HomeMy WebLinkAbout970771.tiff -
7050 Loma Linda, Ct,
Longmont �O 80504
303 833 2992
March 9, 1�97
Board o J Cuunty 7om Ff.issioners
P.OPox 758
5ree�ey CD 80632 ' �
Su�ject: Town of Fires�one Annexat4 "n of WCR22 .
` )
Ladies an, entleme-�
Public nctice �zs been given y Lhe TE
l of FirPStFr� that ths Bp�rd �f �c�v ty !
Cocpissi�ners hes petitic"ed the Tcwn to annex ��R22 between WCR15 ant� the /
fron�age road �f I-25� The assumpLion c nrt
�o �revent the Tcwn n� Frcderick �roe �nnexing o ierriLory c�aimed by the
Town o n w rev� u
f FiresLone io its compretensive pla , +s as its pos annexaticn of
yort� ons of WCRs �0, 1I "nd 13� �cwever, t*� cpnsidera�ions make this petition
ky the Co�nt� seew inconsistant
1 A 71ortion of �CR 22 to be annexed is in t�e M�U�D� distric�, in which
de"rlc7ment xas tc �e control�e� on �nincorporated land It would seem Irudeni
for �he Couniy to con�rol the roads �buttin§ this land, espccially S. ccp+r.n
stan�ards have not bc=n agree� on with the surro"ndin� municpa�ities as to road
eng�ne�rin� �tan�ar s cnntrol , etc
Co��ty is currpnily procpssin� the zoning and p atiin9 o� a
subdiv�sion nr both si�es of WCR�2 between WCR11 and the I-25 frcnta�e roa� in
the uniocurporate� MUD �istict� Onp woul4 i��nk the County would be hetLer
off whirh this devrlcp OIL nt eill be accpsp��
so ttat des�gns �qill bp to C�enty standsrds This would avoid t�e possi�ili�y
I f U.re negz�iat�ons witt the Town where E, y
Unecessar c be Jea+lio�4 frcm a Da rn of weakness resultin—I in
co:cess�ons T�is co/�cern is more �ime�y s�nce the Town cf Firestune is
�resently cuns feri�� an orji - ce to *dopt an amended version of ��e SLaLe
�i1h�ay Access Co�e for a�plica on to e streets of thE� Town.
As was siated in a �revious leLter` ihis on�n� a*ay of C���t� la�d for
Politica� pur|�oses can result in unexp�rted cOnseCuences cos�ly to the County
anJ i �s �esiden�z
:ery t/ ul� yours,
Joho S F�lsnm
970771
\
ANY
7050 Loma Linda Pt
Rick Patterson. Mayor & Board of Trustees
Town of Firestone
Box 100
Firestone C] 805�0
Sukject; Annexation of WCR 22 hetween WCR13 & I-25 frontage road
LadMs & genilemeM
I have been attempting to find out why the Weld County commissioners have
petitioned the Town to annex tie above section of roa& In questioning the
commissioners and county Manners there was no reason given. Therefor one must
assume either because in reality there is no reason besides complying with a
request from the Town out of a spirit of cooperation or they are reluctant to
make public the actual reason for the petition.
I submit the following as being reasons for not approving the petition;
1. A5nering this road, as was done (in part) with WCR20 previously, will not
;reveoi the Town of Frederick from annexing in this area as shown by the
current annexation petition for the annexation of the Hamilton property across
WCR20 from Lhe Frederick town limits. The CRS31-12-104(1) (a) statute pekes
clear thet annexing across an intervening ROW under another jurisdiction does
not defeat contiguity requi'ements.
2, The annexation of WCR20 at leost had in its favor the desire of the Town to
control "The Gateway to Firesone"; the WCR 22 annexation does not.
3. Ve ongci:g rezoning and platting by the County of the Olson-Green property
alo, WCR?2 is going to he complicated if Firest"ne controls the road from
w4rh this property must be accessed. This is particularly true since there are
differing Mandards between the County and Town waiting to be resolved by an
TPA, and negctiations between the county and the developer do not necessarily
have to he nmnnrer liy the Town. BasK nn what information I have been able to
elicit from the County, the platting by the County of this deveiopment will
soon be fina] i/ed
4, it Khe putive of tie Town is to extend the Town limits further in
anticipation of being being able to meet the contiguity requirements to annex
another three miles nest and north in one year, is the risk of positively
having imposed on the Town the burden of having to police and maintain this
-cad offset by the possibility that more land further from the Town nucleus
would be elible Jr be annexed in the future?
5. The a,mex*iion of this road by the Town will result in increased expenses to
tte Town fnr police protection and road maintenance without realizing any
offsetKng to income to defray it. As a taxpayer to the Town, l am concerned
with tte Uurden of these additional Town expenses provoked by what appears to
he pclivical rather than economic motives:,
I Pipe the Town officials will accept ihese as Positive comments and reconsider
ayprov .ny Ve peQiiion. mease make this letter part of the oublic record of
the WCR22 vnxrxarjon proposal .
Very truly yours, 00
jok'� S� rclsum
Hello