The Greeley Planning Commission recommended approval to City Council on July 22 for three serial annexation applications totaling approximately 222.4 acres — Willow Vista Annexations 1, 2 and 3 — and to establish holding-agriculture zoning for the combined area.

Planner Caitlin Puga, Planner III with the City of Greeley, told commissioners the three annexations break down to about 63.29 acres (Annexation 1), 74.71 acres (Annexation 2) and 84.4 acres (Annexation 3). Puga said the properties are currently undeveloped agricultural land in unincorporated Weld County and that the city’s comprehensive plan designates the area as urban reserve; staff concluded the proposals meet the annexation and rezoning criteria and recommended approval.

Puga explained that holding-agriculture zoning "is a zoning designation that limits the amount of uses, and it's primarily to hold the land in place as primarily agriculture use until there is more coordinated planning effort that are provided to change the zoning to allow for other uses," and that any development would later require rezoning and additional review.

Several residents who live adjacent to the parcels urged commissioners to deny annexation. Patricia Conlon and Suzanne Lilly, who said their properties abut two of the subject parcels, said taxes would increase and that they prefer unincorporated county services. Dean Vandergahn and Theresa Suleman raised concerns about increased traffic, light pollution, emergency response jurisdiction and the loss of agricultural character, and one resident mentioned frequent damage to utility poles near his property. In response, planning staff said the annexation itself would not immediately change school district boundaries (the parcels would remain in Eaton School District) and that the city and county use cooperative agreements to coordinate emergency and police response.

Don (staff member) explained state statute and city practice, saying, “a common misconception with annexation is that the city annexes. The city does not actively annex anyone against their will. It is always a voluntary annexation,” and that service levels and taxes do not change unless property owners choose to join an annexation. Engineering reviewer Tina Close said traffic and roadway impacts would be evaluated during future development reviews and that traffic studies and access improvements would be required if and when the owner submits rezoning, PUD or subdivision applications.

Applicant representatives described outreach with city departments and initial infrastructure coordination. A Bessler Homes representative said the company focuses on attainable housing for first-time buyers and emphasized that annexation is not approval of a neighborhood plan and that future development will require further studies and neighborhood meetings.

The commission voted to recommend approval of Annexations 1, 2 and 3 and to recommend establishment of the holding-agriculture zone district to City Council; each motion passed on voice vote. Commissioners and staff emphasized that annexation and holding-agriculture zoning do not authorize immediate development — future rezoning, utilities planning, traffic studies and subdivision approvals would be required before building could proceed.