HomeMy WebLinkAbout720663.tiff WELD COUNTY UTILITIES COORDINATING BOARD :
Date : August 17 , 1972
Subject : Utility of Indianhi11s Subdivision
Applicant : Interladco , Inc .
Utility Board members present :
Byron Ewing , County Engineer
Lovilo Fagan , Little Thompson Water
Earl Ely , Greeley Gas Company
William Rae , Mountain Bell
Lyle Anderson , Department of Highways
Donald Farmer, Union REA
Barbara Huner, City of Greeley
Interladco :
Warren Stobbe
Jim Wilburn
Dale Olhausen
Lynn Hammond
Others :
Glen Paul , Sanitarian
•
720663
• •
Mr. Olhausen : We did approve the composite be-
fore and it is final plat . We ' re in the final platting
and the Commission meets on it next Tuesday so we have
went back and made all the previous adjustments and they
were approved and there are some minor changes on drain-
age and on this corner down here where the sanitary treat-
ment goes in but it ' s basically the same as shown on your
original composite . I don ' t think there are any changes
and all the , all the easements and stuff were approved at
one time , so I think it ' s just a matter if you want to
check , you know , whether the easements have been put in
accordance with the original which I assume the copies have
been sent around already anyway. But there haven ' t been
any , you know , substantial changes or anything, it' s just
all been according to the planning department' s recommend-
ations . Whether you like the development or not , it' s im-
material to you gentlemen .
Mr. Anderson : Not so far as the Highway Depart-
ment is concerned. I , my boss wrote a letter to the , Bur-
man here , day before yesterday requesting that this land
that has been set aside for U. S . 34 be dedicated as public
right-of-way. Do you have that letter? You should have it
in the files by now. It was mailed , I think , a couple of
days ago .
Mr. Olhausen : I think that' s probably done right
on the plat here.
r .
Mr. Anderson : No , we couldn ' t find any indica-
tion . We checked your plans against ours and I approved
them and he came right back upstairs and , see the minute
that this thing , the Planning Commission approves it as a
— subdivision , at that point the cost of the land goes up and
• •
- then the Highway Department pays three and four times the
price of it other than agricultural land .
Mr. Olhausen : You want it dedicated on the plat?
Mr . Anderson : We would like to have it dedicated
to the public , yes . Isn ' t that what Mr. Capron ' s letter
says ?
Mr. Ewing : Do you want me to read it?
Mr . Anderson : I think you should .
Mr. Ewing : It ' s addressed to Burman . "We have
reviewed the preliminary plat for the Indianhead Subdivi -
sion and would request the following : Since the present
land is agricultural and any subdivision will raise the
value of the land , we would request that the right-of-way
deeded for improvement of U . S . 34 to a four-lane facil -
ity be dedicated at this time . The right-of-way as shown
on the plat has been previously checked with our office
and is adequate . Your help in this regard will be apprec-
iated . Signed , Wayne Capron , District Engineer.
Mr. Olhausen : We showed this here with the other
streets and we do dedicate to the public right-of-way and
so on just like the rest of the streets . I ' m not sure , I
•
think that ' s
Mr. Anderson : We couldn ' t interpret it , in ally
way other than that it was being reserved for highway
right-of-way.
Mr . Olhausen : No , we say "do dedicate and so on"
for public use and it ' s , it ' s right along with the rest of
the road , I think that ' s right . Now we can certainly check
it .
-2-
Mr. Anderson : Would you do that?
Mr . Olhausen : Because I think that ' s , it ' ll be
automatically dedicated when it ' s platted .
Mr. ,Anderson : We ' ve been trying to work with you
people and we ' ve got our plans into Denver now. I ' ve got
final designs going on it now and we have checked it and
your approaches are correct and your right-of-way lines and
bearings and everything check ours , so there ' s no problem
other than we don ' t want to go out and buy subdivision land .
Mr . Olhausen : I think that' s added here , but
I ' ll certainly check it and I ' ll check back with you on it.
We put the utility and drainage easement around the perim-
eter of each lot so we ' ve got , we ' ve got it shown in a
statement to cover a blanket so I don ' t think there ' s any
question that we got the total amount. These fellows are
with Interladco , Mr. Warren Stobbe , Mr. Jim Wilburn , so
if there is a question .
Mr. Anderson : What ' s his opinion on this state-
ment? Since - - -
Mr. Olhausen : Lynn , the question has come up .
Lynn Hammond is attorney for Interladco . We were just
questioning the dedication of highway 34- for public use
and there ' s a letter apparently in the file that I haven ' t
•
seen yet from Wayne Capron on the fact that they want to be
sure that this is dedicated for public use and not subject
to requiring purchase at the time that they expand the
highway. They ' re satisfied with the width and everything
but the question was whether it truly dedicates this for
public use and I , . I think it does .
Mr, Hammond : Well , looks to me like it does .
-3-
• •
•
- Mr . Olhausen : Does that any , do you interpret
it any other .gay?
Mr. Hammond : Right .
Mr. Olhausen : I think that dedicated for public
use , I think that ' s , at least the way I understood it was ,
I think that ' s proper.
Mr. Stobbe : I think what has transpired , the
purpose of this is that the highway had a series of meet-
ings , which I am sure that we ' re all aware of and then
they had certain requirements which they were making for
set-backs particularly , like in this particular subdivi -
sion . We certainly are complying with their wishes and we
will do everything that they require but I don ' t think the
intent was just to give so many acres away without due cam-
pensation and what we ' re basically looking forward to is
that as the State had indicated to us at the meeting , that
they would in fact purchase the property from the company.
Being a corporation , we don ' t have the , the right or the
ability just to give something away when it ' s not owned by
an individual , it ' s owned by a corporation . But I certain-
ly feel , by their conversation , that this doesn ' t represent
a problem in that they are already , as I understand , making
bids and doing various things up and down the highway. .
Mr. Olhausen : Well , I didn ' t , the plat here
identifies it as a dedication on the plat here as another
public road , It ' s , this is automatically dedicating , I
think , the way we ' ve got it set up .
Mr. Wilburn : Well , I think that you didn ' t un-
derstand us right , Dale , when you dedicated it that way.
-- We wasn ' t giving away 8 or 10 acres of property along the
-4-
4
• •
highway - - - -
Mr_ S_ tobbe : We are providing for the highway
be there .
Mr . Wilburn : It was taken into consideration
that the highway would eventually be four-lane , so there-
fore , in the future when it was , that we didn ' t want hous
to be sitting out there that the State would be , have to
purchase . We would take that four-lane into consideratioi
to set-back but uh - - - - .
Inaudible.
Mr. The point here is , that we ' re pro-
viding a set-back from the current road of x-amount of
feet which is State requirement , isn ' t this true?
' Mr. 0--- l�?n : Well , we ' re showing it as a dedi -
cation , that ' s all I ' m saying. That ' s what they' re ask-
ing for by letter and that ' s what the question was and
how that ' s resolved is , it ' s got to be apparently resolved.
He ' s questioning that it is handled as a dedication and
that ' s basically what apparently the letter requests , that •
M�ng: Do you want me to read the letter?
Mr. O�lha_usen : Yeah , why don ' t- you read the
letter.
•
Mina: It ' s addressed to Burman . (See
letter attached - not recorded) .
Mr. Hind : That letter, it sounds , I ' m not
too sure I know what it means . It sounds in the first part
_ as though what he ' s concerned with is that the development
out there would increase the value above the present agri -
-5-
• •
cultural value and that they wouldn ' t want to be paying
for that increase in value , although it implies they would
be paying for the agricultural value of the land , what
ever that would be , and then in the second part of the
letter , it implies that they are looking for a definite
dedication of the land . So I guess , my point is , I ' m not
really too sure in my own mind that I know what the State ' s
position is , based on that letter , whether they would in-
tend to pay the agricultural value but they don ' t want to
get involved with paying any increase in value due to the
fact that there would be development , or whether they want
it given to them at the start .
Mr. Anderson : Basically what he' s asking is that
first , he ' s asking the Planning Commission to approve the
plan as far as the Highway Department is concerned , subject
to dedication to highway right-of-way , to public right-of-
way , and if this is not possible then subject to retaining
it as agricultural land and not as subdivision . So this
question is strictly up to the Planning Commission . We have
no , there ' s no laws you know , that we can force you to do
this , but I would say that a great percentage of subdividers
do dedicate the land , because we try to cooperate with you
in drainage and entrances , approaches , everything imagin-
able, and we ' ve worked with you -peopleon this for -some time
• now , as Dale knows .
Mr. Stobbe : I ' m a little in the dark , we got
here late and I apologize , but may I introduce , would you
introduce yourself?
Mr. Anderson : Yes , I ' m Lyle Anderson , I 'm Dist-
rict Design Engineer for Mr. Capron for District 4 .
Mr. Stobbe : I see , and you represent tha State?
-6-
— Mr. Anderson : Yes , I ' m , I ' m the one that ' s doing
the design on this four-lane highway.
Mr . Stobbe : Oh , 0 . K . , well that helps a little
bit , I , I didn ' t know , the thing that , when I was at this
meeting , which was conducted by the State Highway Depart-
ment, - - -
Mr. Anderson : At public hearing , yes .
Mr. Stobbe : Yeah , and the gentlemen I talked to
indicated that they would be purchasing all the right-of-
way and the land from the various people and - - -
Mr. Anderson : Right.
Mr. Stobbe : And intentionally , I suppose be-
cause it ' s primarily agricultural , they would in fact ,
value the land as the use indicates . There were several
commercial developments along the highway, one of which
is a junk yard , that obviously the interpretation of whether
the agricultural or business use would be subject to nego-
tiation . Our thought was , after talking to the people ,
that this would be negotiated and some equitable arrange-
ment would be mutually agreed upon , not necessarily. a gift ,
not necessarily prime value , but something in between that
would be fair.
Mr. Anderson : This is true. This is generally
the way that we explain them at the public hearing. Now ,
as far as the junk yard is concerned , we' re staying clear
away from it . We ' re all on the south side for the simple .
reason it ' s pretty expensive to buy a junk yard , believe
it or not .
Mr. Stobbe : And the other point of issue here ,
a
-7-
•
is that there happens to be a farm house and facilities in
this 200 feet . All the facilities of any consequence are
contained within this period , relating to the farm. So ,
if the consideration was to treat it as farm land , necess-
arily , you would be taking all the farm facilities out of
it , which could not be then referred to as a farm. In
other words , you would be taking the house , which is cur-
rently rental property to us , so it has a different con-
notation than a farm dwelling , and all the buildings there
are used for our corporation in terms of storage and such
as this . In other words , we utilize those instead of er-
ecting sheds , we have been using and utilizing the farm
buildings for our corporation ' s equipment , storage and
equipment and maintenance and this type of thing. So the
thing that I have a , not an immediate conflict , but I ' m
saying that I think we should be able to advise you cur-
rently what we ' re doing so that you can predicate your de-
cision on a more meaningful interpretation of what we are
using the property for currently , regardless of the sub-
division .
Mr. Anderson : Well , - - -
Mr. Stobb.e : You know, in other words , this is
where. I thought- we would sit down and negotiate .
Mr. Anderson : Actually , the negotiations come
at the time that we pick up the certificate of titles and
we send out our appraisers to appraise the property and
get a fair market value , get it approved by _the Federal
Highway Administration , then we come back and send out the
State to negotiate .
Mr. Stobbe : I think we ' re - - - _
•
-R-
fir. H—_ammond: As a fact , though from a Planni
standpoint , one of the main concerns you ;could have , is
that if someone would not go in on that 200 foot strip
plat out lots , that in the process of appraisal , you woi
then be having to have your appraiser appraise lots at t
lot value .
Mr. Anderson : That ' s correct. And you would
surprised the number of people that do this .
Mr . Hammond : yeah , to that extent I think tha
there ' s no conflict with the corporation ' s interest here
that that would be set aside so that it would not be plat
ted as lots and I think the correction that would have to
be made here is engineering and that is simply to desig-
nate that that area is reserved for future highway expan-
•
sion and is not going to be platted so that you ' d be in-
volved in developed land .
Mr. Ammon : Well , at this point , everything
lays on the basis of Mr. Capron ' s letter to the Planning
Commission . It ' s up to them to make the decision , whether
or not they approve it subject to dedication.
Mr. 01hausen : I wasn ' t aware , I thought this
was handled before and apparently if the owner certainly
wants to reserve it or designate it as reserved for the
use and that ' ll have to be handled at that time.
Mr Ammon :• And it ' ll have to , the decision
will have to be by the Planning Commission because we have
asked for a dedication , but we cannot force it.
Mr. Stobbe : Well , I can appreciate your desires ,
_but as I say - - -
-9-
- - - -_.- --
! •
Mr. Anderson : But I mean , after all , we ' re
spending your money , is what we ' re doing .
Mr. Stobbe : I understand .
Mr. Anderson : When you come right back to it .
Mr. Stobbe : And this , our approach to it , is
not necessarily a homespun philosophy, our approach nec-
essarily was askewed by the density factors in the subdiv-
ision . In other words , the demands that were place on us
to make this a rural type subdivision as opposed to a more
high density , we could have done something like this , which
we would have preferred to do. But under the current cir-
cumstances , we have no alternative but to negotiate a rea-
sonalbe settlement for the property in question .
Mr. Anderson : Like I say , if the Planning Com-
mission turns him down , then we will negotiate this . We
have no alternative , but if we do , we want to make certain
that it is negotiated on an agricultural basis , not a com-
mercial or a subdivision .
Mr. Stobbe : We wouldn ' t use the position to under
advantage so I can say that much .
Mr. Hammond : - - - what the plat shows .
Mr. Wilburn : I think we' ve shown that we are
willing to designate that for future highway use but - - -
Mr. Anderson : But our problem is that when we
send out independent fee appraisers , they say , "Well , now
they could have put more lots in here" . So they appraise
it just as though you had lots , even though you don ' t show
them and this is a problem that we continaully run into
-10-
• •
•
when we hire , see we
have no control over the appraisers
at all , contrary to what mane people think .
"fir. Ewi n Well , k I think n:c you get down to basics
it ' s the interpretation here that does the difference
be-
tween designated and dedicated .
The letter her specifi -
cally asks for dedicated .
Mr. Anderson : Now, we will abide by whatever thf
Planning Commission says , it ' s as simple as that.
Mr. Wilburn : Well I think Interladco , what we ' re
saying is , dedicated is wrong as shown on the
plat plan,
It should have been designation ,
Mr. Ewin Well , d. K. , I 'm not going to get in-
to this argument.
t Mr. Wilburn : Well , the only thing I ' m tr in
do is keep from this plat y 9 to
going in as it being a dedication
to the highway department.
Mr. Ewin • a• K. and you have - - - -
Mr. Wilburn :
spelled out.
Mr. Ewin : Right , and yet the request here is
for a dedication .
Mr. Stobbe: You could appreciate their position
ion
Inaudible.
Mr. Ewin : Indeed . However , this kinda puts a
fly in the ointment at this stage of the game.
personal ] I would ,
y , I don ' t know how the rest of the Board feels ,
but I would personally like to see this point clarifie
d ,
x
-11 -
•
inasmuch as the right-of-way would fall within the Utility
Board ' s jurisdiction .
Mr . Olhausen : I don ' t know how we clarify it ,
I mean - - - -
Per. Ewin_c : Well , the question in my mind , is - -
Mr. Olhausen : We ' re assuming it ' s going to be
reserved for , at the present conditions . I think that was
an over sight, it ' s going to be reserved for highway use .
Now take it from there , Byron . I think that' s what the
owner ' s saying , so I think , let ' s assume that we ' ll make
that little designation , that it' s reserved for and it will
not be included under the regular dedication so that item
is in front of you , I think in that manner.
Inaudible .
Mr. Stobbe : What I ' m trying to get at , is it
the words that we ' re fighting on , or - - - -
Mr. Olhausen : Oh yes , this is the indication - -
dedication here , that ' s the way the plat reads for public
roads , that ' s standard procedure . It simply wasn ' t ident-
ified I don ' t think , I think as far as the
Board here , I don ' t, I think you should be able to make a
decision .
Mr. Ewing: Well , right. Well , alright , but - -
Mr. Olhausen : Grant you - -- - -
Mr. Ewing : - - - but what I wanted to do is
clarify what
Mr. Hammond : Right , I ' m glad the issue came up .
-12-
. .._ _ •
Mr. Olhausen : Yeah , I am too .
Mr. Ewing : That ' s just like the little fellow
that comes to the door that The other question
would come up , but I ' m sure , Glen , that you ' ve been over
this completely. I ' m glad you ' re here .
Mr. Paul : Sorry I ' m late .
Mr. Ewing: Is the Evapo storage pond? What are
your thoughts ?
Mr. Paul : Well , we ' ve been over that detail and
they do have the State and the County recommendations , I
mean to approve this type.
Mr . Ewing : Well , I ' m sure they' re in here some
where , and I ' m not going to look.
Mr. 0lhausen : Yeah , we transmitted a copy of
that report later on to Burman , after we , after the initial
one , so I know you ' ve got a later one even than the first
round , so - - -
Mr. Ewing : Yeah , but it ' s a lot easier, particul -
arly with a file this size to ask the man rather than look.
Mr. Paul : Yeah , well this has been approved al -
• right, by Ron Schuyler and the Weld County Health Depart-
ment.
Mr. Ewing : 0 . K. Alright.
Mr. Anderson : And you ' ve got the approval of
this on all the other utilities ?
Mr. Ewing : I ' m sure that ' s all - - - --
Inaudible .
-13-
Mr . Anderson : Now , you ' re on the south side
from the interstate to Kelim through the new - - -
Mr . Paul : - - - - is out , is a new directive and
I , if you haven ' t , if Burman hasn ' t seen it , I will send a
copy of it , from the Water Pollution Commission . The Water
Pollution Commission was ruled that they have no jurisdic-
tion over non-municipal systems .
Mr. Ewing : Tilt .
Mr. Paul : So , in other words , Ron Schuyler
doesn ' t have to go over the subdivisions .
Mr. Ewing : Tilt.
Mr. Paul : We could still go through and get
did mention , if we desire it and to ask for
their help , they would be glad to 0 . K. ?
Mr. Ewing : So they ' re not , they ' re not restrict-
ed to stay completely away then .
Mr. Paul : No , it ' s just their recommendations
that they don ' t have to come in - -
-. I ' 71 get you , I
don ' t know whether Burman ' s received any of those or not
and I ' ll , I ' ll get a copy of it .
Mr. Ewing : One s.mall .guestion- before I a.sk for
a motion . In view of this , if you ask for their review
and/or approval , do they restrict it to the fact of verbal
only and their approval is not for publication?
Mr. Paul : I don ' t know for sure , but I doubt if
they would , they ' re not going to say approve or disapprove ,
they would make their recommendations .
Mr. Olhausen : That ' s by State law isn ' t it , Glen?
-1"4-
a • •
Mr. Paul : Right .
Mr. Olhausen : That ' s by State lase so there ' s
nothing they can do any place , it ' s designated as a County
function .
Mr. Paul : Yeah , this is the , appointed to by
the Attorney General .
Mr. Olhausen : Thank you .
Mr. Ewing : We ' ll aruge about that later, Dale .
0. K. let me see , in order to clarify this situation , let
me say this . The motion , I feel and I cannot make it , but
the motion should be either approval or disapproval , what-
ever the Board wants , with the understanding that the State
Highway right-of-way is designated and not dedicated and
the legal description will read accordingly , that it is a
reservation and not a gift , and as far as Mr. Capron ' s let-
ter, that probably will come up at Planning Commission .
Mr. Anderson : This is the purpose.
Mr. Ewing: Right , Other than that , there were no
changes to speak of.
Mr. Olhausen : I think without exception , we' ve
complied with every request. We' ve got 1.5 foot easements
around everything so that should satisfy them.
Mr. Ewing : The , so , therefore , would somebody
make a motion?
Mr. Hammond : After a motions ' s made or seconded ,
I have one question I ' d like to raise . Assuming, I think
we ' re thinking alike , I think our problem is summatic in
putting it down on paper , suppose that the plat goes through
-15-
e
- and is approved and is recorded and the State Highway ,
through some new concept in planning , decides to go north
or south of the property and never , in fact , intends to
utilize the 200 feet and we have on record a plat which
says "Reserved for the Highway and perpetuity" , and we ' ve
got a situation then when the Highway Department may never
be on o•r have any desire for the road but we got a plat
which says it isn ' t to be used for anything but road and I
think to clarify the Company ' s position is , they have no
intention of platting it , doing anything with it until the
plans of the Highway Department are completed and we know
what it is , but if the Highway Department should come with-
in a year or two and say , "Well , we ' ve changed our mind and
we don ' t want it there " , the Company would certainly not
want to have a plat recorded which says on it , "Reserved
for Highway expansion " . I think we ' re together in mind ,
I ' m wondering if our language is such that , cause I think
you feel the same way . You wouldn ' t want a plat , a weed
pile that nobody could do anything with , if the Highway
didn ' t want to use it .
Mr. Ewing : 0 . K. , well , perhaps Andy could ex-
plain highway policy better than I could . I know from my
experience with the Highway Department , these plans usual -
ly take shape over a period of years and in many cages , a
lot of years . From a personal point of view, the Highway
Department is probably one of the more stable organizations
to work with . If they say that ' s where they' re going to
go , nine chances out of ten , or ninety-nine out of a hund-
red , that ' s where they ' re going to go .
Mr. Hammond : Let me cit you what concerns me .
The Foothills expressway
-16-
d
•
Mr. Stobbe : as such time as the High-
way Department made a final decision but at that particular
time , it would be really to somebody ' s disadvantage if we
found that this was then , sold back by whoever and something
undesirable put there .
Mr . Olhausen : Maybe I can say this . The Company
would have no objection to putting on the plat that it ' s
"Reserved for future Highway expansion if made within five
years " or eight years or whatever time schedule you could
give us and we ' ll add a couple of years to it for leeway.
Mr. Ewing : 0 . K. , to begin with , I don' t know.
whether a time limit is in order. I would think that you ' d
be better off discussing this with the powers that be in
the Highway Department , but they do have provisions for
abandoning right-of-way. I know in the County , when we ab-
t andon right-of-way , we abandon it to adjacent owners . The
State law says you can do it , the State has a policy of ab-
andonment in cases where the road is not needed or they
have by-passed a town and they will abandon from the State
system.
Mr. Hammond : But we ' re in area here that ' s not
really pertinent , the problem is -
Tape ran out .
From the minutes : Motion by Mr. Farmer to approve
the Utility plat subject to the clarification of the dedi -
cation of the right-of-way. Second by Mr. Fagan . A unan-
imous vote of "Aye" . Motion carried .
-17-
Hello