HomeMy WebLinkAbout981713.tiff 7050 Loma Linda Ct.
Longmont CO 80504
September 5, 1998
Weld Board of County Commissioners C1_JI
P O Box 758
Greeley CO 80632
Subject: Fulfillment of I-25 Corridor Group development standards objectives.
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Thank you for the opportunity to serve and the certificate awarded for being on the
advisory committee for the Tri-Area Interim Coordinated Agreement. I hope that the
municipalities involved will approve the Agreement, as has the County. Agreeing on
standards for the area building heights, setbacks, landscaping, streets, etc. and
enforcement procedures is a good start for coordinating those aspects of development.
However, much remains to be done, a great deal of it contentious in nature, to fulfill the
stated goals of the I-25 Corridor Group relating to: "financing of area infrastructure and
services, preservation and/or acquisition of community separators, protected open space,
view corridors along I-25, and passive agricultural areas".
The Revised Development Standards draft of March 26, 1996 calls: "for purchase of
property or conservation easements to preserve unique natural features or maintain
agricultural production in certain areas", provision for open space and access through all
developments to adjacent waterways.
Parenthetically, the recently proposed trail system does not achieve these goals. It appears
to be a patchwork of existing protected land elements in area municipalities and an
adjacent county that supposedly gives the appearance of a plan. Weld County contributes
no land except that of an ongoing gravel pit operation near Del Camino. It will take more
than the contributions of Colorado taxpayers through Dept. of Local Affairs Legacy
Grants to make even a connected trail system a reality.
Weld County government must provide a means and do a substantial part in realizing the
above stated objectives, needed by the area and committed to by County government as a
member of the I-25 Corridor Group. By accompliching those objectives, the word
"interim" could be removed from the Tri-Area Interim Coordinated Planning Agreement,
realizing a meaningful all encompassing Plan for the area. I realize the political
implications relating to those residents in other parts of the County, and particularly the
City of Greeley, in funding for the special needs of southwest Weld. However, the
revenues being generated for the County by permitting, and even promoting, the
development of southwest Weld, in particular in the MUD District, should in some
measure be returned to it. This would serve in some small way to preserve the rural
heritage of the area, which preservation was promised by Weld government before the
MUD District prrooposallww enacted.
Very l}rir
o . rolsom
PC: County Attorney, Director, Planning Services, Weld County Council.awards.doc
4W
01eA -1 981713
St. Vrain Rural Impact District
7050 Loma Linda Ct. Sept. 4, 1998
Lr i Longmont CO 80504
%mica-Daniels Mika, Director
Weld County Planning Services
1400 North 17th Avenue
Greeley CO 80631
Subject: Midtown Materials & Storage
Dear Ms Daniels-Mika
We would like to bring to the attention of Weld County Planning Services some concerns
relating to approval of the above business operating at the corner of SH119 and CR7.
1. The land is in a flood plain. See Building Code ordinance section 20.11, Area of Special
Flood Hazards Standards. Will the trailer and any stored articles on the site be protected
from flooding? We have previously expressed our concerns regarding the effect of using
fill to raise areas above the flood plain on the validity of the FEMA study in establishing
the limits to the flood plain.
2. Re: Building Code Ordinance 119. Will the owner comply with sections 70 - Mobile
Home Permits; 20.9 - Mobile Home Installation Standards, and 30.6 Zoning Compliance
requirement for a mobile home on the property [sections based on 1/16/89 version of
ordinance 119 and assumption mobile home requirements must be met even if the mobile
home is allegedly only used for an office]?
3. Re: Mixed Use Development Ordinance 191: section 2.4 in effect calls for 15% of the
lot to be landscaped plus 20% open space. Section 2.6 Landscaping provisions should be
strictly required given the exposure along a major highway. Additionally, reference should
be made to section 35.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance 89 in determining these requirements.
4. Strict adherence of disposal of sewage [43.1.1.7] and methods of supplying water
[43.1.1.8] of the Zoning Ordinance 89 should be required to be complied with under the
conditions for mobile home installations.
5. Reference should also be made to the requirements of the recently enacted Tri-Area-
County IGA ordinance which provides for additional regulations in the MUD area.
We recognize the inevitability of commercial and industrial uses along SH119 given the
pressures from developers and the attitude of Weld government. It is our hope that
County government will strictly enforce its ordinances pertaining to development to
demonstrate their avowed dedication to establishing a favorable aesthetic appearance to
that corridor. In our opinion, as it stands, the subject establishment fails to comply with
this goal.
Very truly yours,
St. Vrain Rural Impact District
John S. Folsom
PC: BOCC, Weld County Council midtown.doc
9gi713
Hello