HomeMy WebLinkAbout972604.tiff RESOLUTION
RE: APPROVE POLICY FOR ZONING PROPERTY DEANNEXED FROM A MUNICIPALITY
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, 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, no written policy exists for Weld County concerning the zoning of property
deannexed from a municipality, and
WHEREAS, C.R.S. § 31-12-603 provides deannexed property which has been in a
statutory city for more than two years maintains its City zoning unless specifically rezoned by the
County, and
WHEREAS, there are no statutory provisions addressing deannexation from any other
form of municipal government, and
WHEREAS, staff has requested interpretation of the Board's policy regarding such
properties, and
WHEREAS, the Board deems it advisable to adopt the following policy concerning the
zoning of property deannexed from a municipality:
Deannexed property not subject to C.R.S. 31-12-603 or Intergovernmental
Agreements with municipalities or other counties limiting the applicability
of this rule would revert to the County zoning in effect at the time of
annexation (including a finally approved Use by Special Review) unless
the Planning Director determines that them is need for a Board
determination as to whether them has been a substantial change in
conditions in the neighborhood from the date of the annexation. The
procedure for determining whether there has been a substantial change
may be initiated prior to the effective date of the deannexation but any
determination of no substantial change in the conditions in the
neighborhood shall expire within 90 days of the date of the determination.
The procedure for the Board's consideration shall be in accordance with
the procedures for adjudicatory type hearings except that the burden shall
be upon the party seeking to reinstate county zoning.
The uses and structures allowed in the deannexed property where there
has been a substantial change in the conditions of the neighborhood will
be limited to those uses legally in existence at the time of deannexation in
accordance with the terms of§ § 73-75 of the Weld County Zoning
Ordinance, #89 ,as amended, until the landowner has applied for and
obtained a zone designation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld
County, Colorado, that the above stated policy for zoning property deannexed from a municipality
be, and hereby is, approved.
972604/ L PL0073
POLICY FOR PROPERTY DEANNEXED FROM A MUNICIPALITY
PAGE 2
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board that the Director of Finance and
Administration be, and hereby is, directed to include said policy in the Administrative Manual.
The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted
by the following vote on the 15th day of December, A.D., 1997.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD OUNTY, COLORADO
ATTEST: !i�,
d, V, " �' ' Gee E. Baxter, Chair
.t b.
Weld Coun{;j _-
►- i� �,;7 -� ,1 few
�k1
I etance L. rbe , Pro-T m
BY: "_._ita s V O�
Deputy Cle MIT a' •.*r
Dal K. Hall
A ED TO FORM: cit./J.4
arbara J.. KiirrkkineyIer /�
o my A rn // fJ t, /i
W. H. Webster
972604
PL0073
= ELo CCCITY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CLR,'i
REVIEW/WORK SESSION REQUEST TO T'
DEPARTMENT: COUNTY ATTORNEY DATE: December 2, 1997
PERSON REQUESTING:�f.ee D. Morrison, Assistant Weld County Attorney
YK
Brief description of the problem/issue:
Place on agenda for approval of language:
The question has come up as to what zoning a property would possess if deannexed from a
municipality. There is a lack of law on the issue except for a provision which only applies to
statutory cities'. A landowner could request a rezoning or permit but may wish to avoid such a
process.
A use which has a vested right created statutorily would have the protections of compensation for
expenses under the vested rights statutes. Common law vested rights (investment backed
expectation, i.e. construction)would carry that protection over the change of jurisdiction in the form
of a non-conforming use. This limits the ability of the landowner to make changes to the existing
use.
I would propose an administrative manual interpretation which would state as follows:
Deannexedproperty not subject to C.R.S. 3 1-12-603 or Intergovernmental Agreements with
municipalities or other counties limiting the applicability of this rule would revert to the
County zoning in effect at the time of annexation (including a finally approved Use by
Special Review) unless the Planning Director determines that there is need for a Board
determination as to whether there has been a substantial change in conditions in the
neighborhood from the date of the annexation. The procedure for determining whether
there has been a substantial change may be initiated prior to the effective date of the
deannexation but any determination of no substantial change in the conditions in the
neighborhood shall expire within 90 days of the date of the determination. The procedure
for the Board's consideration shall be in accordance with the procedures for adjudicatory
type hearings except that the burden shall be upon the party seeking to reinstate county
zoning.
1 § 31-12-603 C.R. S . provides deannexed property which has
been in the City for more than 2 years maintains its City zoning
unless rezoned by the County.
The uses and structures allowed in the deannexed property where there has been a
substantial change in the conditions of the neighborhood will be limited to those uses legally
in existence at the time of deannexation in accordance with the terms of§ § 73-75 of the
Weld County Zoning Ordinance, #89,as amended, until the landowner has applied for and
obtained a zone designation.
What options exist for the Board?
The other approach would be to simply accept the existing municipal zoning although this creates
problems with inconsistencies between county and municipal zoning classifications. This could be
partially addressed by assigning the closest county designation. However, the County could then
inherit a zoning that is inappropriate and have no say in the process since the deannexation process
provides no input for the county.
Recommendation to the Board:
Place on agenda language for approval.
Initial:
Approve Schedule
Recommendation Work Session Other
Baxter ✓
Hall V
Harbert
Kirkmeyer v
Webster
pc: Bruce Barker
Monica Daniels-Mika
wsrzone.db
Hello