|
<br />.'\mong the policies apProved
<br />were the defleelion of "
<br />priate" new major emp',Ppro-
<br />Ire , "_ oyers:
<br />m re DCa I....g alona 'h F '
<br />R d" " e ronI'
<br />ange, lrectlon of SOme f t
<br />Front Range d{'\'elopment u. ure
<br />new ccmmunilies, develo l mto
<br />mOle viable allernalh~~~g ~
<br />!'ront Range ,ltrowth and limit_
<br />mg of much Front R '
<br />.-wth,. .. Boge
<br />"'V 0 Its ('l[lstrnll' area
<br />STJ.\IL'J.VS PLEDGED .
<br />Th,e commission l'oted 10 eco-I
<br />nO~lcally stimulate growth
<br />If'ntlal.or COmmunities local::;;
<br />on. major eRst,west transpor.
<br />tati~ routes. de\"clop plans and
<br />funch.ng for acquisition of land
<br />to dIvert growth from I) J}..I
<br />s~ace ar:Bs and 10 change ~e
<br />\l,ater poJICYot the slate. I
<br />The commission also voled to
<br />:
<br />
<br />oatG
<br />
<br />_et'k to extend legislalion l.-:
<br />'ubdivislon development acti\'i-
<br />ties in cities and towns, similar
<br />;0 legislatton now covering
<br />cGum/es. The LlJC directed its
<br />staff 10 prepare that proposal
<br />immediately for legislative con-
<br />sideration in January.
<br />The commission next week
<br />will consider policies on how 10
<br />limit community growth with
<br />annexation and boundary con.
<br />trol. Also, it has yet 10 decide
<br />how to stale policy on control.
<br />ling the development or new
<br />cities, controlling taxation-dis..
<br />trict formation and growth,
<br />locating government agencies
<br />to sen'e newly dispe-rsed areas,
<br />and planning transportation
<br />corridors across the state,
<br />Listed as "additional," or less
<br />important, state concerns were
<br />policies on hazard areas, recre-:
<br />:llion resources and ('(Immuni.
<br />lies, prime agricu]tllTal areas,
<br />aquifer recharge areas. rural
<br />areas, waler, mineral reserves,
<br />restricted use areas and trans-
<br />rtalion_
<br />
<br />L'l/TERl:\I PUS
<br />The interim plan draft dis-
<br />cussed last WCf'k by the com-
<br />mission is a compilation and
<br />redraft of earlier staff docu-
<br />ments, It ap~ars that most of
<br />the earlier staff suggestions for
<br />the plan .....ere included in the
<br />version placed before the com-
<br />mission last week,
<br />
<br />72
<br />
<br />THE DEN V E R POST Sunday, Det', leMMZ
<br />
<br />Complex
<br />
<br />Problems
<br />
<br />, Staff d:afts rec3mmcnd that require complex chan~es in the -f ere n t I ate d urban sprawl 'ment," the LL"C staff wrote,
<br />re~iden15 affected by any public state Constitution and existing stretching for 200 miles within "There is a clear need for
<br />decisions should have the right law. it said. the next 30 years," the report greater care in the attraction
<br />to participate in decJslon-mak. Changes in water law should continued. or permission of new employers
<br />mg. The stale plan isn't at, be in line with the state's land Researchers found that plan- to locate in the area;' the
<br />tempting to zone land or make use policy, it added. It rerom. Ding for the various jurisdictions repart rontinued. Sb!e~; and
<br />specifiC land use decisions, <me mended extension of utility ser- in the Front Range district - local policies still aJ::m:t new
<br />draft explained. vice area su.pervisi~n to several including Denver, Adams, Arap- employers, and morCl$!ntion
<br />The state should as!'Crt itself state agencies. whtle no..... only ahoe, Douglas, Jefferson, Clear must be paid 10 th~t
<br />to make sure that ]ocal commu- county commissioners supervise Creek. Gilpin, Boulder, Weld effects, it said. =
<br />. . . . ,those areaS', and Larimer Countie~is "un. Major sewage treatet fa.
<br />mtles ha\e expertl~e. and po~er Another staff document sur. coordinated and often antago- c i lit i e s, including upse in
<br />10 make those decISionS, insure veys existing conditions and rustic." The situation is improv. Denver and Gr~ley. already are
<br />the existence of "coordinated, problems in six regions In the ing, they added. "inadequate" for prevefltkln of
<br />consistent" land use planning state, with a strong report on Sl.;8ST.-\.\"D.-\RO HOLJSI:--;G water pollution, it continued,
<br />S).st..ms, protcct recreational the Front Range area. The area contains most of the "It appears that the public Is
<br />r€'SOUTreS, prevent continuation The Front Range's main state's substandard bousing, it ahead of the decision.making
<br />of urban sprawl and prevent problem is that of sprawl and continued, "Denver alone, for structure" in concern about
<br />ruraJ decay, the draft said. its eUccts, the report explained. instance, accoon!s for almost Front Range growth, the report
<br />The 3vailabmty of water for It recommended that future two-thirds of the substandard said_ Ultimately, deterioration
<br />development is a critical factor. dC\"elopment be "Cf'Ir'lCentrated" housing in the state. and in the Quality of life could
<br />the draft continued. Because of ~ithin the currently existing Adams County. which has a become so unattracth'e that im-
<br />that problem. any attempts to highly developed areas. high percentage of substandard migration into t~ area will
<br />eontrolland use through public The area's rapid growth rate housing, Is experiencing pres.. stop or be reversed in 15 or 20
<br />control 01 water rights will "threatens to creale an undif- sure for mobile home develop- }'ears, the report predict~.
<br />
|