Erie eyes comp plan change, further development outside Boulder County

Erie has begun taking steps toward further growth atop hundreds of acres of grazing fields along the western reaches of unincorporated Weld County, according to several of the property's owners — some of whom have long pushed for the site to be developed.Trustees...

Erie eyes comp plan change, further development outside Boulder County

Erie has begun taking steps toward further growth atop hundreds of acres of grazing fields along the western reaches of unincorporated Weld County, according to several of the property's owners — some of whom have long pushed for the site to be developed.

Trustees next month will consider an amendment to the town's 2015 comprehensive plan redesignating roughly 350 acres north of Colo. 52 and County Line Road 3 ¼ . The area is currently identified as rural residential and public open space under the town's land-use map.

The amendment would identify the space as low-density residential and mixed use to allow the town to annex the property into its boundaries, opening up the property for long-sought development, according to Melissa Leyba, of Permontes Group Inc., a Longmont-based consulting company behind the proposal.

The proposed development, referred to as the Shores on Plum Creek, is only fleshed out as separate zoning areas, Leyba said.

The Shores on Plum Creek as proposed is a mixed-use development with single-family residential, multi-family residential, recreational/open space and commercial uses.

Property owners such as Jon File, who purchased a portion of the land with surrounding neighbors in a partnership to mine the gravel, offered more specific ideas for the property on Friday.

"We plan to build roughly 80 to 90 (low-density) homes on the west side of the property," File said.

He added that roughly 300 to 400 apartments over the life of the project could be possible near Colo. 52, along with several small businesses.

"My thought is that we'll have some gas station or Starbucks (on the property)," he said. "A lot of it depends on what the market does as it develops over the years."

A concept of the proposed development was presented to trustees in December who supported the development being annexed into Erie versus Frederick, which abuts the property to the east, officials said.

"Obviously our Board of Trustees preferred (the property owners) annexed into the town of Erie, where we can control the development," Martin Ostholthoff, Erie's community development director, told planning commissioners.

Frederick officials said Friday that while annexation of the property had been discussed years ago, property owners had not approached the town.

Most annexations are required to be initiated by interested landowners seeking to become part of a specific municipality, according to the Colorado Municipal Annexation Act.

"Annexing the property was something that was discussed sometime ago," Frederick Town Manager Matthew LeCerf said Friday. "We're certainly open to annexing that property if (the property owners) were open to being annexed.

"We also recognize that annexation and those kind of things are based on what the individual believes is in the best interest for their property," he added. "So we respect that as well."

Anthony Hahn: 303-473-1422, hahna@dailycamera.com or twitter.com/_anthonyhahn

Our editors found this article on this site using Google and regenerated it for our readers.

NEXT NEWS