MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Monday, DECEMBER 19, 2005
BUDGET ADOPTION HEARING
The Board of County Commissioners met at 11:00 a.m. with Frank Lancaster, County Manager; Chair Rennels presided, and Commissioners Gibson and Wagner were present. Also present were Robert Keister, Neil Gluckman, and Deni LaRue, Commissioners’ Office; and Gael Cookman, Deputy County Clerk.
Mr. Keister explained that the purpose of the meeting is to approve the 2005 Amended Budget and to adopt the proposed 2006 Budget and Mill Levy Certification. Mr. Keister explained that two public hearings have been held to solicit citizen input. Mr. Keister noted that the Revised 2005 Budget contains revisions previously approved by the Board of County Commissioners and the County Manager. He explained that the 2005 budget would be revised by $36,045,240, with the net effect on the ending 2005 balance being an increase to the reserve account of $1,024,258.
Commissioner Gibson asked for clarification of the carry-in funds. Mr. Keister stated that the carry-in funds would be $15 to $18 million, with $2 million being at the discretion of the Board. Commissioner Gibson asked if the money budgeted to purchase the property for a future landfill would be carried over into 2006. Mr. Keister replied in the affirmative.
Chair Rennels opened the hearing up for public comment. There was no public comment.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Notice and Resolution to Transfer Funds and Amend the 2005 Budget.
Motion carried 3-0.
12192005R001 NOTICE AND RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER FUNDS AND AMEND THE 2005 BUDGET
Mr. Keister continued by explaining that the 2006 Proposed Budget is $258,732,845, and that there are a few significant changes that have been made since the 2006 Budget was first presented and proposed. These include: 1. Funding the self-insured medical fund. 2. Funding Open Lands acquisition improvements. 3. A change to the budgeted fuel costs for Fleet Services, as fuel costs have come down since the original figures were proposed.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Wagner moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the resolution adopting the 2006 Budget and to set levies.
Motion carried 3-0.
12192005R002 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR LARIMER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
Mr. Keister explained that the next item on the agenda provides for adoption of a series of resolutions for separate taxing entities, as listed, which sets the budget and mill levy for each of the same.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the resolutions to adopt the 2006 budgets and set levies for said entities.
Motion carried 3-0.
12192005R003 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY PEST CONTROL DISTRICT
12192005R004 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY PUBLIC TRUSTEE
12192005R005 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY GID #1 IMPERIAL ESTATES
12192005R006 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY GID #2 PINEWOOD SPRINGS
12192005R007 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY GID #4 CARRIAGE HILLS
12192005R008 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY GID #8 NAMAQUA HILLS
12192005R009 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY GID #10 HOMESTEAD ESTATES
12192005R010 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY GID #11 MEADOWDALE HILLS
12192005R011 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY GID #1991-1 ARAPAHOE PINES
12192005R012 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY GID #12 CLUB ESTATES
12192005R013 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY GID #13A RED FEATHER
12192005R014 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY GID #14 LITTLE VALLEY ROAD
12192005R015 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY GID #15 SKYVIEW SOUTH
12192005R016 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY GID #16 KITCHELL SUBDIVISION
12192005R017 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY GID #17 COUNTRY MEADOWS
12192005R018 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY GID #18 VENNER RANCH
12192005R019 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY PID #19 HIGHLAND HILLS
12192005R020 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY PID #20 PTARMIGAN
12192005R021 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY PID #21 SOLAR RIDGE
12192005R022 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY PID #22 SADDLEBACK
12192005R023 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY PID #23 EAGLE ROCK RANCHES
12192005R024 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY GID #24 WESTRIDGE
12192005R025 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY PID #25 ESTES PARK ESTATES
12192005R026 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY PID #26 EAGLE RANCH ESTATES
12192005R027 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY PID #28 TROTWOOD
12192005R028 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY PID #29 VINE DRIVE
12192005R029 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY PID #30 POUDRE OVERLOOK
12192005R030 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 2006 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY PID #31 FOOTHILLS SHADOW
Mr. Keister proceeded on to the next agenda item concerning approval of a resolution appropriating (setting spending limits) sums of money for each department and provided some explanation of the resolution.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Wagner moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Resolution to Appropriate Sums of Money for 2006, which sets the limits for spending for each Larimer County department.
Motion carried 3-0.
12192005R031 RESOLUTION TO APPROPRIATE SUMS OF MONEY FOR 2006
Mr. Keister proceeded on to the next agenda item concerning designation of the ending fund balances, noting that the ending balances are also budgeted, which demonstrates the County's fiscal responsibility.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Resolution to Designate Ending 2006 Fund Balances.
Motion carried 3-0.
12192005R032 RESOLUTION TO DESIGNATE ENDING 2006 FUND BALANCES
Mr. Keister explained the final agenda item is the certification of levies and revenue. Mr. Keister noted that the Allenspark Fire Protection District did not meet the deadline for certification, and further explained that the Assessor's Department has the authority to utilize last year's mill levy for this entity if they consult with the State; otherwise, the Allenspark Fire Protection District will receive no revenue in 2006.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Wagner moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the 2006 Certification of Levies and Revenue.
Motion carried 3-0.
The hearing recessed at 11:30 a.m.
LAND USE HEARING
(#133 & 134)
The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 3:00 p.m. with Rob Helmick, Principle Planner. Chair Rennels presided and Commissioners Wagner and Gibson were present. Also present were: Matt Lafferty, Porter Ingrum, Karin Madson, Casey Stewart, and David Karan, Planning Department; Dave Shirk, Estes Park Planner; Jim Reidhead, Rural Land Use Center; Matt Johnson, and Traci Downs, Engineering Department; Doug Ryan, Environmental Health Department; Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney; Deni LaRue and Donna Hart, Commissioners' Office; Tom Garton, Candice Phippen, Wendy Dionigi, and Chad Gray, Building Department and Code Enforcement; and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk.
Chair Rennels opened the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance, and asked for public comment on the County Budget and Land Use Code. No one from the audience addressed the Board regarding these topics.
The Board presented the 2005 Environmental Stewardship awards to: 1. Dave Swartz and the Rocky Mountain High School Environmental Club, for their 15-year school-wide recycling program. 2. Dr. Robert Streeter, for conservation activities within the Trappers Point Homeowners Association. 3. The Town of Estes Park, for conservation activities on the Knolls-Willows properties.
The Board then presented the 2005 Outstanding Professionalism Awards for the following building contractors: 1. Bob Pavlish, owner of Cornerstone Concrete. 2. Harry Poehlmann, owner of Basements 4 You. 3. Reyes Sarmiento, owner of Kiva Engineering.
Chair Rennels explained that Items 1 - 3, the Amended Plat of Portions of Lots 51 and 52, Block 10, 2nd Amended Plat Carriage Hills 4th; Coyote Ridge Subdivision Preliminary Plat; and Coyote Ridge Subdivision Final Plat, are being tabled to January 17, 2006, at staff's request. Chair Rennels then noted that Items 4 through 8 are consent items and would not be discussed unless requested by the Board, staff, or members of the audience:
4. POUDRE SPRINGS 1ST FILING LOTS 85, 86, AND 87 LOT CONSOLIDATION AND EASEMENT VACATION - #05-S2509: This is a request to combine three lots into one in the Poudre Springs 1st Filing. This application also requests the vacation of the utility easements located on the common lot lines of the subject lots. There have been no objections to this proposal by surrounding neighbors. Additionally, the following Larimer County agencies have stated that they have no objections to this proposal: The Larimer County Department of Health and Environment; and the Larimer County Engineering Department Development Review Team.
It should be noted that the plat of record of Poudre Springs 1st Filing contains a note limiting the use of traditional septic systems on lots 85-87. Vaulted systems are the only septic system allowed on these lots. Approval for any septic system must be obtained from the Larimer County Department of Health and Environment.
The proposed Lot Consolidation for Poudre Springs 1st filing Lots 85-87 and easement vacation, will not adversely affect any neighboring properties or any County agency. The Lot Consolidation will not result in any additional lots. The staff finds that the request meets the requirements of the Larimer County Land Use Code.
The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Lot Consolidation for Poudre Springs 1st filing Lots 85, 86, and 87, File #05-S2509, to be known as Lot 87A of the Lot Consolidation of Lots 85, 86 and 87 Poudre Springs 1st Filing and the vacation of the 20 foot utility easement located on the common lot lines subject to the following conditions:
1. All conditions shall be met and the final resolution of the County Commissioners recorded by June 19, 2006 or this approval shall be null and void.
2. The resultant lot is subject to any and all covenants, deed restrictions or other conditions that apply to the original lots.
5. HIAWATHA HEIGHTS LOTS 5A, 5B, 6 AND 19 OF BLOCK 19 AND LOT 26 OF BLOCK 19A LOT CONSOLIDATION- #05-S2512: This is a request to combine Lots 5A, 5B, 6 and 19 of Block 19 and Lot 26 of Block 19A in the Hiawatha Heights Subdivision into one building lot. There have been no objections to this proposal by surrounding neighbors. Additionally, the following Larimer County agencies have stated that they have no objections to this proposal: The Larimer County Department of Health and Environment; and the Larimer County Engineering Department Development Review Team.
The Larimer County Engineering Department has noted in their comments that this proposed lot consolidation will be divided by a road, which is not allowed in the LCLUC. However, the plat for this subdivision indicates that this road is actually a private access easement. The Engineering Department has asked that this access easement be maintained to allow access to nearby lots. Staff has included a condition of approval to address the Engineering Department’s request.
The proposed Lot Consolidation for Lots 5A, 5B, 6 and 19 of Block 19 and Lot 26 of Block 19A in the Hiawatha Heights Subdivision will not adversely affect any neighboring properties or any County agency. The Lot Consolidation will not result in any additional lots. The staff finds that the request meets the requirements of the Larimer County Land Use Code.
The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Lot Consolidation for Lots 5A, 5B, 6 and 19 of Block 19 and Lot 26 of Block 19A in the Hiawatha Heights Subdivision (#05-S2512) subject to the following conditions:
1. The resultant lot is subject to any and all covenants, deed restrictions or other conditions that apply to the original lots.
2. All conditions shall be met and the final resolution of the County Commissioners recorded by June 19, 2006 or this approval shall be null and void.
3. The private access easement on Lots 5A, 5B and 19 in Block 19 and Lot 26 on Block 19A as shown on the Plat of Record for the Hiawatha Heights Subdivision, shall be maintained as a public access easement to allow nearby property owners access to their property.
6. COOKIES PARCELS SUBDIVISION - #05-S2471: This is a request for a Preliminary Plat for the division of a 10 acre parcel into two (2) residential lots. Currently, one existing residential use exists on the property. On October 19, 2005, the Development Services Team presented the Preliminary Plat for the Cookies Parcels Subdivision to the Planning Commission as a consent agenda item. No public testimony regarding the application was offered; therefore, the Planning Commission made a recommendation to approve this two lot subdivision as recommended by the Development Services Team.
The Development Services Team recommends the Board of County Commissioner approve the Preliminary Plat of the Cookies Parcels Subdivision, File #05-S2471, as recommended by the Planning Commission and outlined below:
The Planning Commission recommends to the Board of County Commissioners that the Cookies Parcels Subdivision, File #05-S2471, be approved subject to the following conditions:
1. The Final Plat of the Cookies Parcels Subdivision shall be consistent with the plans, documents and representations contained in the file, (#05-S2471), unless modified by the conditions of approval.
2. The applicant shall execute a Development Agreement and provide a disclosure notice for Final Plat approval by the County as part of the Final Plat. These documents shall be recorded with the Final Plat, and shall provide notice to all future lot owners of the conditions of approval and issues, costs and fees associated with the approval of this project.
3. The following fees shall be collected at building issuance for new single family dwellings: Thompson R2-J School Fees, Larimer County fees for County and Regional Transportation Capital Expansion, and Regional Larimer County Park Fees (in lieu of land dedication). The fee amount that is current at the time of building permit shall apply.
4. Passive Radon Mitigation measures shall be included in the construction of residential dwellings on the approved lots. The results of a radon test once the structure is enclosed but prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy shall be submitted to the Planning Department. As an alternative, a builder may present a prepaid receipt for a radon tester, which specifies that a test will be conducted within 30 days. A permanent Certificate of Occupancy can be issued when the prepaid receipt is submitted.
5. The applicant shall provide an access easement across Lot 2 for access to Lot 1 of the subdivision. Said access easement shall extend from County Road 4 to 20 feet north of the Culver Irrigation Ditch on the property.
6. Prior to the recordation of the Final Plat the applicant shall provide an agreement with the Culver Ditch Company for any crossing of the ditch and any storm water releases into the ditch.
7. The applicant shall provide access and maintenance easements along the Culver Irrigation Ditch in accordance with Section 8.8 of the Larimer County Land Use Code.
8. The standard for connectivity found at Section 8.14.2.S of the Larimer County Land Use Code shall not be required for this development.
7. SAGE VALLEY CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT AND REZONING - #05-S2405: This is a request for a Preliminary Plat for a Conservation Development to divide 35 acres into 3 single family residential lots and one residual lot and rezoning. The property is split zoned O-Open and FA-1 Farming. The applicant wishes to downzone the FA-1 portion and develop consistent with the O-Open zoning district. This preliminary plat was on the Consent Agenda for the Planning Commission at its public hearing on November 16, 2005. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval. The Development Services Team and Planning Commission recommend to the Board of County Commissioners the following conditions of approval:
A. Approval of the Appeal to LCLUC Section 8.14.2.S on connectivity.
B. Approval of the Appeal to Section 8.14.2.N on dedicating right-of-way for internal streets.
C. Approval of the Sage Valley Conservation Development with the following conditions:
1. The Final Plat shall be consistent with the approved Preliminary Plat and with the information contained in the Sage Valley Conservation Development (file #05-S2405). The applicant shall be subject to all other verbal or written representations and commitments of record for the Sage Valley Conservation Development.
2. Passive radon mitigation measures shall be included in the construction of all new residential structures on these lots. The results of a radon detection test once the structure is enclosed but prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy shall be submitted to the Building Department. As an alternative, a builder may present a prepaid receipt from a radon tester that specifies that a test will be done within 30 days. A permanent Certificate of Occupancy can be issued when the prepaid receipt is submitted.
3. The following fees shall be collected at the issuance of the building permit for new single family dwellings. Thompson R-2 school fee, Larimer County fees for County and Regional Transportation Capital Expansion (TCEFs), Larimer County Regional Park Fee (in lieu of dedication) and drainage fee. The fee amount that is current at the time of building permit application shall apply. Both the Development Agreements and the Disclosure Affidavits will reference this requirement. The County Engineer’s office also requires a Development Construction Permit, prior to commencing development construction.
4. The applicant shall execute a Disclosure Notice for approval by the County to be recorded with the Final Plat. This notice shall provide information to all lot owners of the conditions of approval and special costs or fees associated with the approval of this project. The notice shall include, but not be limited to, the issues related to rural development, fire department requirements, the requirement for any access permits and culverts, building envelopes, the need for passive radon mitigation, and the issues raised in the review and/or related to compliance with the Larimer County Land Use Code.
5. A Conservation Easement, Development Agreement, or other instrument will: a) state that no further development of any residual land lots will be allowed, b) specify uses allowed on the residual lot, and c) specify how residual land will be managed. This condition will be fully satisfied before the Final Plat proceeds to the County Commissioners for approval.
6. The applicant will address all other Final Plat issues discussed in County Engineering Department’s October 7, 2005, comments including, but not limited to meeting street standards and improvement of the design of the intersection of Sage Valley Court and Lot 2 driveway easements.
7. A Homeowners Association bylaws and documents or a Road Maintenance Agreement shall be approved by County Planning and Engineering Department, specify that all maintenance of the driveway easements will be the responsibility of the owner of Lot 2, and establish a method for joint maintenance of the Sage Valley Court right-of-way by the owners of Lots 1 and 2 and Residual Lot A.
D. Approve the Sage Valley rezoning to O-Open (file # 05-Z1540).
8. SCHROEDER RURAL LAND USE PLAN: The proposal for the Schroeder Preliminary Rural Land Plan is to divide 70 +/- acres into four (4) lots in the following manner: Three (3) single-family residential lots, each lot approximately 3 acres in size, and one residual lot about 61+/- acres in size. The residual lot will contain a 7-acre building envelope for a home-site and support buildings, leaving about 54+/- acres as undeveloped residual land (private open space) that will be protected from further development in perpetuity by either a conservation easement or a covenant, as required under the RLUP. The residual land’s current use as dry grazing land will continue.
The property is located in W ½ of the NW ¼ of Section 10, Township 9 North, Range 69 West. It is generally located 5 miles northwest of the Town of Wellington and 2 ½ miles northwest of the Waverly Community, immediately south of County Road 72 and ¾ of a mile west of County Road 17. The property is mostly dry grazing land with a small pond and stream (Dry Creek) located in its southern portion. The land could be divided into two (2) 35-acre parcels without County input. The property is zoned O-Open. Under the property’s current O-Open zoning (1 home site per 10 acres), up to seven (7) homes could potentially be built if brought through the County's Conservation Development (CD) process if adequate public facilities are provided.
The residential lots have been located to minimize the internal access road and water line installations and to provide good views of the mountains. The 7-acre building envelope for Residual Lot A will be designed to avoid both the stream on the west and pond in order to the east to provide adequate setbacks for the on-site septic system. Access to these new lots is proposed from County Road 72. The residential lots will be about three acres in size. Water to the residential lots will be provided by Northern Colorado Water Association; an on-lot well will provide domestic water for the fourth home-site located on the residual lot. The applicant is proposing appropriate architectural guidelines for this project to mitigate the visual impact of the proposed new residences and associated structures.
The surrounding properties consist of parcels ranging in size from 35 acres to 640 +/- acres. To the north are 35-acre residential lots; to the east is the Canyon Ranch Estates R.L.U.P. (351 acres; 20 residential lots); to the south is an existing 150-acre +/- farm and ranch operation; and to the west is a 640-acre +/- parcel that is part of an existing cattle ranching operation. The Grant Family Farms organic farming operation processing plant is located ¾ mile east at the northeast corner of the intersection of County Roads 17 and 72. The Horseman Hills subdivision, 46 residential lots on 160 acres, is located 1 ¼ miles east of the subject property at the northwest corner of the intersection of County Roads 15 and 72.
There is significant development pressure in this area for 35-acre parcels and smaller residential lots, if available. This pressure is caused by general growth along the Front Range, as well as by pressure specifically associated with growth in the Waverly-Wellington-north Fort Collins area and relatively-easy access to I-25 via County Road 70. The proposed density of the Schroeder Rural Land Use project, one unit per 17.5 acres, appears to be compatible with the neighborhood.
The residual land, approximately 54 acres and comprising roughly 77% of the property, will be protected from further development in perpetuity by either a covenant or conservation easement. It will have a management/use plan to foster its long-term health. The owners of the residual land parcels will be responsible for maintaining the residual land and for providing a periodic monitoring report(s) to the County. A road maintenance agreement will include provisions for maintenance of the internal private road. Lots 1 through 3 and Residual Lot A will be party to this agreement.
A neighborhood meeting was held on November 8, 2005, at the Comfort Inn in Wellington. Approximately five area residents attended. Their concerns were mainly about water and architectural guidelines.
This project is based on Section 5.8—Rural Land Use Process of the Larimer County Land Use Code. The development will comply with the Road Naming and Site Addressing System Resolution, Section 8.8—Irrigation facilities and Section 8.10—Management/Use Plans.
The referral agencies have responded and applicable fees will be collected to meet the requirements in Section 9.0—Land Dedications, Fees-in-Lieu of Dedications, Facility Fees and Capital Expansion Fees. The fees that will be collected on this project are park fees, school fees, and Transportation Capital Expansion fees. Other fees that will be collected are Rural Land Use Process fees in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
Mr. Steve Smith, North Poudre Irrigation Company (NPIC) Manager, expressed concerns in his referral comments about NPIC easements along Dry Creek and water rights in the small pond at the south end of the Schroeder property. As a matter of policy, all RLUP projects are subject to Section 8.8 of the Larimer County Land Use Code which addresses irrigation facilities. No additional conditions beyond those code provisions should be applied to this project.
In his referral comments, Mr. Porter Ingrum, Environmental Planner, made the following recommendation: “Move proposed Lots 1-3 away from the western boundary line or place building envelopes on the lots and move the lots east if necessary. A 200 to 300 foot buffer from the riparian wetlands west of this site is an ideal buffer”. Based on this, the building envelopes for Lots 1-3 shall be designed to create a buffer of at least 200 feet from the Dry Creek riparian area.
Global Engineering Issues:
1. Drainage paths and basins for historic flows must be identified and preserved. Effective drainage paths for new development must be provided. All building envelopes must be sited so that they do not interfere with existing drainage patterns.
2. This project will access off of LCR 72. The Larimer County Transportation Plan, adopted in September of 2000, functionally classifies LCR 72 as a Local Road that require a 60-foot right-of-way (30-foot half right-of-way). In the next submittal, delineate the existing and any proposed dedicated right-of-way necessary to satisfy this requirement (see Section 9.7.2 of the LCLUC).
3. The County Engineering Department asks that all existing fences and structures be moved out of the existing and proposed dedicated right-of-way as part of this development proposal.
4. Due to various topographical constraints the sight distance at the site entrance off of LCR 72 may be compromised. A sight distance evaluation as part of the Final Plat process could assist in placing the site access in a safe location and insure that adequate sight distance is provided.
5. For informational purposes only, the most recent traffic counts recorded by this office are referenced below (taken on LCR 72 west of LCR 17):
Per Section 9.5 of the LCLUC, Transportation Capital Expansion Fees will be required at the time of building permit issuance in accordance with duly enacted Transportation Capital Expansion Fee regulations then in effect.
Water for Lots 1, 2 and 3 is to be supplied by the Northern Colorado Water Association. The County’s Land Use Code contains level of service standards for domestic water service in Section 8.1.2. In order to demonstrate compliance with those standards, the applicant will need to obtain a letter of commitment from the Association for inclusion with the Final Plat submittal. The letter of commitment needs to specifically state that the water distribution system is (or will be) designed to meet the normal and minimum pressure design standards contained in Section 8.1.2.A.1 of the Land Use Code, or more stringent standards as required by the District. If the water system will be designed to provide fire protection, the letter of commitment also needs to address the pressure and delivery standards outlined in Section 8.1.4 of the Land Use Code.
Water for Residual Lot A is proposed to be supplied by an individual well. State statutes provide for the issuance of restricted well permits for lots in Rural Land Use developments. Those permits must be obtained from the Colorado Division of Water Resources prior to obtaining building permits. Water quality and quantity issues are important for new lot owners to consider. Water wells in this type of geology are known to show wide variations in the amount of water they produce. While some wells can pump tremendous amounts of water, other very deep wells are insufficient for residential use without large storage tanks. Once the wells have been developed, owners would be advised to perform water quality testing in addition to the yield tests normally performed. Testing for coliform bacteria and nitrates is recommended.
Sewer is to be by individual on-site septic systems. A preliminary indication of the suitability for these systems can be obtained through a review of the county soil survey. I have attached an excerpt of the map along with an explanation of the constraints for septic systems. The principle soil in the area of Lots 1-3 is the Larim gravelly sandy loam. It is assigned a severe constraint ranking for septic systems due to steeper slopes. On this site the slope constraints occur along the west property boundary and are related to the adjacent Dry Creek drainage. During the site visit, the benefit of locating the building envelopes toward the east side of these lots in order to buffer the houses and septic systems from the drainage side channels was discussed. The residual lot development envelope has similar constraints, but benefits from a larger size which allows more choice in the placement of the home and septic system. Based on the information available, and based on the lot size and design proposed, it appears that suitable locations for septic systems are available. As is the case with all rural area lots, it will be necessary to obtain permits to install the septic systems at the time building permits are requested. Soil test data is required at that stage.
County Road 72, providing access for this property, is gravel surface. The Colorado Air Quality Control Commission’s regulations concerning particulate (dust) emissions require the owner or operator responsible for maintenance of any unpaved roadway which has vehicle traffic exceeding 200 vehicles per day to use all available, practical methods which are technologically feasible and economically reasonable in order to minimize particulate emissions resulting from the use of the roadway. Control measures to be employed may include but are not necessarily limited to, chemical stabilization, paving, speed restrictions and other methods approved by the Air Pollution Control Division. The Adequate Public Facilities standard for roads in Section 8.1.5 of the Land Use Code relate back to these State requirements for dust control. As a practical matter, the type of control that is most feasible depends on the amount of traffic and on other maintenance factors. The County Engineering Department should determine the category of dust treatment that is most appropriate.
The area surrounding this proposal is rural in nature and future occupants should be aware of some unique issues that may be encountered. Examples include lack of mosquito control, potential conflicts with wildlife, and adjacent agricultural operations. Disclosure affidavits should be prepared to inform potential owners about these types of issues.
The zoning for this area allows for horses and other livestock. If livestock are to be kept, the owners should be aware that it has been our experience that lots of this size must be managed very carefully in order to maintain grass cover in the pasture. Overgrazing produces lots with bare ground and scattered weeds. Erosion and polluted runoff result from such a situation, and affect the lot owner, neighbors and the environment. The Larimer County Cooperative Extension Service has extensive information about pasture management. It is recommended that lot owners contact that office if they intend to keep livestock.
All construction activities are required to obtain coverage under a State level stormwater management permit if they disturb one or more acres of land. The permits are administered by the Colorado Department of Health and Environment, Water Quality Control Division. The main pollutant of concern for construction activities is sediment. The permits require holders to control or eliminate the sources of pollutants in stormwater through the implementation of a Stormwater Management Plan, developed as part of the application process. These Stormwater Management Plans must include Best Management Practices (BMPs) that include treatment of stormwater discharges along with source reductions. Inclusion of the BMPs allows most permits to avoid numeric effluent limits.
Information on the county’s geographic information system indicates that this property contains three classifications of riparian wetlands: forested dominated, shrub dominated and herbaceous dominated. There are also palustrine (pond) or lacustrine (lake) wetlands in the southern portion of the site. Wetlands in Larimer County are ranked on a scale of 1 (least important) to 4 (most important). The rankings were determined according to a wetland’s importance for functions such as flood storage, groundwater recharge, and wildlife habitat, plus the wetland’s sensitivity to disturbance. The wetlands on this property were given the ranking of 3 in part because of their overall importance, quality and sensitivity. The riparian wetland is located along the western edge of the property where lots 1-3 are proposed. Riparian wetlands often serve as migration corridors and as important habitat areas because of the availability of water. During the site visit staff observed a raptor or owl nest that may be located on a portion of proposed lot three. To reduce any impact to wildlife using this area staff would recommend that either the lots be moved away from the western property line or that building envelopes be placed near the proposed access road to create a 200 to 300 foot buffer from the riparian area and the proposed houses.
The proposed seven acre building envelope is buffered away from the pond on the southern portion of the property. It appears that any house built within this envelope will be at least 200 feet away from this pond which is an adequate buffer.
Recommendation: Move proposed lots 1-3 away from the western boundary line or place building envelopes on the lots and move the lots east if necessary. A 200 to 300 foot buffer from the riparian wetlands west of this site is an ideal buffer.
The Department of Wildlife (DOW), which serves as a referral agency for RLUP’s, has not yet commented on this proposal. If the DOW comments on this application, their comments will be forwarded to the applicant.
Larimer County Parks and Open Lands has reviewed this application and has no comments at this time.
Department of the Army—Corps of Engineers: If any work associated with this project requires the placement of dredged or fill material, and any excavation associated with a dredged or fill project, either temporary or permanent, in waters of the United States at this site, this office should be notified by a proponent of the project for proper Department of the Army permits or changes in permit requirements pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Waters of the U.S. includes ephemeral, intermittent and perennial streams, their surface connected wetlands and adjacent wetlands and certain lakes, ponds, drainage ditches and irrigation ditches that have a nexus to interstate commerce. Work in waters of the U.S. should be shown on a map identifying the Quarter Section, Township, Range and County of the work and the dimensions of work in each area of waters of the U.S.
North Poudre Irrigation Company:
- The North Poudre Irrigation Company moves water from the #15 reservoir north of WCR 72 to the main ditch just south of the proposed planning parcel via Dry Creek. While it has been very seldom that NPIC has gone in on Dry Creek with equipment to perform maintenance activities, it should be made part of the record that there is a prescriptive easement to do such work. The typical width is highly variable due to the terrain. If no formal easement or right-of-way document exists North Poudre Irrigation Company has a “prescriptive” easement with no specified width extending on both sides of the centerline of Dry Creek.
- The potential lot owners adjacent to the Dry Creek ditch should not interfere, impede, or restrict the Company’s access, use of, or maintenance of this easement. This could include but not limited to these examples; vinyl fencing, gates, planting of trees, the restriction of burning the ditch, the application of herbicides to control weeds, use of the ditch road for any other than the operation and maintenance of the Dry Creek easement.
- The conceptual plan for this RLUP shows a pond on the south end of the property. Existing water rights to Dry Creek should not be infringed upon by the impediment of drainage waters from this parcel to Dry Creek. What this might be would include enlarging, deepening, the building of an embankment, etc. to store or collect unappropriated water in this pond. NPIC has an early water right to Dry Creek flows.
This proposal is consistent with the policies of Section 5.8—Rural Land Use Process of the Larimer County Land Use Code. Support for the Schroeder Preliminary Rural Land Plan is based on the following:
· Applicant’s planning and design rationale for the project, which is consistent with the RLUP.
· Conservation values of the residual land, including preservation of grazing land, open space and wildlife habitat.
· The plan is generally compatible with the existing neighboring land uses.
Support for this proposed plan takes into consideration the various other land development and design options, particularly the 35-acre alternative, for which there is no County review. The greater number of residential units possible under the zoning and the general development pressure within the immediate area for use-by-right 35-acre division of land supports the belief that this is an appropriate project. As proposed, this project will also provide commensurate long-term benefits to citizens of Larimer County. Those benefits are summarized below:
· Perpetual protection of residual land.
· Transportation Capital Expansion Fees received from the project.
· School and park fees received from the project.
· Fewer residences than likely allowed through subdivision process.
· Ability to influence design of project, as compared to use-by-right division of property into 35-acre parcels.
This project was reviewed by the Rural Land Use Advisory Board on Monday, Dec ember 5, 2005. The RLUAB unanimously recommended approval of the project. The Rural Land Use Director recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Rural Land Plan. The following contingencies must be met prior to approval of final plat by the Board of County Commissioners:
1. The Final Plat shall be consistent with the approved Preliminary Plan and with the information contained in the Schroeder Rural Land Plan (File # 05-S2500) except as modified by the conditions of approval or agreement of the County and applicant. The applicant shall be subject to all other verbal or written representations and commitments of record for the Schroeder Rural Land Plan.
2. All roads constructed within the Rural Land Plan shall be in accordance with Section 5.8.6.D of the Rural Land Use Process. All designs must be prepared and stamped by a qualified professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado and certified that design standards in 5.8.6.D. were followed, before final approval. Internal roads may be contained in a private access and utility easement. Road names and addressing shall meet standards in the Road Naming and Site Addressing System Resolution.
3. On-lot wells will be provided for Residual Lot A and public water shall be provided for Lots 1-3. A letter of commitment from the water provider must be provided for Lots 1-3 prior to Final Plat approval. This letter of commitment must specifically state that the water distribution system is (or will be) designed to meet the normal and minimum pressure design standards contained in Section 8.1.2.A.1 of the Land Use Code or more stringent standards as required by the District. If the water system will be designed to provide fire protection, the letter of commitment also must address the pressure and delivery standards outlined in Section 8.1.4 of the Land Use Code.
4. Building envelopes shall be placed on each lot. All building envelopes shall be located outside the floodplain and drainage areas and shall meet minimum setback requirements listed in the Larimer County Land Use Code. The building envelopes for Lots 1-3 shall be designed to create a buffer of at least 200 feet from the Dry Creek riparian area.
5. All structures and septic systems must be located within the building envelopes on any residual lots.
6. Automatic fire protection sprinklers will be required for all new residential structures or written permission for variance from this requirement from the fire district.
7. The Residual Land Protective Covenant and Use Plans must be reviewed and approved by the County Attorney and the RLUC Director prior to Final Plat approval.
8. Restrictive covenants, including provisions for internal road maintenance, small acreage management, architectural guidelines, and other requirements must be reviewed and approved by the Rural Land Use Center Director prior to Final Plat approval.
9. The final Development Agreement must be reviewed and approved by the County Attorney prior to Final Plat approval.
10. A Lot Sale Prohibition shall be placed on this property preventing the sale of any new lots until the applicable improvements (i.e., legal access and public utilities, including but not limited to water supply, electricity, and telephone facilities) have been completed and/or installed according to the project requirements. The lots cannot be sold, transferred or conveyed unless and until Developer provides written designation stating whether the improvements have been completed for the lot proposed to be sold, transferred or conveyed. The Lot Sale Prohibition will be recorded in the records of the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder and will be a covenant running with the Lots. Upon receipt of such written designation, County will provide to Developers a release of the Lot Sale Prohibition for the particular lot(s) for which the improvements have been completed.
11. The following must be listed as a note on the Final Plat and on a disclosure statement, approved by the County Attorney, available to lot buyers through the public records at the time of purchase:
a) LOT SALE PROHIBITION. Developers have executed a Lot Sale Prohibition Agreement which stipulates that Lots 1-3 and/or Residual Lot A cannot be sold, transferred or conveyed unless and until Developers provide to County a written designation stating that all the applicable improvements (i.e., legal access and public utilities, including but not limited to water supply, electricity, and telephone facilities) have been completed and/or installed according to the project requirements. The lots cannot be sold, transferred or conveyed unless and until the developer provides written designation stating whether the improvements have been completed for the lot proposed to be sold, transferred or conveyed. The Lot Sale Prohibition is recorded in the records of the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder and is a covenant running with the Lots. Upon receipt of such written designation, County will provide to Developers a release of the Lot Sale Prohibition for particular lot(s) for which the improvements have been completed.
b) The construction of any single-family residence in this development will require the installation of residential fire sprinklers if fire hydrants and/or a public water supply are not present to provide fire protection unless written permission for variance from this requirement from the fire district is received.
c) Passive radon mitigation measures shall be included in construction of structures designed for habitable space on these lots. The results of a radon detection test conducted in new dwellings once the structure is enclosed but prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy shall be submitted to the Building Department. As an alternative, a builder may present a prepaid receipt from a radon tester which specifies that a test will be done within 30 days. A permanent Certificate of Occupancy can be issued when the prepaid receipt is submitted.
d) Some or all lots in this development include building envelopes. All structures must be located within these Larimer County approved building envelopes, as shown on the approved Plan. If a structure within the building envelope is located 5’ or less from the boundary of the building envelope, the owner/applicant for a building permit will be required to demonstrate that the structure(s) is located within the building envelope prior to the approval of the footing and foundation inspection. This shall be accomplished by a written certification by a Colorado Licensed Surveyor.
e) All structures and septic systems must be located within the building envelopes on any Residual Lots.
f) Engineered footings and foundations may be required for new habitable construction. Please check with the Larimer County Building Department for requirements prior to submitting a building permit application.
g) Lot owners should be advised that there is a potential for nuisance conflicts from wildlife (such as skunks, mountain lions, raccoons, foxes, coyotes, prairie dogs and snakes). The Colorado Division of Wildlife can provide information to property owners about how to handle these situations, but lot owners are responsible for addressing wildlife conflicts if they arise.
h) Many other species of wildlife live in the area; some can be dangerous to humans and pets. It must be remembered that landowners will be living with wildlife. Species that may be found in the area are coyotes, mountain lions, bobcats, skunks, badgers, raccoons, deer, elk, hawks, owls and eagles.
i) Pets must be contained on property, either by leash or enclosure.
j) During certain times of the year mosquitoes may present a significant nuisance. Larimer County does not have a mosquito abatement program. Any mosquito abatement activity will be the responsibility of the homeowner; such activity must be according to applicable Federal, State and local rules and regulations.
k) Prairie dog colonies exist in the general area; prairie dogs can be a nuisance if they migrate to developed residential property. At times these animals are implicated in the transmission of plague to people or their pets. It is important for residents to observe animal control requirements for dogs and cats.
l) Agricultural operations and farming practices on adjacent properties can produce odors, noise and dust. These are a normal part of agriculture and should be expected to occur. In addition, plowing, planting, cultivating, spraying, harvesting, and various livestock operations may be carried out at all times including nighttime.
m) If livestock will be kept on these lots, it will be important to carefully manage grazing in order to maintain grass cover in the pasture. Overgrazing will produce bare ground, weeds, erosion and polluted runoff. Management of these lots should be coordinated with drainage and erosion control issues, siting of sanitation systems, fencing and feeding.
n) Larimer County has adopted a Right to Farm Resolution.
o) The following fees shall be collected at building permit issuance for new single-family dwellings: Poudre R-1 school fees, Larimer County fees for County and Regional Transportation Capital Expansion, Larimer County Park Fees (in lieu of dedication), and Rural Land Use Process fees. The fee amount that is current at time of building permit application shall apply.
p) Larimer County shall not maintain roads or streets in this development. Maintenance of the streets shall be the responsibility of the property owners. Failure to maintain streets may result in a lien being placed on these lots.
q) At time of real estate closing, owner shall provide purchasers of residential lots and Residual Lot A with the Code of the West, a County document which addresses differences between urban and rural living in Larimer County.
r) The owners of the residual land parcel shall be responsible for providing a periodic monitoring report for the residual land to Larimer County Rural Land Use Center.
s) Lots in this Rural Land Plan are subject to the conditions and requirements of a Development Agreement. The Developer and Larimer County executed this agreement in consideration of the approval of this Development. This Agreement was recorded in the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder’s office immediately after this plat. All purchasers should obtain and read the Development Agreement.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Wagner moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve Items 4 through 8, as listed on the consent agenda and outlined above.
Motion carried 3-0.
9. EAGLE RIDGE ESTATES REZONING - #05-Z1570: This is a rezoning request to take action to revert the FA-1 (Farming) conditional zoning tied to an expired development plan back to the original zoning. There are three parcels that are affected by the conditional zoning. The original zoning of the parcels was FA-Farming and O-Open
This item was on the Planning Commission discussion agenda due to the potential for property owner comment and because this is a County initiated request. None of the property owners attended the hearing and no concerns were raised by the Planning Commission. Notice of the Planning Commission and this hearing was mailed to the property owners and lienholders of record by both certified and regular mail.
The Planning Commission and Development Services Team recommendation is for the Eagle Ridge Estates PUD Rezone, File #05-Z1570, be approved as follows:
· Rezone Parcel 98130-00-003 from conditional FA-1-Farming to O-Open.
· Rezone Parcel 98140-00-004 from conditional FA-1-Farming to FA-Farming.
· Rezone Parcel 98140-00-007 from conditional FA-1-Farming to FA-Farming.
Ms. Madson displayed aerial photos of the parcels and explained the zoning was approved conditional to the parcels being developed. She noted that the development proposal has expired, and staff is recommending that these parcels revert back to their original zoning. Ms. Madson explained that there are more development proposals that have expired which are hanging out in limbo, and staff is working under the Board's direction to clean these up.
Chair Rennels opened the hearing up for public comment. Jim Martell, attorney for the property owners, gave a more detailed description of how foreclosures and sales have affected the properties and the owner's ability to complete the development proposal. Discussion ensued regarding the original proposal, and access to the property. Ms. Haag stated that the zoning is questionable, as Mr. Martell states that the last plat that was filed with the County indicates that the property has indeed been rezoned. Mr. Martell requested that the Board allow them the opportunity to present an improved development plan for the property in question.
Robert Hau, Realtor with The Group Inc., explained that they have had the property listed on the market for three years and had a difficult time finding a buyer. Mr. Hau stated that it will have a negative economic impact if the properties revert back to the O-Open zoning. He too requested that the Board afford them the opportunity to present their plan.
Jeff Couch, representative with Team Engineering, noted that they are very close to bringing a proposal to the Board that will justify the zoning. Mike Van Norstrand, Attorney for Valley Bank and Trust, stated that banks never end up with properties of this nature unless something goes wrong. He stated that the bank will already be losing money on this deal, and if the deal falls through and the property is re-zoned to O-Open, they will not be able to market it at all. Mr. Van Norstrand also requested that the Board afford them the opportunity to propose a development plan. There was no further public comment.
Commissioner Gibson stated that he was inclined to allow the property owners time to submit a sketch plan, and suggested that they be able to bring one back in January 2006. Chair Rennels stated that she wanted to see the development either move along or revert the zoning back to its original state. She also noted concerns with the property being in the middle of a water supply and storage area; therefore, she recommended allowing the owners to bring back a proposal that conforms to the development plan that was originally approved. Commissioner Wagner also agreed to allow the property owners time to submit a proposal to the Planning Department as long as the proposal was in the form of a conservation development.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board of County Commissioners table the Eagle Ridge Estates Rezoning, File #05-Z1570, to February 6, 2006, at 3:00 p.m., in order to provide the property owners time to present a sketch plan for a conservation development that conforms to the originally approved conditions for the Eagle Ridge Estates.
Motion carried 3-0.
10. COLORADO BOAT CENTER APPEAL: This is an appeal of Section 10.14.B of the Larimer County Land Use Code to exceed the height and size requirements for a proposed freestanding sign. The proposed sign is 18 feet tall and 90 square feet in size. At the proposed location, the sign would be limited to 10 feet tall and 33 square feet in area.
At a public hearing on November 16, 2005, the Larimer County Planning Commission considered the applicant’s appeal of Section 10.14 of the Land Use Code, which establishes the height, size, and setback requirements for commercial freestanding signs. The use of the property is currently a motorized boat sales and service center and has been for approximately 15 years. The business operates on two separate, adjacent lots and has existing signs on each property. The proposed sign would be placed on the southern most lot and would be 18 feet tall, 90 square feet in area, and 14 feet from the front property line/edge of frontage road right-of-way. The setback requirement for freestanding signs of this size – 90 sq. ft., and 18 feet tall – is 36 feet from the edge of the road right-of-way. The appeal seeks exception from the height and size limits for the setback distance.
The Development Services Team provided an overview of the project, including a determination that the request does not meet the review criteria and recommendation for denial. Discussion occurred regarding the request and how it relates to the surrounding properties, how it matches up to the Town of Johnstown’s sign regulations, and what hardship, if any, exists. The Planning Commission’s votes were mixed; however, they ultimately recommended approval of the appeal.
The Larimer County Development Services Team maintains their position, and recommends that the Board of County Commissioners deny the Colorado Boat Center Sign Appeal, File # 05-G0089.
Mr. Stewart displayed aerial photos of the property, and explained the appeal as outlined above. He noted that the sign is taller and larger than what is allowed within the setback.
The applicant, Nancy Smith, and Tim Hayes, representative from Gardner Signs, addressed the Board. Ms. Smith explained that her sign appeal, if approved, would be conforming to those businesses that surround her property. She displayed photos of signs of adjacent businesses that are all placed very close to the frontage road. Ms. Smith stated that if the sign is placed where the Planning Department suggests, then it will be right in the middle of the driveway used to transport boats within the property. She also noted that she used to have the only boat business in the area, but she now has competition and would like to place the sign closer to the road so that it will be more visible. Discussion ensued regarding Johnstown's regulations regarding placement of signs. Mr. Hayes explained that what is being applied and permitted in Johnstown is not what is written in their code, and that it appears there are many appeals being granted. There was no public comment on this item.
Commissioner Gibson asked if Ms. Smith might be able to go higher with the sign in order to meet the setback requirement. Ms. Smith stated that the boats vary in size and would not be able to say for sure how high the sign would have to be placed in order to provide clearance for all of the boats. Commissioner Gibson was in favor of supporting the appeal. Chair Rennels stated that she also agreed with the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval, and further stated that working with the cities and surrounding communities was part of the big picture when deciding on appeals of this nature. Commissioner Wagner stated that the design standards were adopted with a purpose and a goal for the I-25 corridor, which Johnstown chose not to participate in. Commissioner Wagner also stated that it seemed as though the sign could be placed on another location within the property; therefore, she indicated that she would stand behind the sign code regulations on this matter.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Colorado Boat Center Appeal of Section 10.14.B of the Larimer County Land Use Code to exceed the height and size requirements for their proposed freestanding sign.
Motion carried 2-1, Commissioner Wagner dissenting.
The hearing adjourned at 5:05 p.m.
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
(#135 & 136)
The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 a.m. with County Manager Frank Lancaster. Chair Rennels presided and Commissioners Wagner and Gibson were present. Also present were: Neil Gluckman, Bob Keister, Deni LaRue and Donna Hart, Commissioners’ Office; Stephen Gillette, Solid Waste Department; Marc Engemoen, Public Works; Dave Spencer, Facilities Department; Richard Guest, Health and Human Services Department; Jay Hardy, Fairgrounds and Events Center; Senator Bob Bacon, Chip Stiener, Jack Wolfe, and Mark Radtke, Fort Collins Downtown Development Authority; Kate Tremblay, Risk Management Department; and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT: Ed Aitken urged the Board to build a sports shooting range in the proposed 4-H Youth Community Building. The Board agreed that implementing a sports shooting range is of importance, and something they would like to see take place within the 4-H Youth Community Building.
2. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE WEEK OF DECEMBER 12, 2005:
M O T I O N
Commissioner Wagner moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the minutes for the week of December 12, 2005, as amended.
Motion carried 3-0.
3. REVIEW THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK OF DECEMBER 26, 2005: Ms. Hart reviewed the upcoming schedule with the Board.
4. CONSENT AGENDA:
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the following items as presented on the Consent Agenda for December 20, 2005:
12202005A001 PERSONNEL SEPARATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THE LARIMER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, AND RANDY KOLB
12202005A002 AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS , THE DIVISION OF TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT, AND THE STATE OF COLORADO FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
12202005A003 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE NORTH FRONT RANGE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION
12202005A004 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND RESIDUAL LAND USE RESTRICTIONS BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND EDWARD AND NORMA SQUIRES AND SQUIRES OWNERS ASSOCIATION
12202005A005 AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF THE LARIMER COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND EDWARD AND NORMA SQUIRES (Right-of-Way Agreement)
12202005A006 LAW ENFORCEMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE TOWN OF TIMNATH
12202005D001 DEED OF DEDICATION FOR DONNA R. AND MICHAEL C. LAYCHAK (Right-of-Way for PN235 County Road 21)
12202005R001 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE VACATION OF A UTILITY EASEMENT IN CRYSTAL LAKES SUBDIVISION, 4TH FILING, LOT 58
12202005R002 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE VACATION OF UTILITY EASEMENT IN LOTS 125 AND 126 OF CRYSTAL LAKES 11TH FILING
12202005R003 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE POUDRE FIRE AUTHORITY STATION 5 APPEAL TO EXPAND A NONCONFORMING BUILDING
12202005R004 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SADDLE CREEK RANCHES PRELIMINARY RURAL LAND PLAN
12202005R005 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE WALTERS MINOR LAND DIVISION
12202005R006 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LORENZ APPEAL TO EXPAND A NONCONFORMING RESIDENCE
12202005R007 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SOMETHING FROM THE FARM - BIG HORN SPECIAL EXEMPTION AND SECTIONS 8.1.1 AND 8.1.2 APPEAL
12202005R008 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDED PLAT VACATING A PORTION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY IN HILLCREST ESTATES SUBDIVISION
12202005R009 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2ND EXTENSION OF PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR COYOTE RIDGE SUBDIVISION
12202005R010 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 2 AND 3 IN HERMAN MINOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
12202005R011 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL MAP OF RAMBLING RIVER CONDOMINIUMS
12202005R012 RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE PROVISION OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SERVICES IN NON-URBANIZED AREAS
12202005R013 RESOLUTION CONCERNING EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER FOR 2006
12202005R014 RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING RECOGNITION OF EFFORT DURING 2005
12202005R015 RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COMPENSATION FOR LARIMER COUNTY APPOINTED OFFICIALS
12202005R016 RESOLUTION FOR STATUTORY VESTED RIGHTS FOR SQUIRES RURAL LAND PLAN
MISCELLANEOUS: Final Plat for Squires RLUP - #03-S2127; Department of Human Services Payments for October 2005; Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Company Application for Group Coverage for Larimer County.
LIQUOR LICENSES: The following license was approved and issued: Cloverleaf Kennel Club - Racetrack - Loveland. The following license was approved: Berthoud Area Chamber of Commerce - 6% Special Events Permit - Berthoud.
Motion carried 3-0.
5. DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL LEGISLATION TO EXTEND THE FORT COLLINS DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (DDA): Senator Bacon, Mr. Stiener, Mr. Wolfe, and Mr. Radtke requested the Board's support on a bill that will be introduced into the 2006 Colorado General Assembly to allow an extension in the life of DDA tax increment financing (TIF) districts by ten years. Mr. Stiener stated that they have been very successful in revitalizing the downtown Fort Collins area; however, there are always new challenges and competitors, which creates the need to continue re-inventing the downtown area. Discussion ensued regarding the amount of money that would be sacrificed by the County if the DDA TIF is extended. Mr. Keister stated that Larimer County relinquishes $1.2 million each year to support the DDA. Commissioner Gibson noted that sacrificing these dollars may hurt other county programs and services. Mr. Stiener explained that the DDA would be willing to work with the County on joint projects within the DDA, such as the downtown parking garage, which benefits both the City and the County. The Board agreed that the overall benefit of the DDA outweighs the loss of revenue and stated that they would like to see the legislation before they weighed in on it. Senator Bacon stated that they will make sure the Board receives a draft copy of the legislation so they can provide input on this matter.
6. DISCUSSION OF FINANCING STRATEGY FOR PROPOSED 4-H, YOUTH AND COMMUNITY BUILDING AT THE RANCH: Mr. Engemoen and Mr. Hardy presented diagrams of the 27,000 square foot proposed 4-H, Youth and Community Building to be constructed at The Ranch. He explained that the cost to construct the metal building is approximately $4.32 million, and stated that a portion of it will be funded from gifts and grants such as the recently announced $800,000 gift from the McKee Trust. However, Mr. Engemoen continued, in order to proceed with construction of the building, the County will need to borrow approximately $3 million. He recommended borrowing the $3 million from the County Solid Waste Fund's reserve for a future landfill replacement. Mr. Engemoen stated that this makes sense from a financial standpoint, as the Solid Waste Department has no plans to expend these funds during the next 10 to 15 years; therefore, the County can borrow "from itself" and avoid issuance costs and higher interest rates that a financial institution would impose. The Solid Waste Department Director, Mr. Gillette, stated that he was agreeable to lending the funds for this project. Mr. Engemoen stated that the only pitfall to this proposal was that it does not include a sports shooting range, as research has shown that construction of the shooting range would cost anywhere from $800,000 to $1. 5 million to build and the County simply does not have the budget to accommodate it. Much discussion ensued. Ultimately, the Board asked that the drawings for the shooting range be restored to the building plans in order to secure the land for this feature. Chair Rennels also recommended that a Shooting Sports Task Force be implemented to try and raise the funds to support both the cost of construction of the building, as well as the operation and maintenance of the shooting range.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Wagner moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve of Staff borrowing approximately $3 million from the Solid Waste Fund Landfill Replacement Reserve in order to proceed with the construction of the 4H, Youth and Community Building at The Ranch.
Motion carried 3-0.
7. APPOINTMENTS TO THE OFFICE ON AGING ADVISORY COUNCIL: Ms. Pineda noted that interviews have been conducted, and recommended that Beverly Hageseth and Donald Venneberg to fill the two vacancies for the Office on Aging Advisory Council.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the appointments of Beverly Hageseth and Donald Venneberg to the Office on Aging Advisory Council to fill unexpired terms effective December 20, 2005, and expiring June 30, 2006.
Motion carried 3-0.
8. RESOLUTION REGARDING DISTRICT ATTORNEY EMPLOYEES PARTICIPATION IN THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION (PERA): Mr. Lancaster presented a resolution to not support the District Attorney's office participation in PERA at this time due to budget constraints. Mr. Lancaster noted that the resolution reserves the option for the Board to consider this request again in the future.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Wagner moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the resolution finding that it is not fiscally appropriate to make an election at this time to include officials and employees of the office of the District Attorney to participate in the Colorado Public Employees Retirement Association.
Motion carried 3-0.
12202005R017 RESOLUTION FINDING THAT IT IS NOT PRESENTLY FISCALLY APPROPRIATE TO MAKE AN ELECTION AT THIS TIME TO INCLUDE THE OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE COLORADO PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION
8. LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO THE CACHE LA POUDRE RIVER HERITAGE AREA ENABLING LEGISLATION: Mr. Lancaster requested Board approval on a letter of support to the Larimer County congressional delegation to make technical corrections to the Cache la Poudre River Heritage Area enabling legislation.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the letter of support for the technical corrections to the Cache la Poudre River Heritage Area enabling legislation.
Motion carried 3-0.
9. MODIFY POLICY 390.7, REGARDING USE OF CELL PHONES WHILE DRIVING ON COUNTY BUSINESS: Ms. Tremblay presented changes to Policy 390.7, regarding cell phone use while driving on county business, per the Board's request. Discussion ensued regarding whether or not Department officials should be able to place greater restrictions on the policy. The Board agreed that they would rather have the policy standards apply to all employees, rather than allow departments to add restrictions to it.
10. WORKSESSION: There were no worksession items to discuss.
12. COMMISSIONER REPORTS: The Board discussed their attendance at events during the past week.
13. LEGAL MATTERS: There were no legal matters to discuss.
The meeting adjourned at 11:55 a.m., with no further action taken.
KATHAY RENNELS, CHAIR
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
CLERK AND RECORDER
Gael M. Cookman, Deputy Clerk