 2 5 4 S 6 ' i L:'{ , ♦1 1 ,5EvC7rwlrC! 1 f� , . , t'`
.MILES • \., t _ _ , ,, y+ I }) C,' ▪f' -
y S.... .g' of ` 1\; -.-: -:-.1"
-.1 •i., , • .t, - { I.
I ' ir�;. \: .. ,•,y�� ••!t- ♦,' .rte • 'L..• •
;u • :,:ELI_ ', ,' ' , V - •_,•'+ .�1.
•¢ i• t Ili y -, - •- •.f••-{
�' ' f - .
i EXHIBIT "A" ism i•♦ _ ` �' LtM ic_ 1t:•ripur.1�.r
L , ' . :� �I J • •;,4._m •': _•.,..--.'c'r'r. .•71 - --r'• -:'' 1— • .. $ ...:.„,:.:.....'i-.1r. 1}4:. l: SS •'.A. . ' t ` :......;.:...:::7',...,:;,...,...%.!:.7..:...,.....:
ri •4 •
r,._. r1A :ice �.' . .1. • tr•.'I • .l•:.7 :t•• f�: .:�''
.,y .. ?.; '�S'•n+V f '7 •rJ ,, 3r• '. •i 2. 7p^ . . \f
cC '� • 'f r ••�, I•,�f )•C. ,I%Y ,7•. 2 �t •,•J' S SI�7:•'•
I
I•,t •
all Ytt '.s \ I J+y'r• If' 1• A. �.., /' Ili r'1.• r• l\ ,•• _ .t t L• J.
•
• . !, .• •-•:-•� e. J� •-• -..:•.•1• {.J�.•._▪.• �` •.. •wit ^--� •f.
' ,{I` _1 \_t y•o 1 y`_ • •{ 7l!-.a ••Z•' •'' \ ,}I,-7',.1- . .....•1 pre{. ' ` ...4•1I•71,....77".....-_ "'.''•1• ::::'-'.1% . 1s,q
• • 7"; tic Ili- Rc?t. 1 •- y. f : `1 a. � .
1 +ham:' .. 1
.r 11• '.�j.. ,•t : `f - II t 11 ••701:.4,,., !• t�' _'r��w ,L= •
�' '• ' 1 i'� ,. ta I'•-Y !y Et� � '.�t�: __'•� �, r'nt t•. - 11 ..*•••-•
. '`:t1'. , .•r ,
I..r�., •.
• - .{• 'jam. ! mow• '..� ! f' / --•r
}\•~
t1 '.. S:,./''' 1 I C'.....' •Y/.l � ' d - ' •''�IT I�.j i'� ,,., r 1' :ti ' �• *,1 •%.
•-• - •- . ' •
NELSON ENGINEERS
822 7TH STREET GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 (303)356-6362
November 16, 1993
Weld County Planning Commission
1400 North 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Commissioners,
Weld County and the Colorado Department of Health have promulgated extensive and
detailed regulations with respect to individual sewage disposal systems. These regulations
have been developed for the purpose of preserving the environment and protecting the public
health, to eliminate and control the causes of disease, infection, and aerosol contamination;
and to reduce and control the pollution of the air, land, and water. They further limit the
installations to areas that are not feasible for connection to public sewer systems and to areas
that are amenable to their use.
These regulations, when used properly, ensure safe and adequate sewage treatment facilities.
When systems are properly designed, installed, and administered in accord with these
published regulations, they create little or no problems of sewage disposal with respect to
public health and safety. It is only when facilities are installed improperly or in areas not
adequate for absorptive systems that problems arise. The broader scope of public benefit,
including effective and beneficial use of lands, should be the basis for positive decisions
regarding the use of individual sewage disposal systems outside the boundaries of publicly
sewered areas.
As a registered professional engineer who is familiar with the published regulations and the
design of individual sewage systems, I believe it is in the best interests of the citizens of Weld
County to continue use of septic tanks and leach fields and/or evapotranspiration systems in
accordance with the state and county published regulations.
Respectfully,
LaVern C. Nelson, P.E.
• "(HIM
a
J. C-
November 16, 1993
TO: Weld County Planning Commission
The undersigned concerned citizens and Weld County Planning
Task Force members agree and request the Weld County Planning
Commission not to redefine the urban growth boundaries for Minor
and Estate Subdivisions from the existing three (3) mile radius of
an incorporated city or town to within 1/2 mile of an existing
incorporated city or towns sewer service as has been proposed.
The effect of this proposed change will virtually stop all
planned growth within the County. The existing criteria is
reasonable and has not created any adver�sse eff ts9
Signed: ( - -g - t 4-U
Concerned cit zens arid Weld County
'mg Task Force me ers
( i
14---
6In 76t
k
,SaPS- Q"Fri‘
7/vc
-e-ya,-64-vgic-4 -5-c*e/imitr--
nisi'.
C
November 11, 1993
TO: Weld County Planning Commission
The undersigned concerned citizens and Weld County Planning
Task Force members agree and request the Weld County Planning
Commission not to redefine the urban growth boundaries for Minor
and Estate Subdivisions from the existing three (3) mile radius of
an incorporated city or town to within 1/2 mile of an existing
incorporated city or towns sewer service as has been proposed.
The effect of this proposed change will virtually stop all
planned growth within the County. The existing criteria is
reasonable and has not created any adverse effects.
Signed:
concerned citizens and Weld County
Planning Task Force members
•
C
77g psi ( -)
2
riEXHIBIT
� �
November 15, 1993
Weld County Planning Commissioners
Weld Administrative offices
1400 N. 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Commissioners,
This letter is to protest the proposed change to the Comprehensive Plan to allow Minor
Subdivisions only within 1/2 mile from a city's sewer line.
I cannot imagine where an idea like this originated. I am sure that this proposal did not
come from the land owners in the county. Here we go again, the government is taking
away more of the land owners rights. I am a professional in the real estate field who
has been dealing with farmers and land owners for 30 years and I have never talked to
any land owner who wanted more restrictions to have to deal with.
Every time that a land owner has to give up one of his rights, it reduces the value of his
property.
When dealing with a proposal like this, I first like to ask myself 'how would all of the
land owners who own land outside the city limits would vote on this, if they had the
opportunity?' These are the people that you represent. What are their desires? Has
the public really been notified? Have the land owners been asked for their input?
I hope that you will realize that South Weld County is in for a period of growth. Not
everyone wants to live in the city. We need rural subdivisions to meet the needs of our
citizens.
Our present method of regulating subdivisions seems quite restrictive enough as it is
now. It is working adequately now, so I urge you to leave the rules on subdivisions
alone and do not change them.
Sincerely,
/g-b1,6
Burl Van Buskirk
Associate Broker Phone 785-2291
J.L. Sears & Associates, Inc.
140 Denver Ave.
Fort Lupton, CO 80621 + EXHIBIT
Br
J.L.
SEARS & ASSOCIATES
INC. REAL ESTATE
November 16, 1993
Weld County Planning Commission
Greeley, CO
Greetings:
I am writing to express my concerns over a proposed change regarding
the defined urban growth boundaries established in Weld County. The
current boundary is a 3 mile radius from the limits of an incorporated city
or town. I understand that the proposal is to reduce this boundary to a
radius of 1/2 mile from the town's sewer system.
This proposal seems to be overly restrictive and not particularly
conducive to "controlled" growth in the county; rather, it appears to be an
effort to kill this type of development completely. If enacted, a developer
would have little choice but to apply for annexation to the nearest town,
effectively allowing the county officials to wash their hands of the issue.
I realize and support the goal of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan to
preserve productive agricultural lands. A defined urban growth boundary
of 3 miles seems adequate and reasonable, 1/2 mile does not. There is a
reasonable balance between development and preservation of
agricultural lands. Let's try to manage growth rather than kill it.
Sincere (),
< 2t,tao
Kirk Goble
Broker
J.L. Sears &Associates, Inc.
EXHIBIT
r
lV� ✓H7
303/857-2930 - 303/629-0432 - 303/785-2291
140 DENVER AVENUE-FORT LUPTON,COLORADO 80621
November 15, 1993
To: WELD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
As a concerned citizen and landowner in Southern Weld County,
I request that the Commission and Planning Commission not
redefine the urban growth boundaries for Minor and Estate
Subdivisions from the existing 3 mile radius of an incorporated
City or Town to within z mile of an existing incorporated City
or Towns ' sewer service as has been proposed.
I believe this step takes away more of the ownership rights
as well as the devaluation of properties. The proposed change
will also affect the planned growth within the County. The
existing criteria is reasonable and has not created any adverse
effects.
Signed: A concerned Citizen & Landowner
-27 z-c(/jc.n/t
Sam S. Funakoshi
6757 Weld County Road 231/2
Fort Lupton, Colorado 80621
,get
itN
November 16, 1993
To: Weld County Commissioners
Weld County Planning Commission
As a concerned citizen and homeowner in Southern Weld County,
I am requesting that the Commission and Planning Commission not
redefine the urban growth boundaries for Minor and Estate
Subdivision from the existing 3 mile radius of an incorporated
City or Town to within z mile of an existing incorprated City
or Town sewer service as has been proposed.
I believe this step will take away more of the ownership rights
as well as devaluation of property. The proposed change will
also affect the planned growth within the County. The existing
criteria is reasonable and has not created any adverse effects.
Signed: a concerned citizen and homeowner,
da Icy
Brenda K. Kast
160 Kahil Place
Fort Lupton, Co 80621
lidit
I ,--
November 15, 1993
To : Weld County Planning Commission
Weld County Commissioners
The undersigned concerned citizen request the Weld County
Planning Commission not to redefine the urban growth boundaries for
Minor and Estate Subdivisions from the existing three ( 3 ) mile
radius of an incorporated city or town to within 1/2 mile of an
existing incorporated city or towns sewer service as has been
proposed.
The effect of this proposed change will virtually stop all
planned growth within the County. The existing criteria is
reasonable and has not created any adverse effects.
As an owner of a 80 acre farm I feel my ownership rights of a
property have been violated by backdoor tactics . In the future I
hope the County officials will be more considerate about informing
the people of Weld County of such important issues .
Respectively Submitted,
Ll&I
Donald Rosenbrock
3286 WCR 23
Fort Lupton, CO 80621
EXHIBIT
Z.
64Q1 P/7c.
Zadel & Associates Realty, Inc.
311 Grant Avenue•P.O.Box 90•Firestone,Colorado 80520
833-3012•Metro 659-0092•FAX 833-3054
November 12, 1993
Weld County Board of County
Commissioners
P. O. Box 758
Greeley, CO 80632
Dear Commissioners:
I am writing in connection with the Planning Commission
hearing scheduled for November 16 & 17, 1993 concerning a
chap a in the Weld County Comprehensive Pi f
minor subdivisions in icy,�.inQ
To restrict the urban growth boundary to within one-half
mile of the outermost boundary of a town's sewer service
will deny future home ownership to a very large number of
potential tax payers in Weld County. People who buy in the
minor subdivisions do so because they want to live in
"rural" Weld County, not within the confines of a town or
city! Restriction of growth should remain at the current
three-mile boundary. That is adequate and definitely should
not be reduced.
Thank you for your consideration.
Al The Bes ,
Carralee Somers
Sales Associate
II4
4 I MO'?
Ca pi 7c.
L ® MLSI Cr
"Professional Real Estate Service"
Zacuci t"u Associates Realty, Ii.. .
311 (;win Avenue• P.O. Box 90 • Firestone,Colorado 80520
833-3012• Nteuo 059-0092 • FAX 833-3054
November 12, 1993
Weld County Board of County
Commissioners
P. O. Box 758
Greeley, CO 80632
Dear Commissioners:
I am writing in connection with the Planning Commission
hearing scheduled for Tuesday, November 16, 1993 concerning
a change in the Weld County Comprehensive Plan affecting
minor subdivisions in the county.
To restrict the urban growth boundary to within one-half
mile of the outermost boundary of a town's sewer service
will deny future home ownership to a very large number of
potential tax payers in Weld County. People who buy in the
minor subdivisions do so because they want to live in
"rural" Weld County, not within the confines of a town or
city! Restriction of growth should remain at the current
three-mile boundary. That is adequate and definitely should
not be reduced. F
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
R). 6.14-10
Betty L. Close
Sales Associate
gr
i
EXH< nT
O
"1'rul'otisionad Real Estate He twice"
Zadel & Associates Realty, Inc.
311 Grant Avenue •P.O. Box 90•Firestone, Colorado 80520
(303) 833-3012 •Metro (303)659-0092 •FAX(303) 833-3054
Greg Zadel
CRS-CRI
Broker
Licensed Appraiser
Tuesday, November 09, 1993
Weld County Board of County Commissioners
P.O.Box 758
Greeley, Co. 80632
Dear Commissioners:
RE: Minor Subdivisions
I understand that you will be discussing a proposed change to the Weld County Comprehensive
Plan regarding the development of minor subdivisions. The current 3 mile boundary is adequate
and should not be reduced. The demand for these type of properties is high and the County
should not artificially impose barriers to the marketplace. I encourage you to deny this proposed
change.
Sincerely,
It'
l
V
!XMtjif
2
erer
-- has
"Professional Real Estate Service"
-'1
November 15, 1993
Weld County Planning Dept
Weld Administrative Office
1400 N 17th Avenue
venu
Greeley,
Fax: 351-0978
Gentlemen:
Concerning the proposed change to Weld County Comprehensive Plan,
"Minor Subdivision" in an urban Growth Boundary now defined as a
distance of 3 miles from the boundary of an incorporated city or
town.
It is my understanding that the Planning Department and County
Commissioners are considering redu of cing the sewer3leeradius to a 1/2
mile of the outermost boundarl►
I feel very strongly that the current 3 mile limit wis reasonnable to
blento_ .
control development and handle concerns of growth
I understand and agree with hhernsmofdcontrolling
nntr lling df eloopment
in order to maintain the agricultural small
county. The county also offeschistory and friendly
town environment that needs preservation.
As an active Realtor in Weld County and a past resident of the Fort
Lupton area, I have experienced the demand for properties in Weld
County and the concerns of rapid growth. We must be reasonable and
wise in the approach seems fn limiting
r eo Cana llinnggadevelopment. The
current proposal
we can all agree that the demand of vemenntait sr knocking
mathat Weld
counties door. This is a vary serious lop
study.and thati believe t3 mile boundary is fair and b
better planned subdivisions or other reasonable
on development should be studied. Example: if one of the concerns
is water for domestic use, then alstuudyo sof thistconcerni should
should be
implemented; would a community
beneficial, maybe, maybe not, but the idea is to continue some
reasonable growth and address the issues one by one in order to
create better communities.
CC: fie
200 ' 39dd 1S3MH1'JON XUW 3d WOdd 60 : 1 ! 666 63 nON
•
•
The majority of purchasers for small acreage properties, want the
rural environment eitheetcfor lifesneweror the
tenjoyment
the county
few
increase horses, Ore e projects,
s fo
ur cities andevenoinr creasetrevenuesgfornsmallll and larges within
farmers
and ranchers in the community as well as the counties tax base.
Livestock is a multi-million dollar industry and an active part of
weld Counties agricultural base, with wise decisions that are
to control development wilal industrieso harm in our over the
will
prosper.s The current proposal Department and
long run and I am confident that Weld County Planning Depa
county Commissioners can implement
ema neatproposal os lrworkingawith the 3
d
mile boundary currently inplace and
progressive plan is at our fingertips.
Thank you,
Toni L. Thieman
Broer Associate
RE/kMAX Northwest, Inc.
(303) 888-1555
800 ' 39tld 1S3MHldON XaW 3d Woad 01e1I C6d 63 AON
♦ K
November 15, 1993 fl Weld County-B°Board of Commissioners
centenial services Building
P.O. Box 958
Greeley, Co 80632
Fax: 352-0242
Gentlemen:
Concerning the proposed change to Weld County Comprehensive Plan,
"Minor Subdivision ' in an urban Growth Boundary now defined as a
distance of 3 miles from the boundary of an incorporated city or
town.
It is my understanding that the Planning Department and County
Commissioners are considering reducing the 3 mile radius to a 1/2
mile of the outermost boundary of a towns sewer service or boundary.
I feel very strongly that the current 3 mile limit is reasonable to
control development and handle concerns of growth within the county.
I understand and agree with the concerns of controlling development
in order to maintain the agricultural demands and needs of the
county. The town environment that needsistory and friendly small
As an active Realtor in Weld County and a past resident of the Fort
Lupton area, I have experienced the demand for properties in Weld
County and the concerns of rapid growth. We must be reasonable and
wise in the approach of limiting or controlling development. The
current proposal seems neither reasonable or wise.
We can all agree that the demands of development are knocking at
Weld Counties door. This is a very serious issue that requires much
study. I believe the current 3 mile boundary is fair and reasonable
and that better planned subdivisions or other reasonable regulations
on development should be studied. Example: if one of the concerns
is water for domestic use, then a study of this concern should be
implemented; would a community well to service the development be
beneficial, maybe, maybe not, but the idea is to continue some
reasonable growth and address the issues one by one in order to
create better communities.
de; /PG- ROHR( Northwest, Inc.
12000 Psoos Street. Suns 180
Welauntnstsr, Colorado 50234
113-1/fa Office: (o) 467-4800
s.a.ow..-- . --wo..r.ccins
'00 ' 39dd 153MHldON XUW 3d WOdd 01 : I1 E6 , E3 AON
** ie , **
The majority of purchasers These new residents
for small acreage proeerties, want the al environment either hhoorrses,, 4-H projects, etc for lifestyle
or the enjoyment
thetcountyof a few
increase revenues for the cities, large and small business within
our cities and even increase revenues for small and large farmers
and ranchers in the community as well as the countiestisctax part. of
Livestock is a multi-million dollar industry c
Weld Counties agricultural base, with wise decisions that are
prosper. The ccurrent ol pproposalewil all
�doimoretries in our harm than good over the will long run and I am confident that Weld County Planning Department and
County Commissioners yninmplace and thatent a new ew proposal eativegandtand the 3
mile boundary si currently fingertips.
progressive plan is at our
Thank you,
41
LeRoy Pfaff
Broker Associate
RS/NAX Northwest, Inc.
(303) 451-5153
GO0 ' 39dd IS3MHldON XHW 3d WOdd [ l : ll E66 S3 OON
Hello