HomeMy WebLinkAbout951158.tiffMay 19, 1995
Mr. Dale K. Hall
AT -LARGE
P/O Box 758
Greely, Colorado 80631
L &"W Partnership
1011 WCR 7
Carrgp nt, Colorado 80504
Phone 535-0727
SUBJECT PROPERTY: SW CORNER of 1-25 FRONTAGE RD. & WCR 28
Dear Mr. Hall,
The purpose of this letter is to ask why there is a proposal for the elimination of property north of WCR 28 from the I-25
Mixed Use Development Area. We are confused as to why, and urge you to reconsider this proposal.
We learned on May 18, 1995, that our property was being eliminated from the Mixed Use Development Area in the
proposed revision to the Weld County Comprehensive Plan. We were never contacted regarding the elimination of our
land; therefore, we did not have the opportunity to voice our opinion regarding this matter.
The elimination of land north of WCR 28 puts land owners at a considerable disadvantage for development of their
property. In our case, our property was purchased with the intent of development. At the time this property was
purchased, it was more desirable because it was located in the I-25 Mixed Use Development Plan. Our property is
located at an area that we believe would make development more desirable (near I-25/Highway 66 junction). Our
assurances that this land would be developed responsibly, without the cost and time associated with amending the
WeldCounty Comprehensive Plan, is that it is already in this plan. We want our property to remain in the I-25 Mixed
Use Development Area.
Proceeding with this action would be a financial detriment to us because developers would have less incentive or
motivation to purchase or develop our property without the tax incentive currently available in the MUD and Enterprise
Zone. Subsequently, this places a financial loss on our investment for commercial/industrial sales purposes.
Additionally, this poses as a potential loss of revenue for Weld County from any income that may be generated in the
future.
We would strongly urge that no land be deleted from the I-25 Mixed Use Development Area without the land owner
petitioning for exclusion. This would be the reverse of requirements necessary for inclusion into the Comprehensive Plan.
A second, but definitely less desirable alternative would be to hold hearings before both the Planning and Zoning
Commissions on the single issue alone, of elimination of property north of WCR 28. This would require notification to
the land owners and any other affected parties so that they could present their views.
Again, we want our property to remain the in the I-25 Mixed Use Development Area. I would deeply appreciate
you reconsideration of deleting our property from the I-25 Mixed Use Development Area.
Sincerely, Sincerely,
LeRoy Louwagie, Mgr. Partner Michael G. Williams, Gen. Partner
4nn0��
\l0r519\ &! 677 «i
951158
Hello