HomeMy WebLinkAbout981362 •
ORDINANCE NO. 201
IN THE MATTER OF ADOPTING A COORDINATED PLANNING AGREEMENT FOR REFERRAL
AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES AND UNIFORM BASELINE STANDARDS AMONG THE
COUNTY OF WELD, CITY OF DACONO,TOWN OF FIRESTONE,TOWN OF FREDERICK,AND
TOWN OF ERIE
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, Title 29, Article 20, C.R.S., as amended, authorizes and encourages local
governments to cooperate and contract with each other for the purpose of planning and regulating
the development of land by the joint and coordinated exercise of planning, zoning, subdivisions,
building, and related regulatory powers, and
WHEREAS, existing and anticipated pressures for growth and development in areas
surrounding the City of Dacono, Town of Firestone, Town of Frederick, and Town of Erie indicate
that the joint and coordinated exercise by the County of Weld and said municipalities of their
respective planning, zoning, subdivision, building and related regulatory powers in such areas will
best promote the objectives stated in this ordinance, and
WHEREAS, Ordinance #195, adopted on March 24, 1997, compels the creation of such
agreement to include the municipalities of Dacono, Firestone, Frederick, and Weld County, and
WHEREAS, the attached agreement among the County of Weld, City of Dacono, Town of
o Co▪ rm' Firestone, Town of Frederick, and Town of Erie, also referred to as the South Weld County Land
i- Use Plan, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. has been
n i uaw considered and approved by said municipalities, and
Awe
N— WHEREAS, the development standards referred to within the agreement are intended to be
"tea a baseline'for development within such areas, but are also intended to accommodate plans by
m os— persons who propose developments for such areas having standards for landscaping; setbacks;
v Ba building height, orientation, and design; signs; streets, and lighting and utilities, which are
m a� considered to be stricter than those set forth in the agreement, and
m•• —
C.$a WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 202 is under consideration concerning Coordinated Planning
coAgreement for Weld County, City of Dacono and Town of Erie.
•
c —�
o▪ mon NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of the
n aas.
a c — County of Weld, State of Colorado, that the attached agreement among the County of Weld, City
w� of Dacono, Town of Firestone, Town of Frederick, and Town of Erie, also referred to as the South
• c� Weld County Land Use Plan, is, and shall be, approved.
o mom 11 11111111 C�. ny., 981382
ORD201
2637539 09/02/1998 11:12R Weld County CO `,!r`
1 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JR Sukl Tsukamoto
ORDINANCE #201
PAGE 2
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED by the Board that the Chair is authorized to sign the attached
agreement.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED by the Board if any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence,
clause, or phrase olF 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
any one or more sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases might be
declared to be unconstitutional or invalid.
The above and foregoing Ordinance No. 201 was, on motion duly made and seconded,
adopted by the following vote on the 24th day of August, A. D., 1998.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WE.D COUNTY, COLORADO
ATTEST: �i.�•� •�,,. . �.G�L
.,f /� Constance L. H rbert, Chair
Weld County Clef', • th. b0-'.• c
• ;u;ro 2
, &,
W. H. b ter, Pro-Te
BY: , :.1.4 _
Deputy Cler ' : B I
®` °el r e . Baxter
APP D AS TO#DR .
Dale K. all
un Attor ey G� a./. '/,� � c L-
-Barbara J. Kirkmeyer{ J
Pre-Publication: July 1, 1998
First Reading: July 15, 1998
Publication: July 22, 1998
Second Reading: August 3, 1998
Publication: August 12, 1998
Final Reading: August 24, 1998
Publication: September 2, 1998
Effective: September 7, 1998 1111111 11111 111111 111111 III 11111 1111111111 11111 11111111
2681989 03/23/1999 04:34P Wald County CO
2 of 32 R 161.00 D 0.00 JR Suki Tsukamoto
I�0��� �II I'lll IIII 1111 981362
2637539 09/02/1998 11:12R Wald County CO ORD201
2 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JR Suki Tsukamoto
1 .0 Uniform Baseline Design Standards
1.1 Intent: The intent of this intergovernmental agreement is to establish baseline regional
standards and a uniform communication process for new development activities in a
predefined area in unincorporated Weld County. These standards do not attempt to
address every design related issue, rather they emphases eight major design
components. These components were specifically chosen based on aesthetic and
functional value to the region. Much of the emphasis of these standards is intricately
related to major transit corridor patterns.
The success of these standards is attainable only through a recognition of the value
and land use authority of each participating community. Only working together can a
region be developed which will accommodate both the land use needs of today and
tomorrow.
�1 �1���������III III MI111111III WI NI 1111
2681989 03/23/1999 04:34P Weld County CO
3 of 32 R 161.00 D 0.00 JR Sukl Tsukamoto
I IHI
2637539 09/02/1998 11:1211 Weld County CO
3 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JR Sukl Tsukamoto
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS 1
2.0 Building Height, Orientation and Design
2.1 Intent: The height of buildings is a major factor in defining the character of an area or region.
Building height can impact important views and view corridors, limit access to sunlight,
increase shade, and affect the level of privacy in residential neighborhoods and
developments.
2.1.1 In some areas, taller buildings may be appropriate, especially around the 1-25
Interchanges. The interchanges provide an opportunity to cluster higher density
development in those areas that have the best vehicular access.
2.1.2 Since building height plays a significant role in the establishing the scale and character
of an area and/or region, the building placement must be carefully considered with
respect to existing structures, topography, and views.
2.2 General Guidelines: The height of a building shall be compatible with its site and existing (or
planned) adjacent buildings. The relationship between height and bulk shall be
considered in determining where additional height may be appropriate.
2.2.1 All maximums listed below shall require submittal of information needed for review of
the following criteria:
2.2.1.1 Scale of building — combination of height and mass compared to
surroundings
2.2.1.2 Views — affect on mountain views and other view corridors
2.2.1.3 Light and shadow — potential of height to affect lighting and shade on
surroundings
2.2.1.4 Privacy— potential to affect existing residential uses
I IIIIII IIIII IIIIII IIIIII III IIII! IIIIIII III 11111 IIII IIII
2681989 03/23/1999 04:34P Weld County CO
4 of 32 R 181.00 D 0.00 JR Suki Tsukamoto
139 09/02/1998 11:12A Weld County CO IIII
4 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JR Sukl Tsukamoto
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
BUILDING HEIGHT, ORIENTATION AND DESIGN 2
2.3 Minimum Standards
Maximum Building Height (except at 1-25 Interchanges)
Residential Commercial Industrial Agricultural
(except at 1-25 (except at 1-25
interchanges) interchanges
Principal 35' for single 50' 50' 50'
Building family
40' for multi-
family
Accessory 15' 20' 20' 15'
Building
2.3.1 Building Heights around 1-25 Interchanges
2.3.1.1 Buildings within 1,500 feet of 1-25 Interchange right-of-way, as shown in
Figure 1, shall be permitted the following heights:
Zone A 100 feet
Zone B 75 feet
Zone C 50 feet
III I
2637539 09/02/1998 11:12A Weld County CO
5 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JA Suki Tsukamoto
Figure 1 •
TYPICAL 1-25 INTERCHANGE QUADRANT
with BUILDING HEIGHT ZONES
I111111IIIIIIIIIIII11111 III 11111IIIIIII MIME Mil 1111 H GtFY a5 ;¢
2681989 03/23/1999 04:34P Weld County CO ZO4 *
5 of 32 R 161.00 D 0.00 JA Suki Tsukamoto ICf41 •
2�tQl�i"11 .
20NE A�
-25 a.—
Rig ht-of-Way Line
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
BUILDING HEIGHT, ORIENTATION AND DESIGN 3
2.3.1.2 Commercial, industrial and multi-family structures should be sited to avoid a
"wall" affect along public rights-of-way and along adjacent property lines.
This can be achieved by varying the building setbacks and clustering
buildings.
2.3.1.3 Where multiple buildings are proposed on a development parcel, buildings
should be oriented to allow views into the project as well as preserving high
quality views through the project, e.g. views of the Front Range.
2.3.1.4 Avoid large square or rectangular box like structures by incorporating vertical
and horizontal articulation into the building design.
Figure 2
AVOID MONOTONY
Illt 11%;4;:iC3'''t.1-:+k-:.�r.: 4,..).1,1 :• •: .Lr i
t..
DO THIS
i
Monotony of design,both within projects and between
any project and its surroundings,should be avoided.
Variation in detail,form and siting shall be encouraged to
IIII provide visual interest.
i \
2637539 09/02/1998 11:12A Weld County CO
6 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JR Suit! Tsukamoto /
ppB.
1111
1111111 IIIII IIIIII 111111 III IIIII 1111111 III IIIII IIII IIII
2681989 03/23/1999 04:34P Weld County CO ,
6 of 32 R 161.00 D 0.00 JR Suki Tsukamoto
NOT THIS
I
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
BUILDING HEIGHT, ORIENTATION AND DESIGN 4
3.0 LANDSCAPING
3.1 Intent: Landscaping is extremely important for enhancing the quality of development in the area. Trees,
shrubs and other plantings add greatly to the aesthetic appeal while controlling erosion, reducing glare,
moderating temperatures, buffering sounds and blocking or diverting wind. As no single landscaping plan
can be prescribed for all developments due to differing land features, topography and soils, these
guidelines encourage flexible and creative landscape designs.
3.1.1 Landscaping must be sensitive to the characteristics and maintenance requirements of the
planting selected. Plant species that are hardy for the climate and soil conditions in the area,
that can tolerate traffic, are resistant to disease and insects and whose maintenance needs can
be met should be selected.
3.1.2 All improvements should consider the context of the area and the region as a whole as well as
people that will use the spaces. The character of this area is defined by the views of the Front
Range of Colorado and large, open expanses of undeveloped land. Development within this
area should strive to fit into this open, expansive environment while creating comfortable,
functional, environmentally sensitive places.
The following landscape standards set minimum requirements for development within the area.
3.2 General Guidelines:
pro— 3.2.1 Landscape plans shall utilize the following xeriscape design principles to promote water
O � conservation:
ro—
N toIMM 3.2.1.1 well planned and approved planting schemes;
m=
N- 3.2.1.2 appropriate turf selection to minimize the use of bluegrass;
cil▪ ca
m
am CO� 3.2.1.3 use mulch to maintain soil moisture and reduce evaporation;
ro—
ro�
as 3.2.1.4 plant materials with similar micro climatic needs and water requirements should be
a_ clustered together when designing and installing the landscape improvements;
• A_
a• v� 3.2.1.5 improve the soil with organic matter if needed;
rn e a
x � 3.2.1.6 provide for efficient irrigation; and,
soc = 3.2.1.7 proper maintenance and irrigation schedules.
r e--
a —
a
o I I
2837530 09/02/1908 11:12R Weld County CO
7 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JR Sukl Teukemelo
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGNS IANDARDS
LANDSCAPING 5
3.2.1.8 The use of native species should be maximized. Where native plant material is not
appropriate for the intended use or appearance, species that are regionally adapted
and non-invasive may be used. Landscape improvements shall consist of a variety
of species to enhance the visual aspect as well as the functional aspect (such as
shading, windbreaks, etc.) of the landscaped area. A partial list of appropriate plant
materials is attached for use as a guideline. Plant materials that are discouraged in
this area include:
• Cotton bearing cottonwoods (Populus)
• Siberian and Chinese Elm (Ulmus)
• Tree of Heaven (Allianthus)
• Russian Olive (Eleagnus Angustifolia)
• Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum Salicaria)
3.2.1.9 Fescue, brome/fescue, or other drought tolerant turf types shall be used in lieu of
bluegrass, where heavy foot traffic is not anticipated.
3.2.2 Buildings and parking areas should be located in a manner that will preserve existing healthy
trees, of desirable species. Where feasible and appropriate, all individual trees, of a desirable
species, of 4-inch caliper size or larger, and groupings of small trees shall be preserved. Site
design and construction techniques shall be used to minimize the impact on those trees and
assure their survival. This requirement is not intended to prevent the removal of unhealthy
trees in conjunction with site development.
3.2.3 Whenever the use of a property to be developed or redeveloped will conflict with the
reasonable use of an adjoining property, a buffer zone should be constructed between the two
a,to— uses. The buffer may be accomplished through the use of a combination of setbacks, berming,
o a— plantings and fencing. However, in no event shall a fence be the only screening material used.
CO_= The buffer shall moderate the impact of noise, light, unattractive visual elements and traffic.
N OD
w
ass
7a ly anal
o rs Figure 3
LANDSCAPE BUFFER
m--
m —
oD
ma—
A-
45)
m..
anal
a•a MOM 1 l
nZMIEN ■ II IL.r n. _
c`� ICI I_
F o. •
to ass• Provide a Landscaped Buffer Between Dissimilar Uses
o
e C =
C 7 —
7r e►aass
3
e — 3.2.4 Landscape improvements shall be integrated into the overall site design for each property.
e 0— New landscaped areas should be designed and constructed in a manner that maximize their
ass
connection within the site, as well as to other natural and landscaped areas off-site. Small
isolated islands of landscaping should be minimized except as required in parking lots and for
screening along,roadways or adjacent properties.
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
LANDSCAPING III'll 6
2637539 09/02/1998 11:12A Weld County CO
8 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JA Suk1 7sukamoto
3.2.5 In order to provide for ongoing health and appearance of landscape improvements, all
landscaping shall be maintained and replaced by the landowner as necessary The property
owner shall be responsible for proper pest control, irrigation, fertilization, pruning and other
maintenance of the landscape. Plant materials exhibiting evidence of insect or disease
infestation or other damage shall be appropriately treated. Dead plant material shall be
removed and replaced.
3.2.6 Unless the landscape improvements were installed by the County, City/Town or other public
or quasi-public entity, all property owners (or other designated entity e.g. a homeowners
association)shall be responsible for maintenance of landscaping with the portion of the right-of-
way between the back of curb (or edge of shoulder if no curb) and the adjacent property line.
3.2.7 Landscaping plans should be designed and constructed to minimize the loss of solar access
on adjacent properties.
3.3 Minimum Standards:
3.3.1 Minimum Percent of Landscaped Area
3.3.2 All multi-family, commercial, industrial and mixed-use development parcels shall provide a
minimum of twenty (20) percent of landscaped area. This area does not include building
footprints, the hard surface or landscaped areas of parking lots or driveways. However, it can
include sidewalks and other pedestrian paths (not within the parking lot), outdoor plazas, water
features and any required landscaped setbacks.
3.3.3 The above landscaped area requirement is in addition to any public land dedication that may
be required.
3.4 Landscaping Requirements for Parking Lots
3.4.1 At least ten (10) percent of the area of a parking lot must be landscaped if the lot contains 10
or more spaces. This ten (10) percent is in addition to the twenty (20) percent of the entire lot
area that must be landscaped. At least seventy-five (75) percent of the required landscape
area shall include living plant material.
IIIIII11111111111IIIIII III 11111 MI Ill
2681989 03/23/1999 04:34P Weld County CO
9 of 32 R 161.00 0 0.00 JR Sukl Tsukamoto
11
2637539 09/02/1998 11:12R Weld County CO
9 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JR Sukl Tsukamoto
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
LANDSCAPING 7
Figure 4
LANDSCAPE AREA
A Minimum of 20%of
Street the Lot Should be Landscaped
*"' Tr'r• 7•rrTrr Trr r7T+r r.Me .r?S t}.rTrJ
I J1Jr14'.V. 1J1JJ1J1J1J1•1r. 1 1J1rSJ1J'{ 411:1:1
J :41 J J J J J•J r J J J•J J r J J J• a •1'1'
' rJfrJJrr,J1 J JJJJJJJJ1 N 11• .••
1.1 . 11 . 1 . 111.111 L115 3 1.1• 1
J•J.r•r•r•J•r•r• .r.r•J•J•J•J•J•r•J•J•r• •r•J•J•
: 1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1•� j 1.1.1. •
' J J•J•J•r•J•J•J•r,J.J.J.J•J•J•J•J•J•r•r• = J•J•J.
::Atet 'L.••.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1•L.b.1.1.1.1 1.1.L.1
J•r•r•r•J•J•J.r•r•r.r•r•J•r.r•J•J•r•r•r, o •J•r•r.
. 1.1 •.•1.1•S•1.1.1.1.1•�,•1•L•1.1•ti•1•L•1 1.1.1.1•<
• J•J•r• J.J.J.J:
II
F aD
(Z3
�.., Building `- A Minimum of 10%of
the Parking Lot Should be
Landscaped
L:
" Parkin. rr
Lot
I V
I I
Property Line
3.4.2 Berming and shrub or tree planting shall be used to screen parking lots from view of the
roadway. Berms can vary in height depending on location and proximity of existing trees.
Berms shall have smooth transitions from the top of the curb to the setback line so as not to
create snow traps, with allowance made for placement of the sidewalk. Grading of berms shall
not be rough or abrupt.
3.4.3 Landscaping techniques shall be used to alleviate the harsh visual appearance that
accompanies parking lots. At least 75 percent of the length of the frontage of the parking lot
must be screened.
MIDI IIIII IIIIII IIIIII III IIIII IIIIIII III IIIIII III IIII
2681989 03/23/1999 04:34P Wald County CO
10 of 32 R 161.00 D 0.00 JR Suki Tsukamoto
11 IIII
2637539 09/02/1998 11:12A Weld County CO
10 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JR Sukl Tsukamoto
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
LANDSCAPING 8
Figure 5
PARKING LOT ARRANGEMENT
„1 Alinn11n1
- ilia
Parking lots along the full
length of the street frontage
are discouraged.
!It I 1 Zed t
I:
lb kill a dik
r Parking lots located on the
=MIMS .to sides of buildings are
acceptable.
SIMMS r Illl
Ski
aims : a Foil .kill
r'
sw (IL
rUIII�r1 �Ia/Pla OD— •r
CO MIM
+rco= girl
41 at IIII
...,
N 0
al S .T
."--- _ a
la OD air
N
m Co ssi•
m0—
OM
O�
m— t fd s Parking lots located behind
11! � IW builings are preferred.
o li
NM 0 aI g to O (0 0
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS II �1�111-�II�-11N�it
LANDSCAPING 2637539 09/02/1998 11.12R Weld County CO
11 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JR Suk! Tsukamele 9
•
3.4.4 Loading, service and storage areas visible from the public right-of-way or adjacent properties
must be screened with an opaque screen that is an integral part of the building architecture or
landscape design. Chain link fencing with slats, tires, or used building materials, are not
acceptable screening.
Figure 6
SCREEN PARKING LOTS
Otr flt`'/b,
A
Street Bike Sidewalk Landscaped
Lane Berm Parking
Lot
3.5 Special Landscaping Requirements Along Primary and Secondary Roadway Corridors
3.5.1 Several roadways serve not only as travel corridors through the area, but also visual corridors.
These roadways play an important role in the function and image of the community. The
existing Primary Roadway corridors in the area are Interstate 25; State Highways 7 and 52;
n�� Weld County Roads 8, 13 and 24; and, Del Camino Parkway.
o ...OM.
"ID_
3.5.2 The existing Secondary Roadway corridors include Weld County Roads 11, 15, 16 and 20.
N —
a=
Awl 3.5.3 Other roadway corridors may be designated Primary or Secondary Corridors in future
W transportation planning efforts.
a m— 3.5.4 Plantings along Primary and Secondary Roadway Corridor right-of-ways should be integrated
o with the landscaping of the adjacent development.
a a—
a p� 3.5.5 That portion of a lot in any zone district which abuts a Primary or Secondary Corridor right-of-
t.va way shall be landscaped with a minimum of one 2 % inch caliper shade tree, or one 6-foot
n£— minimum height coniferous tree, for every 40 linear feet of street frontage. Trees may be
c`n grouped with a maximum distance of 100 feet between trees or groupings, with exceptions
�=MI made at entrance drives.
o
1c —
x�- 3.5.6 Tree plantings should be clustered or grouped along the landscaped setback to avoid a straight
s — line of trees, unless otherwise appropriate. The effectiveness of the screening shall be
0 0_ increased by planting trees and shrubs in layered beds of two or more rows of plant materials,
u = rather than a single row. A mix of coniferous and deciduous trees and shrubs shall be planted
in clusters or groupings.
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS I"��� mu u�ui imi iiuii ��� IIIIIII III 111111 III ull
LANDSCAPING 2637539 09/02/1998 11:12A Wald County CO 10
12 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JA Suitt Tsukamoto
3.5.6.1 The minimum landscape setback along the existing Primary Roadway Corridors of
1-25, State Highway 7, State Highway 52; Weld County Roads 8, 1:3 and 24; Del
Camino Parkway; (and future Primary Roadway Corridors) and their associated
frontage roads shall be fifty (50)feet measured from the planned future right-of-way.
Figure 7
LANDSCAPE SETBACKS and TREE SPACING
Setback From 1-25 and Principal Roads
40"Min.
40'Min. Street
i
r•r•r• r % r.r•r_'err •?...r. ,P" lagiS rote :r•r:r•r:7.
PPI-..'. f1?ti boo Rj �i ti.1• ti.ti•1.1..
4' yr • .•. ' .s�R ?•r. G r•r.r.r•
h•%•%•- . J, r ,y4.7- l• rti�1• t� l• ;yfyy1f1•.f5
.4 .II.Ai�i11L, ,.r n•We alk i
O t re. •.�tif4i 'S • r•J• fir
6 1tiL. ��. R > ~ J:cot"u' > ti? ? • >
qVA:St:fr. LL ? Jy? L.• Prc -}y
�L4r
Building Line
N— Setback From Secondary Roads
w aa�
O�0- 40"Min. Street
as
N = 4( 'S T ' T��-Pjy,.r.r•ew2 et. g' 'f- i
W c5 �,t ' ���*¢i1. { ?{ tv °/" .a . .
W= Lc) ' .4:4}r.
al
rrr
MEM
.= Building Line
B 1I•NOM
ED
1•�
Eta MIN
A=
ElA 2837539 09/02/1998 11:12A Weld County CO
c. s 13 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JA Sukl Teukamoto
az—
• —
In
c d=
x c-)mm 3,5.6.2 Along the existing Secondary Roadway Corridors of Weld County Roads 11,15, 16
o _ and 20(and future Secondary Roadway Corridors)there shall be a minimum twenty-
-I C
VI c r— five(25)foot wide landscape setback measured from the planned future right-of-way.
< S
e —
0 0MEM 3.5.6.3 For development adjacent to 1-25, a berm should be constructed, along the 1-25
u a corridor, to a height sufficient to screen elements of the development that lie along
the ground plane, (e.g. parking lots, storage areas or other similar site elements) as
far as 180 feet from the right-of-way line. Such berms shall have maximum side
slopes of 5:1. The maximum berm height shall be 6' above the existing elevation at
the foot of the proposed berm. If additional height of screening is necessary above
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
LANDSCAPING 11
the 6' berm, it shall be achieved through dense landscape plantings Plantings on
top of the berms shall be designed to avoid snow traps. A berm may not be required
if the subject property is elevated above the roadway and it can be demonstrated
that views into the site will not be possible for a distance of 180 feet.
3.5.6.4 Required landscaping and screening within the landscape setback and other
portions of the property shall be governed by the landscape standards within this
document and any other more restrictive requirements the controlling local
jurisdiction might have, i.e. Dacono, Erie, Firestone, Frederick or Weld County.
111111111111111111111111 III 11111111111I III 'll111 III IIII
2881989 03/23/1999 04:34P Weld County CO
14 of 32 R 161.00 D 0.00 JA Sukl Tsukamoto
I ill
2637539 09/02/1998 11:12A Weld County CO
14 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JA Sukl Tsukamoto
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
LANDSCAPING 12
4.0 LIGHTING AND UTILITIES
4.1 Intent: Exterior lighting should be designed to meet the functional and security needs of a site
or development, without adversely affecting adjacent properties. Lighting should facilitate the
convenient and safe use of circulation systems and activity centers, for both pedestrians and
vehicles. Lighting can also be used to enhance the appearance of the site's structures and
landscaping.
4.1.1 All new electrical, cable and phone utilities should be installed underground to
minimize unsightly visual impacts.
4.2 General Guidelines:
4.2.1 All light sources shall be shielded so that light will not shine onto adjacent properties
or into the windows of private residential dwellings.
4.2.2 All exterior lighting shall be installed in such a manner that the light source will be
sufficiently obscured to prevent excessive glare onto public streets.
4.2.3 The installation of lighting that may be confused with warning signals, emergency
signals or traffic shall not be permitted.
4.2.4 Background spaces, such as parking lots, should be illuminated as unobtrusively as
possible to meet functional needs of safe circulation and the protection of people and
N— property.
ea coo
4.2.5 Foreground spaces, such as building entrances, should use lighting that defines the
N�o� space without distractions or glare.
m—
aw
• w4.2.6 Light standards shall be in scale with the height and use of the related structure and
.• the style of standards and fixtures shall be consistent with the style and character of
m m� the use and architecture of the site.
0141�
141 The use of new energy efficient lighting technology, such as solar powered fixtures,
m a• is encouraged.
aim
L. aa�
x � 4.3 Minimum Standards: The recommended lighting levels shown below, based on the
1 c° Illuminating Engineering Society's (IES) guidelines, shall be used to develop a lighting plan
a 3 — for all proposed uses.
a c I III 1
3 ff�
o�� 2637539 09/02/1998 11:12A Weld County CO
15 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JA Suit! Taukamoto
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
LIGHTING AND UTILITIES 13
4.3.1 Recommended Lighting Levels (in foot candles— one foot candle is
equal to one lumen uniformly distributed over an area of on square
foot)
Residential Commercial Industrial Agricultural
Building Area 0.5 - 0.8 1.0 1.0 N/A
Walk/Paths 0.2 1.0 0.6 0.2
Parking Lots 0.6 - 1.0 1.0 - 2.0 0.6 - 1.0 N/A
Street Lighting 0.3 - 0.4 0.8 - 1.2 0.6 - 0.9 0.3 - 0.4
Loading Docks N/A 2.0 2.0 N/A
4.3.2 Underground Utilities: All utilities installed as part of new development shall be
installed underground.
I IIIIII IIIII IIIIII IIIIII III IIIII IIIIIII III 111111 III IIII
2681989 03/23/1999 04:34P Weld County CO
16 of 32 R 161.00 D 0.00 JA Suki Tsukamoto
1297539
2637639 09/02/1998 11:12R Weld County CO
16 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JA Sukl Tsukamoto
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
LIGHTING AND UTILITIES 14
5.0 SETBACKS
5.1 Intent: The setback of buildings, structures, or parking lots along streets and roadways is an
important component in creating a visually pleasing and sensitive edge treatment for
development. Variation from a uniform building or parking lot alignment along streets and
roadways is generally appropriate, to add interest to the street scape; however, where there
is a strong and established character of alignment, it may be more appropriate to align with
existing building facades, fences or parking lots. Setbacks can also be used to provide space
for buffering structures and/or parking lots from streets and public rights-of-way where
needed.
5.2 General Guidelines: In newly developed areas, encourage variation of building setbacks to
add interest and/or improve the appearance of the street scape, allow for differences in
building height and mass, or to accommodate natural or man-made constraints such as
topography, existing trees or utility lines.
5.2.1 In developed areas, where there is an established and identifiable setback, new
development shall be designed to align with existing setbacks, to the extent
practicable.
o ;° 5.2.2 Setbacks shall be measured from the edge of the future street right-of way.
co
loo
NIA
m--
p aS 5.2.3 Setbacks shall be landscaped and where additional screening is needed, berming
a� shall be incorporated into the setback (see Landscaping Section).
..tom
m 11;eel
B d1m
mmme 5.2.4 Signage placed within landscaped setbacks shall be integrated into the design of the
m a= site's frontage and conform to baseline sign standards (see Signs Section).
ova
4 s
asp
!so
— 5.2.5 When above ground utility facilities (i.e. vaults, pedestals, etc.) are proposed within
x�� a landscaped setback, such facilities shall be placed in a location and manner that
aallows for screening of the facilities, while providing adequate access to such facilities.
c0►I
.< —
ee�
o c-- 5.2.6 Locating parking lots between the front of the building and the public right-of-way is
discouraged. Parking lots should be located on the sides or behind buildings.
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS I III �'"�� 1 ..I.� I
SETBACKS 15
2837 9 09/02/1998 11:12R Weld County
17 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 Jii Suki Teukemoko
5.3 Minimum Standards: The following setbacks shall be required and shall be measured from
the edge of future right-of-way and shall apply, whether the setback is a front, rear or side
setback:
Setbacks from 1-25 Mainline/Frontage Road
Residential Commercial Industrial Agricultural
Buildings 300' 150"' 150' * 150'
Commercial
Parking 250' 50' 50' 50'*
Lots
* The building setback may be reduced to 100 feet if an additional 50' of landscaping is
installed, for a total of 100' landscaped buffer (See Landscape Guidelines).
5.4 Setbacks from Primary Roadway Corridors
(All designated Primary Roadway Corridors and State Highways 7 and 52, Weld County Roads
8, 13, 24 and Del Camino Parkway)
N— --
e�� Residential Commercial Industrial Agricultural
•ft ro o --
�� Buildings 100' 100' * 100' * 100'
is)A'"'MEM Commercial
a'w� Parking 50' 50' 50' 50'*
Lots
m --
mle—
in a
m a- The commercial and industrial setbacks may be reduced to 75 feet if an additional 25 feet
m a— of landscape buffer is installed.
-uasas.
4 a
az—
a a a>>
c n=
0 asaa
O
1C —
a 3 =
C waf•
UI II
0 0—
o 2837539 09/02/1998 11:12R Weld County CO
asp
18 of 28 R 0.00 0 0.00 JA Suki Tsukamoto
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
SETBACKS 16
5.5 Setbacks from Secondary Roadway Corridors
(All designated Secondary Roadway Corridors and Weld County Roads 11,15, 16, and 20)
Residential Commercial Industrial Agricultural
Buildings 50' 50' * 50' * 50'
Commercial
Parking 50' 25' 25' 25'*
Lots
5.6 Setbacks from Existing or Planned Residential Areas
Between New Between Between Between
Multi-family New New New
and Existing Commercial Industrial Agricultural
SF or MF and Existing and Existing and Existing
or Planned or Planned or Planned
Residential Residential Residential
Buildings 35' 50' * 50' * 25'
Parking
Lots
111111 11111 111111 III IIIII 1111111 III HMI III 101
2881989 03/23/1999 04:34P Weld County Co
19 of 32 R 181.00 D 0.00 JA Sukl Teukemoto
2637539 09/02/1998 11:12A Weld County CO II'I
19 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JA Suki Tsukamoto
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
SETBACKS 17
6.0 SIGNS
6.1 Intent: The following sign controls are intended to protect and preserve the visual quality of
the roadways within Southwest Weld County. The controls are intended to prevent the visual
obstruction and interference of vehicular traffic from improperly placed and designed signs.
These guidelines address the magnitude, placement and number of signs.
6.2 General Guidelines:
6.2.1 Lighting of signs shall be by indirect illumination only.
6.2.2 No sign shall be erected at or near the intersection of any road(s) or driveways in
such a manner as to obstruct free can clear vision of motorist or at any location
where, by reason of the position, shape or color, it may interfere with, obstruct the
view of, or be confused with any authorized traffic sign, signal or device. Signs
located at an intersection must be outside of the sight distance triangle.
6.2.3 Signage may be incorporated into the landscape design where feasible.
6.2.4 The following signs are prohibited in all districts:
NN-
61 c�� 6.2.4.1 Flashing or blinking signs are prohibited
-et
m-
(�
u114
- 6.2.4.2 Any sign that is erected in such a location as to cause visual obstruction or
73 interference with motor vehicle traffic, or traffic control device including any
w� sign that obstructs clear vision in any direction from any street intersection
�— or driveway is prohibited.
mco—
v
m�
m a= 6.2.4.3 Attention attracting devices are prohibited including mechanical or electrical
IS appurtenances,appurtenances, such as "revolving beacons", that are designed to compel
� attention are prohibited.
NSa
co —
x 6.2.4.4 Roof signs are prohibited.
o
1c —
e 7 —
C ear
6.2.4.5 Any sign other than traffic control signs erected, constructed, or maintained
0 MEM
o= within, over or upon the right-of-way of any road or highway is prohibited.
o EMEN
MEM
- III
2637539 09/02/1998 11:12A Weld County CDIII II'I
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS 20 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 Jf Suki 7sukamoto
SIGNS 18
6.2.4.6 Off-site advertising signs are prohibited. Signs shall only be erected for the
primary use, shall be located on the same lot as the primary use, and shall
be associated with the operation of the primary use
Figure 8
SIGN TYPES
Billboard
(Off-site Advertising) Freestanding Roof Top
Wall
Monument
rre
,yam Projecting FittnnE91. —
mpr' ...
MI n. I NMN
+1!!!. Ug its, / rim aujo �.ie' ' /.
art
:0?00
uvuumn■!;11
Directional
(Enter Here)
6.3 Minimum Standards:
1%)
e+o)=
o�Co Maximum sign heights, sign area, and minimum setback requirements are as follows:
co—
co w n
to no
N- Applicable to all uses that All other streets
o,cam. front 1-25
c�� Maximum Height 25' 25'
pr (for all free standing on-
site identification signs)
BAD
n-•� Maximum Square Ft. Area 100 sq.ft. 50 sq.ft.
e a —
r n= Minimum Setback 25' 5' —
.- aa
o
-a c
e 7 —
• < M3Mi
I I'll
0 0- 2637538 09/02/1988 11:12R Weld County CO
o a 21 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JR Sukl Taukamoto
mim UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
SIGNS 19
6.3.1 The sum of all commercial building identification signs on a given wall shall not
exceed 8% of that wall.
6.3.1.1 For example, if a building wall is 100 feet long and 15 feet high, for a total
of 1500 sq. ft., the total square footage of wall signs cannot exceed 8% of
1500 sq. ft. or 120 sq. ft.
6.3.2 One sign per development complex is permitted. The sign can be either a free-
standing sign that is a maximum of 25' in height or a ground mounted monument sign
that does not exceed 150 square feet in area. A development complex is a group of
free-standing buildings or buildings constructed in such a way as to give an
appearance of being inter-related due to architectural similarity, interconnected drives,
parking areas and/or platting of the development. A development complex includes
uses which provide a combined sense of place such as office or business parks, retail
centers, industrial parks, apartment complexes and hotels.
6.3.3 One sign per tenant in the development complex is allowed and each development
complex should strive to utilize consistent placement, size, and style of sign. For
example, all tenant signs in a development complex should be flush-mounted signs
on buildings or projecting signs (signs that project perpendicular from a building) not
a combination of the two.
6.3.4 Ground mounted monument signs may be located along arterials at the primary
entries to residential, commercial and industrial subdivisions to provide the overall
project identity. They should be no greater than 150 square feet in area. The
monument sign shall only contain the name of the subdivision and be appropriately
landscaped.
1111111 ill 1111111II 1111
2681989 03/23/1999 04:34P Weld County CO
22 of 32 R 161.00 D 0.00 JR Sukl Tsukamoto
I'III111111 II111111111 IIIIII 111 IIIIIII III 1111111 II I111
n�mrnml
2637539 09/02/1998 11:12A Weld County CO
22 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JR Sukl Tsukamoto
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
SIGNS 20
w..� 7.0 STREET STANDARDS
•.up= 7.1 Design Standards:
(At
▪ m_IMIM
7.1.1 Streets and roads constructed within the area should comply with the Colorado State
Awl Highway Access Code and with the American Association of State Highway and
w'Qr.. Transportation Officials'A Policy on the Geometric Design of Highways and Streets.
"....
- In addition, structural capacity of the streets and roads should be designed in
m N� accordance with the Guide for Design of Pavement Structures.
to—
o m MEM
mA—
m a 7.2 Right-of-Way and Street Profiles:
n 7.2.2 All designated Major Arterials and Weld County Roads 8, 13 and 24 and Del Camino
rn n — Parkway should be designed and constructed in conformance with the street cross-
• o.= section shown below.
0 MIMI
7.2.3 All designated Minor Arterials and Weld County Roads 11, 15, 16 and 20 shall be
le c 3-- designed and constructed in conformance with the street cross-section shown below.
✓ STREET CROSS SECTIONS
O 0 Figure 9
o a
MIMI
ARTERIAL/4 LANE WITH RAISED MEDIAN
120'
r.
�. ��� .
/ 0Rt ii iri, .
1SSA r,
e'Concrete ' ' 6 Concrete
Pedeelrenwey Pedeslrianwey
17' 6' 13' 12' 24' 12' 13' 6' 17'
Setback from Bike Driving Driving Raised Median or Turn Driving Driving Bike Setback from
Curb Lane Lane Lane Lanes Lane Lane Lane Curb
4 LANE WITH PAINTED MEDIAN
120'
4. 1
I
2637539 09/02/1998 11:12A Weld County CO
23 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JA Sukl Tsukamoto
1P SS Sr
it ,,,,,-,
0
e'Cornet. e'concrete
Pedeetrie way Pednstrienway
22' 6' 13' 12' 14' 12' 13' 6' 22'
Setback from Bike Driving Driving Median or Driving Driving Bike Setback from
Curb Lane Lane Lane Turn Lanes Lane Lane Lane Curb
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
STREETS STANDARDS 21
•
8.0 REFERRAL AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
8.1 Intent: The intent of the referral and enforcement procedures is to establish a mutually agreed
upon process in which all parties agree to abide by. This section delineates administrative
responsibilities and corresponding time frames for proper;enforcement of the IGA. To resolve
disputes over the interpretation of the design standards a Joint Board of Appeals has been
established.
8.2 Recital: For Purposes of this Outline, a"Referring Government" is the government with which
the applicant filed his or her application, and that refers the application to others for comment;
a "Commenting Government" is a government that files comments with the Referring
Government. A "Review Body" means the body that will be reviewing and making a
recommendation or decision on an application for preliminary or final approval, and includes
a Planning Commission, Town Council, City Council, and Board of County Commissioners.
Other terms have the meanings given to them in the Interim Coordinated Planning Agreement.
8.3 Timeframe for Referrals
8.3.1 Application in the County. For development proposed to the County within the Urban
Growth Area, the County will refer the application to the Municipalities within 7 days
after the application is complete.
ro ro— 8.3.2 Application in a Municipality. For development proposed in a Municipality and located
Aar within 500 feet of unincorporated land in County, the Municipality will refer the
°.m= application to the County and the other Municipalities within 7 days after the
co application is complete.
A w iiii i.
• Col Ems8.3.3 Multiple Approvals. Where the Referring Government requires an application to be
"' approved at more than one stage — such as preliminary and final approvals of a
a(o- subdivision or PUD — there shall be a separate referral and comment process for
0m� each stage.
GO —
a$mmi 8.4 Timeframe for Comments. Referring Governments will allow Commenting Governments at
rnom least 21 days to comment before preparing staff report to first review body.
NI—
• d=
e- — 8.5 Types of Comments. Commenting Governments shall identify whether each of their
r§ — comments is a "Design Standard Comment" or an "Optional Comment", as described below.
c .-aa=
a
."C aa>,
0 0
o = 1 IIIIII II II IIIIII IIIII IIIIII III IIIIIII III IIIIIII II IIII
2837539 09/02/1998 11:12R Weld County CO
24 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JR Sukl Taukamoto
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
REFERRAL AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES 22
8.5.1 Design Standard Comments. Design Standard Comments are comments that the
application is inconsistent with the IGA Design Standards. All such notices must
include a statement identifying the IGA Design Standard(s)that has been violated and
specifying why the decision violates that design standard(s).
8.5.2 Optional Comments. Optional Comments are comments about any other matter
related to the application.
8.6 Response to Comments
8.6.1 Design Standard Comments -- Timely. If Design Standard Comments are received
in a timely manner, the Referring Government shall respond to those comments by
either:
8.6.1.1 Requiring that the applicant change the application to make it consistent with
the Design Standards (either before formal review, or through a condition
attached to any decision on the application), or;
8.6.1.2 Notifying the Commenting Government in writing, no later than the date of
any hearing or action by the Review Body, that it does not agree with the
Design Standard Comment, and the reasons for such disagreement.
8.6.2 Design Standard Comments-- Late. If Design Standard Comments are received late,
but before action by a Review Body, the Referring Government shall forward those
comments to the Review Body, and the Referring Government may -- but shall not be
required to -- respond as described in subsection 8.6.1.
NN—
Ualrim
co
:,�= 8.6.3 Optional Comments. If Optional Comments are received, and regardless of whether
Nw� they are received in a timely manner, the Referring Government may — but shall not
m= be required to — respond as described in subsection 8.6.1.
AWOEM
—
1+N
CD —
�= 8.7 Effective Date of Approvals
mm—
ID NNW
mfl 8.7.1 Seven Day Wait. In order to allow for effective enforcement of the IGA Design
m W= Standards, each Referring Government that has received a Design Standard
coaMIN Comment regarding an application shall provide that any action approving the
4 - application, or approving it with conditions, shall not become effective until 7 days after
H —
e a the date on which the Review Body takes its action.
xnWNW
— n MIN
a C- = 8.7.2 Wait For Appeal. In addition, in the event a Commenting Government initiates an
c •►� Appeal pursuant to subsection 8.9 below, the Referring Government shall provide that
d ` — any action approving the application, or approving it with conditions, shall not become
0 oMMM effective until the IGA Joint Board of Appeals has made a decision on the Appeal.
0
immi UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS II IIII
REFERRAL AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES I
2637539 09/02/1998 11:12A Weld County CO
25 of 28 R 0.00 O 0.00 JA Sukl Tsukamoto
8.7.3 Time lines for Rule 106 Actions. The waiting periods set forth in subsections a and b
above shall not affect the deadlines for filing actions under Rule 106(a)(4) C.R.C.P.
Such actions must be filed no later than 30 days after the date of the Review Body's
decision regardless of whether or not enforcement action is taken pursuant to
subsections 8.8 below.
8.8 Enforcement
8.8.1 Disagreement. If one or more Commenting Government(s) has filed a Design
Standard Comment with the Referring Government in a timely manner, and a-Review
Body of the Referring Government has acted to approve the application with or without
conditions, and such Commenting Government(s) believes that the application as
approved is inconsistent with the IGA Design Standards, any such Commenting
Government(s) may notify the Referring Government in writing, within 7 days after the
approval action of the Review Body, that it intends to Appeal the matter.
8.8.2 Timely Notice of Appeal. Notices received more than 7 days after the action of the
Review Body shall not be valid to initiate an Appeal.
8.8.3 Consolidation of Appeals. If more than one Commenting Government files a notice
of intent to Appeal the same action of a Referring Government, all such Appeals shall
be consolidated into a single Appeal for review and consideration.
8.8.4 Review of Appeals. Appeals under this Agreement shall be reviewed by the IGA Joint
Board of Appeals, as defined in subsection 8.9 below, pursuant to the procedures set
ro ro— forth in subsection 8.9 below.
01m�
O M-
W�� 8.8.5 Decision of Consistency. If the IGA Joint Board of Appeals concludes that an
N application as approved or approved with conditions by a Review Body is consistent
a cos with the IGA Design Standards, the Board shall notify the Referring Government and
- r all Commenting Governments of that fact within 30 days after the decision of the
Review Body, and no Commenting Government shall have the right to question
m� compliance with the IGA Design Standards or the decision of the Board through court
oco• action.
—
m A—
mp 8.8.6 Decision of Inconsistency. If the IGA Joint Board of Appeals concludes that an
�.�s application as approved by a Review Body is not consistent with the I(3A Design
Ne Standards, the Board shall notify the Referring Government and all Commenting
c d— Governments of that fact within 30 days after the decision of the first Review Body.
If the Referring Government does not act to bring the application into compliance with
•
the IGA Design Standards (through the imposition of additional conditions on the
c � approval, or negotiations with the applicant, or any other legal means) within 45 days
rx-ticafter receipt of such notice from the Board, any Commenting Government that filed
0 0o
si comments on the matter and participated in the Appeal may file suit in a court of
c 000M competent jurisdiction, and may request that the court enforce the terms of the IGA
Design Standards. No such suit may request money damages for a violation of the
IGA Design Standards, but the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover attorneys
fees incurred in bringing or defending the action.
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS I'll
REFERRAL AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES I IIII
2637539 09/02/1998 11:12R Weld County CO
26 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JR Sukl Taukamoto
8.9 IGA Joint Board of Appeals
8.9.1 Membership. The IGA Joint Board of Appeals shall be made up of:
8.9.1.1 One representative from the City of Dacono;
8.9.1.2 One representative from the Town of Erie;
8.9.1.3 One representative from the Town of Firestone;
8.9.1.4 One representative from the Town of Frederick; and
8.9.1.5 One representative from Weld County.
8.9.2 Notice of Membership. The initial representatives from each party shall be named
within 30 days after the approval of these Referral and Enforcement Procedures by
that party. Each party shall notify the other parties of the name, address, and
telephone number of its representative, and such representative shall serve until the
party notifies the other parties in writing of the name, address, and telephone number
of a new representative.
NN
J09"a a
-ft o- 8.9.3 Substitute. If a member of the IGA Joint Board of Appeals is not able to attend a
CDIII meeting of the Board to review an appeal, the governmental entity shall be authorized
A MOM
to designate in writing a substitute to attend and take all actions that the member
would be authorized to perform if the member were present. The substitute may bring
o, the writing designating them as a substitute to the meeting of the Board, and need to
"�—am
file such writing with the Board before the meeting. Substitutes designated in writing
m(0� shall be treated as members for purposes of this Agreement.
oto—
—MUM
ma—
m it a 8.9.4 Notice of Appeal. When one or more Commenting Government(s) chooses to initiate
m-ea an Appeal of the decision of a Referring Government pursuant to subsection 8.8, the
aa Referring Government shall notify all members of the IGA Joint Board of Appeals
,• MUM-- about such appeal in writing no later than 14 days after the date of the Decision of the
ar
c Reviewing Body. The notice shall set forth the name(s) of the Commenting
▪ c NM Governments initiating the Appeal, and the date, time, and place of the Board meeting
14 ; — to consider the Appeal. The date of such meeting shall be not less than 21 and not
F,s more than 29 days after the date of the Review Board's action on the decision being
3 cilia appealed.
0• NEM
o =
8.9.5 Open Meetings. The meetings of the IGA Joint Board of Appeals shall be open to the
public, and representatives of both the Referring Government and the Commenting
Government(s) that appealed the action shall make a presentation as to why they
believe the decision appealed is or is not consistent with the IGA Design Standards.
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS I I" "I
REFERRAL AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES 2837539 09/02/1998 31:12R Wald County CO
27 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JR Sukl Taukamoto
8.9.6 Decisions. Following the presentations and any discussion, the Board shall make a
decision at the same meeting as to whether (i) the application as approved by the
Review Body was consistent with the IGA Design Standards, or as consistent as
possible in light of unique constraints of the site not created by the applicant, or(ii) the
application as approved by the Review Body was not consistent with the IGA Design
Standards.
8.9.7 Quorum and Required Votes. At least four members of the Board must be present
before the Board may act on any Appeal. The votes of four out of the five Board
members shall be required to conclude that any application as approved by a Review
Body was not consistent with the IGA Design Standards, provided, however, that if one
of the Board members is absent, the vote of three of the remaining four Board
members shall be required for such decision.
IIIIII IIIII Hill 111111 III III IIIIIII III INN II IIII
2681989 03/23/1999 04:34P Weld County CO
28 of 32 R 161.00 D 0.00 JR Sukl Tsukamoto
II
2637539 09/02/1998 11:12A Weld County CO
28 of 28 R 0.00 D 0.00 JR Sukl Tsukamoto
UNIFORM BASELINE DESIGN STANDARDS
REFERRAL AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES 26
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have approved and executed
this Agreement on the dates shown below, the effective date hereof
being the last date on which a party hereto has approved and
executed this Agreement .
APPROVED AND EXECUTED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE
COUNTY OF WELD, COLORADO THIS 24th DAY OF August 1998 .
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF THE COUNTY OF WELD
42-71:1- e_ icS,4
Constance L. a err
(08/24/98)
ATTEST: tiil / ___.,
/► J!r.,T'%:„,
N, •- --_.��),
By: . % i �.. ; V5N .
Deputy Clerk toy •.�:%."r
1 IIIIII Ell IIIIII IIIIII III 11111 IIIIIII III 1111111 II IIII 27
2661969 03/23/1999 04:34P Weld County CO
29 of 32 R 161.00 D 0.00 IA Suki Tsukamoto
/t
APPROVED ANW EXECUTED BY THE TOWN OF FIRESTONE, COLORADO THIS �7
DAY OF %r440 j , 1998 .
TOWN OF FIRESTONE, COLORADO
Rick Patterson, Mayor
PQSTON�‘`�
ATTEST: ) /:t/40 :7,\ 1I/'
/
/ 'G.
By: ---
T.L. Peterson, Town Clerk 1�IN
111111111111 HMI IIIIII III Ill 1111111 III 11111111111 28
2661989 03/23/1999 04:34P Weld County CO
30 of 32 R 161.00 0 0.00 JA Suki Tsukamoto
APPROVED AND EXECUTED BY THE CITY OF DACONO, COLORADO THE 5 DAY
OF cr,uoyi
, 1999 .
CITY OF DACONO, COLORADO
Lina D. Stepien, Mayor
ATTEST:
By: lio '
Nancy El t, CityClerk
IIIIII 11111 111111 11111 III 11111 1111111 III 1111 11111 IIII 30
2881989 03/23/1999 04:34P Weld County CO
31 of 32 R 181.00 D 0.00 JA Sukl Tsukamoto
APPROVED AND EXECUTED BY THE TOWN OF FREDERICK, COLORADO THE
DAY OF ;7) /. ei K; , 1998 .
TOWN OF FREDERICK, COLORADO
AL&
Edward Tag]Gtent ,/ Mayor
ATTEST:
By: ' (%/4� ?J✓ ,AD<'
Ka en Borkowski, Town Clerk
IIIIII 11111 IIIIII IIIIII III IIIII IIIIIII III IIIII IIII 1111 29
2681989 03/23/1999 04:34P Weld County CO
32 of 32 R 161.00 D 0.00 JR Suki Tsukamoto
Hello