Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-65.1-101 (2026)

Legislative declaration

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) The general assembly finds and declares that:

(a) The protection of the utility, value, and future of all lands within the state, including the public domain as well as privately owned land, is a matter of public interest;

(b) Adequate information on land use and systematic methods of definition, classification, and utilization thereof are either lacking or not readily available to land use decision makers; and

(c) It is the intent of the general assembly that land use, land use planning, and quality of development are matters in which the state has responsibility for the health, welfare, and safety of the people of the state and for the protection of the environment of the state.

(2) It is the purpose of this article that:

(a) The general assembly shall describe areas which may be of state interest and activities which may be of state interest and establish criteria for the administration of such areas and activities;

(b) Local governments shall be encouraged to designate areas and activities of state interest and, after such designation, shall administer such areas and activities of state interest and promulgate guidelines for the administration thereof; and

(c) Appropriate state agencies shall assist local governments to identify, designate, and adopt guidelines for administration of matters of state interest.

Source: L. 74: Entire article added, p. 335, § 1, effective May 17. L. 2005: IP(1) amended, p. 671, § 13, effective June 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1979–2024 · leading case: Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. Hygiene Fire Prot. Dist., 221 P.3d 1063 (Colo. 2009).
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. Hygiene Fire Prot. Dist., 221 P.3d 1063 (Colo. 2009). · cites it 12× “1994)(holding that the more specific County Land Use Act, section 24-65.1-101, C.R.S. (1988) (repealed 2005), prevails over the "broader" override provision contained in section 30-28-110(1)(c)).”
City & Cnty. of Denver, Etc. v. Bergland, 517 F. Supp. 155 (D. Colo. 1981). · cites it 11× “I note further that the second statute under which Grand County promulgated its administrative regulations, the Colorado Land Use Act, Colo.Rev.Stat. § 24-65.1-101 et seq., delegates to the counties power to supervise land use with regard to areas and activities of “state…”
City & Cnty. of Denver Ex Rel. Bd. of Water Commissioners v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 782 P.2d 753 (Colo. 1989). · cites it 8× “1-502, encourages local governments to designate areas and activities of state interest, and promulgate guidelines for the administration of those areas and activities. See § 24-65.1-101(2)(b). Section 24-65.”
Colorado Mining Ass'n v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners of Summit Cnty., 199 P.3d 718 (Colo. 2009). · cites it 4× “The Areas and Activities of State Interest Act ("HB 1041"), §§ 24-65.1-101 to -502, C.R.S. (2008), is another source of land use planning authority for counties.”
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. Dist. Court in & for the City & Cnty. of Denver, 632 P.2d 1017 (Colo. 1981). · cites it 5× “See, section 24-65.1-101, C.R.S.1973 (1980 Supp.”
Dep't of Transp. v. City of Idaho Springs, 192 P.3d 490 (Colo. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “Background The city has adopted regulations under the Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (AASIA), sections 24-65.1-101 to -502, C.R.S.2007.”
Droste v. Bd. of Cnty. Com'rs of Pitkin, 159 P.3d 601 (Colo. 2007). · cites it 4× “The County argued that it had the power to enact moratoria under the Areas and Activities of State Interest Act, section 24-65.1-101, et seq., C.R.S. (2006)("H.”
C & M Sand & Gravel, Div. of C & M Ready Mix Concrete Co. of Boulder v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 673 P.2d 1013 (Colo. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “” Local governmental authority to regulate mining operations by permit is also derived from a delegation of authority in the Areas and Activities of the State Interest Act, § 24-65.1-101, et seq., C.R.S. 1973 (1982 Repl.”
Hygiene Fire Prot. Dist. v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 205 P.3d 487 (Colo. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “The cases cited by the County concerning the requirements of the Land Use Act, §§ 24-65.1-101 to -502, C.R.S.2008, do not suggest otherwise.”
City of Colorado Springs v. Bd. of Commissioners, 147 P.3d 1 (Colo. 2006). · cites it 4× “1041 and currently codified at section 24-65.1-101, et seq., C.R.S. (2006), for the purpose of protecting the utility, value, and future of all lands within the state as a matter of public interest, section The Act provides, in part, that the General Assembly "shall describe…”
Droste v. Bd. of Cnty. Com'rs of Pitkin, 85 P.3d 585 (Colo. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 3× “That zoning ordinance remained in effect on May 17, 1974, when both the Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (AASIA), § 24-65.1-101, et seq., 2002, and the Local Government Land Use Control Enabling Act (Enabling Act), § 29-20-101, et seq.”
City of Colorado Springs v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 895 P.2d 1105 (Colo. Ct. App. 1994). “In order to complete a transbasin water diversion project there, the cities applied to the Board for a special use permit, a permit to conduct a major extension of an existing water collection system, and a permit to conduct a municipal water project, pursuant to regulations…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-65.1-101(1) — 1 case
City & Cnty. of Denver, Etc. v. Bergland, 517 F. Supp. 155 (D. Colo. 1981). “I note further that the second statute under which Grand County promulgated its administrative regulations, the Colorado Land Use Act, Colo.Rev.Stat. § 24-65.1-101 et seq., delegates to the counties power to supervise land use with regard to areas and activities of “state…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-65.1-101(1)(a) — 2 cases
Dep't of Transp. v. City of Idaho Springs, 192 P.3d 490 (Colo. Ct. App. 2008). “Background The city has adopted regulations under the Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (AASIA), sections 24-65.1-101 to -502, C.R.S.2007.”
No Pipe Dream v. Larimer Cnty. (Colo. Ct. App. 2024).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-65.1-101(2) — 1 case
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-65.1-101(2)(a) — 1 case
City of Colorado Springs v. Bd. of Commissioners, 147 P.3d 1 (Colo. 2006). “1041 and currently codified at section 24-65.1-101, et seq., C.R.S. (2006), for the purpose of protecting the utility, value, and future of all lands within the state as a matter of public interest, section The Act provides, in part, that the General Assembly "shall describe…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-65.1-101(2)(b) — 4 cases
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. Hygiene Fire Prot. Dist., 221 P.3d 1063 (Colo. 2009). “1994)(holding that the more specific County Land Use Act, section 24-65.1-101, C.R.S. (1988) (repealed 2005), prevails over the "broader" override provision contained in section 30-28-110(1)(c)).”
City & Cnty. of Denver Ex Rel. Bd. of Water Commissioners v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 782 P.2d 753 (Colo. 1989). “1-502, encourages local governments to designate areas and activities of state interest, and promulgate guidelines for the administration of those areas and activities. See § 24-65.1-101(2)(b). Section 24-65.”
City of Colorado Springs v. Bd. of Commissioners, 147 P.3d 1 (Colo. 2006). “1041 and currently codified at section 24-65.1-101, et seq., C.R.S. (2006), for the purpose of protecting the utility, value, and future of all lands within the state as a matter of public interest, section The Act provides, in part, that the General Assembly "shall describe…”
No Pipe Dream v. Larimer Cnty. (Colo. Ct. App. 2024).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-65.1-101(l)(c) — 2 cases
City & Cnty. of Denver, Etc. v. Bergland, 517 F. Supp. 155 (D. Colo. 1981). “I note further that the second statute under which Grand County promulgated its administrative regulations, the Colorado Land Use Act, Colo.Rev.Stat. § 24-65.1-101 et seq., delegates to the counties power to supervise land use with regard to areas and activities of “state…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.