The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About980983.tiff WELD COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 4 PHONE: (970) 356-4000, EXT. 4391 K FAX: (970) 352-0242 915 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 1948 February 9, 1998 GREELEY, COLORADO 80632 C. COLORADO John Coppom, Administrator The Villa 1750 6th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Letter of January 27, 1998 Dear John: Your letter has requested a work session in order to have the Board to make a determination prior to a final plan application of the applicability of the provisions regarding annexation agreements to municipalities signatory to the Tri-Area Interim Coordinated Planning Agreement. Unfortunately, it is this office's opinion that such a work session where the particulars of your proposal would be discussed would not be appropriate as these are issues which should be considered during the quasi judicial consideration by the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners and not in a meeting held without specific notice and opportunity to comment. To make a determination outside of the hearing process would have the potential for creating an issue for litigation which would certainly not be the desired result for either the County or you as applicant. From reading your letter, I cannot ascertain whether you have specific questions about the policy. It does appear that you are familiar and understand the ramifications of the policy but wish to have a determination made as early in the process as possible. I would indicate that this information that you allude to in your letter should be included in your application and the staff requested to make a recommendation finding on issues you have mentioned. I hope that this letter has been somewhat helpful in at least explaining what the problems which would be created by holding a work session on these issues. Yours truly, Lee D. Morrison Assistant Weld County Attorney LDM/db:Let/Coppom pc: Department of Planning Services Bruce Barker Board of County Commissioners 980983 ;1 4 WELD COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 4 PHONE: (970) 356-4000, EXT. 4391 FAX: (970) 352-0242 915 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 1948 lFebruary 10, 1998 GREELEY, COLORADO 80632 C. COLORADO John Coppom, Administrator The Villa 1750 6th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Your Letter of January 27, 1998 Dear John: Your letter raises issues regarding the timing of a decision regarding the applicability of the annexation agreement provisions of the Tri-Area Interim Coordinated Planning Agreement. You have requested that the Board make this determination in a work session prior to a final plan application. Unfortunately, it is this office's opinion that such a work session where the Board would discuss the particulars of your proposal would not be appropriate. These are issues which should be considered during the quasi judicial hearings by the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners and not in a work session . This decision, if made outside of the public process, could be attacked as procedurally deficient. From reading your letter, I cannot learn whether you have specific questions about the policy. It does appear that you understand the consequences of the policy but want to have a determination made as early in the process as possible. I would suggest that you should include the information alluded to in your letter in your application and request the staff to make a recommendation on issues you have mentioned. I hope that this letter has been helpful in at least explaining what the problems that holding a work session on these issues would create. Yours truly, Lee D. Morrison Assistant Weld County Attorney LDM/db:Let/Coppom pc: Department of Planning Services Bruce Barker Board of County Commissioners Cii 1� cr2 THE YtEL121 1750 6th Avenue • Greeley, Colorado 80631 • (970) 353-9263 John T. Coppom, Ph.D. January 27, 1998 Administrator Ms. Connie Harbert, Chairperson Weld County Board of County Commissioners 915 10th St. Greeley, CO 80632 Dear Commissioner Harbert: The purpose of this letter is to seek clarification of the Interim Coordinated Planning Agreement Among the County of Weld, City of Dacono, Town of Firestone, and Town of Frederick (Interim Agreement). Specifically, I am seeking clarification of any requirement of an annexation agreement on a development we are proposing on a parcel of land located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Interstate 25 and WCR 24. According to the Weld County Attorney's Office, their interpretation is that The Board of Commissioners does not believe that the Interim Agreement applies to developments that have previously received a land use approval, such as a zone change,prior to designation of the Urban Growth Area, as long as the developer has diligently pursued the next step in the process (such as a final plan.) However, one interpretation of the County Attorney's letter(see attached), is that our P.U.D. approval process would remain with the County process until the Final Plan is reviewed before the County Commissioners. It would be at that point that the application of the Interim Agreement to our project would be determined. This, of course, would be costly, time consuming and an inefficient process if it was then determined that we would be required to annex to another town (in this case, Firestone). The property to which I am referring received a Final Plan Zone change from Agricultural to Commercial and Industrial in 1990 for a development called the Fort Junction P.U.D. As you may recall, The Villa received Final Plan Zoning approval for a prerelease facility on this property in December of 1993. This zoning was ultimately voided through a ballot issue in 1996. There can be no doubt that we diligently pursued this project. Since that time, we have continued to diligently pursue development of this property through numerous meetings with the Colorado Department of Transportation, which is just now completing a new service road that winds through the property. As soon as the legal description of the road was determined, which showed the exact location of the road, State Rights-of-Way, etc., we hired, in March of 1997,the company of Tuttle Applegate, Inc. to assist us in designing and platting out a Commercial and Industrial development for this property. Having received preliminary approval for state D.O.T. Access Agreements just two weeks ago, we are completing the proposed P.U.D. application, and intend to submit a sketch plan in the near future. One clear preference is that this development remain in Weld County. I am requesting that the Board schedule a work session so that this matter can be further discussed and hopefully resolved before we get any further along in the Weld County Planning and Zoning processes Thank you very much. Sincerely, / ` UV /John Coppom Administrator WELD COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE PHONE: (970) 356-4000, EXT. 4391 FAX: (970) 352-0242 915 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 1948 11 IWD GREELEY, COLORADO 80632 COLORADO• January 22, 1998 Michael Brand The Villa at Greeley, Inc. 1776 6th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Status of Property Within Scope of Tri-Area Agreement Dear Mr. Brand: I have attached a copy of a letter I have written to another potential developer with similar although not identical circumstances to the Villa. I believe that this information will provide you some guidance as to the future considerations of your property by the County. Please contact me if you have further questions. Yours truly, 7,241 e D. orison Assistant Weld County Attorney LDM/db:Let/Brand Enclosure pc: Bruce Barker Monica Daniels-Mika WELD COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE PHONE: (970) 356-4000, EXT. 4391 FAX: (970) 352-0242 915 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 1948 GREELEY, COLORADO 80632 CJanuary 13, 1998 • COLORADO Town of Firestone c opy Attn: Bruce Nickerson 150 Buchanan P.O. Box 100 Firestone,CO 80520 RE: Del Camino East Dear Mr.Nickerson: This is in further response to your letter of December 8, 1997 to the Director of the Department of Planning Services. Attached is a certified copy of the INTERIM COORDINATED PLANNING AGREEMENT AMONG THE COUNTY OF WELD, CITY OF DACONO, TOWN OF FIRESTONE, AND TOWN OF FREDERICK(INTERIM AGREEMENT). The Board has given staff the following directions regarding the relationship between the INTERIM AGREEMENT and proposed developments which are in the land use process before the County. The Board will have to reach a final decision regarding the individual cases within the urban growth areas as they are presented in public hearings. The Board will consider the additional operative provisions of the INTERIM AGREEMENT, including the availability of municipal services from the municipality seeking the annexation agreement, overlaps between urban growth areas designated by municipalities, and the timing of the annexation sought by the municipality. The Board will consider the individual facts in the final plan process but does not believe that the INTERIM AGREEMENT intended that an annexation agreement for immediate annexation and a new application for land use approval by the municipality was intended where the developer has already received an approval from the Board, such as a zone change, prior to designation of the Urban Growth Area and has diligently pursued the next step in the process (such as a final plan). Please contact me with any further questions you may have regarding this letter. Yours t.;uly, Lee D. Morrison Assistant Weld County Attorney pc: Monica Daniels-Mika Bruce Barker Rusty Green Sam Light Hello