Elk in Rocky Mountain National Park
 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

MONDAY, DECEMBER 14, 1998

PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND THE 1998 BUDGET AND ADOPT THE

PROPOSED BUDGET FOR 1999

(#397)

The Board of County Commissioners met at 1:30 p.m. for an advertised public hearing to amend the 1998 budget and adopt the 1999 budget. Chair Olson presided and Commissioners Clarke and Disney were present. Also present were: Budget Manager Bob Keister; Frank Lancaster, County Manager; Deni LaRue, Community Information Manager; and Tom Clayton, CSU Fall Intern. Recording Clerk, Sherry Graves.

Mr. Keister stated that the purpose of today's public hearing is to adopt resolutions to amend the current budget to reflect all changes made during the year, adopt the 1999 budget for the County; adopt resolutions for numerous general improvement districts, the pest district, and the Public Trustee, to appropriate monies for 1999 and to designate ending fund balances for 1999. Mr. Keister noted that the Board will not be adopting a resolution this year for the E911 Telephone Authority, as they will adopt their own budget. Mr. Keister also noted that certification of the different mill levies from the various taxing authorities will not be approved today and will be done at a follow-up meeting at 9 a.m. on Thursday, December 17, 1999.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Clarke moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the Notice and Resolution to Transfer Funds and Amend the Budget for 1998, and authorize the Chair to sign same.

Motion carried 3-0.

R98-189g NOTICE AND RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER FUNDS AND AMEND

THE BUDGET FOR 1998



M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the Resolution to Adopt the 1999 Budget for $174,654,561., Set Levies and Certify a Temporary Tax Credit, and authorize the Chair to sign same.

Motion carried 3-0.

R98-190g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1999 BUDGET, SET LEVIES AND

CERTIFY A TEMPORARY TAX CREDIT

M O T I O N

Commissioner Clarke moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the Resolutions to Adopt 1999 Budgets and Set Levies for the following Larimer County Taxing Entities, and authorize the Chair to sign same: Pest District; Public Trustee; GID #1 - Imperial Estates; GID #2 - Pinewood Springs; GID #4 - Carriage Hills; GID #8 - Namaqua Hills Maintenance; GID #10 - Homestead; GID #11 Meadowdale Hills; GID #12 - Club Estates; GID #13A - Red Feather; GID #14 - Little Valley; GID #15 - Skyview South; GID #16 - Kitchell Subdivision; GID #17 - Country Meadows; GID #`18 - Venner Ranch Estates; GID ##1991-1 - Arapahoe Pines, and authorize the Chair to sign same.

Motion carried 3-0.

R98-191g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1999 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR

THE LARIMER COUNTY PEST DISTRICT, COMMONLY KNOWN

AS THE WEED DISTRICT

R98-192g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1999 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR

THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE

R98-193g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1999 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR

GID #1 FOR IMPERIAL ESTATES

R98-194g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1999 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR

GID #2 - PINEWOOD SPRINGS

R98-195g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1999 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR

GID #4 - CARRIAGE HILLS

R98-196g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1999 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR

GID #8 FOR NAMAQUA HILLS MAINTENANCE

R98-197g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1999 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR

GID #10 FOR HOMESTEAD

R98-198g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1999 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR

GID #11 FOR MEADOWDALE HILLS

R98-199g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1999 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR

GID #12 FOR CLUB ESTATES

R98-200g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1999 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR

GID #13A FOR RED FEATHER

R98-201g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1999 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR

GID #14 FOR LITTLE VALLEY

R98-202g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1999 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR

GID #15 FOR SKYVIEW SOUTH

R98-203g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1999 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR

GID #16 FOR KITCHELL SUBDIVISION

R98-204g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1999 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR

GID #17 FOR COUNTRY MEADOWS

R98-205g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1999 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR

GID #18 FOR VENNER RANCH ESTATES

R98-206g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1999 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES FOR

GID #1991-1 FOR ARAPAHOE PINES

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the Resolution to Appropriate Sums of Money for 1999, and authorize the Chair to sign same.

Motion carried 3-0.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Clarke moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the Resolution to Designate Ending 1999 Fund Balances, and authorize the Chair to sign same.

Motion carried 3-0.

R98-207g RESOLUTION TO APPROPRIATE SUMS OF MONEY FOR

1999

R98-208g RESOLUTION TO DESIGNATE ENDING 1999 FUND BALANCES

Commissioner Clarke apprised his fellow Commissioners to be cognizant that there is a gentleman from Arkansas that has been looking at all the fund balances of the municipalities, counties, state governments, etc. in the country and has decided they need to be used because that is money the taxpayers should have the benefit of using and he is planning to put the issue on the ballot to require governments to use those fund balances.

The hearing recessed at 1:50 p.m.

LAND-USE PUBLIC HEARING

(#397 @ 1000)

The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 3:00 p.m. in regular session with Larry Timm, Director of Planning. Chair Olson presided and Commissioner Disney was present. Also present were: Carol Evans and Richael Michels, Planners II; Rob Helmick, Senior Planner; Jim Reidhead, Director Rural Land Use Center; Rex Burns and Sylvester Mabry, Project Engineers; Doug Ryan, Environmental Health Planner; and Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney. Recording Clerk, Sherry Graves.

Chair Olson stated that the following are consent items and will not be discussed in detail unless requested by the Commissioners or members of the audience. Sandy Fletcher requested that the Lampert MRD and Rezoning be removed from the consent agenda, and Ken Ludwig requested that the Morning Star Farm Preliminary Rural Land Plan be removed from the consent agenda.

1. SHILO FALLS SUBDIVISION (#98-SU1260): SE ¼ OF 23-05-68 -

NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF COUNTY ROAD

3 AND COUNTY ROAD 18; 35 ACRES; 4 LOTS; FA-FARMING ZONING

This is a request for Preliminary Plat to divide 35 acres into 4 lots for single family residential uses. Staff findings include: 1) The proposal is in compliance with the Larimer County Comprehensive Zoning Resolution, Master Plan, and Subdivision Resolution; 2) The proposal will create significantly less density than would be permitted by the underlying zoning; 3) There are adequate public facilities to serve this proposal which will not have a negative impact on roads or the provision of other public services; 4) County Engineering, County Health, the Colorado Department of Transportation and other agencies have reviewed this proposal and have stated no objections to it; 5) With minor alterations, this proposal will not have a negative effect on the public health, safety, or welfare.

The Planning Commission/ Staff recommendation is for approval of the Preliminary Plat of the 4-lot Shilo Falls Subdivision, with the following conditions: 1) The Final Plat must be prepared in accordance with the Preliminary Plat approved by the Board of County Commissioners; 2) A half right-of-way of 35' for County Road 3 will be dedicated; 3) Information must be included in the covenants of Shilo Falls informing residents of the potential conflicts with agriculture, wildlife, mosquitoes, and livestock and that Larimer County is neither responsible for these conflicts, nor will they take measures to stop legal land uses. The covenants must also reference the document "The Code of the West" and the requirements of the Hillsboro Ditch Company. Any other issues addressed by plat notes listed below should be included in the covenants as well; 4) A paved apron is required in the right-of-way of County Road 18 for the common access easement of Lots 1 and 2. This apron must be designed and constructed by County standards. Construction drawings must be approved by the appropriate reviewing agency prior to work beginning on the apron; 5) Access permits are required before working in the right-of-way and for any new points of access onto County Roads. Site distance information as required by Larimer County Engineering must be submitted with the final plat application; 6) The Shilo Falls Subdivision covenants must include information and requirements for maintenance of the paved apron and common drive facilities including statements that Larimer County is not responsible for the maintenance of the roads in Shilo Falls. A road maintenance agreement for this purpose is also required; 7) A final drainage plan and report, final stormwater plan, and final erosion plan must be submitted with the final plat for review and approval by the Larimer County Engineering Department; 8) The County Road Fee in effect at the time of Preliminary Plat approval will be collected for new dwellings constructed on this property. If that fee is the existing Section 2.8 fee, that fee shall be $527 per lot. If the Preliminary Plat is approved by the Board of County Commissioners after the adoption of new road fees, that new fee shall apply and a note regarding that fee shall be placed on the final plat; 9) Fire hydrants must be installed at the corner of County Road 3 and County Road 18 to the standard required by the Loveland Fire Protection District. Fire hydrants must be installed and flow test approvals must be provided to Larimer County from Little Thompson Water District before building permits for combustible construction will be issued; 10) Easements as required by utility providers must be shown on the final plat; 11) A half right-of-way of 40 feet for the Hillsboro Ditch must be shown on the final plat; 12) The following notes must be placed on the final plat: a) 24-inch culverts with flared end sections are required for all driveways as a condition of receiving a building permit. An Access Permit from the County is required for any work in the right-of-way of either county road; b) Lots 1 and 2 must utilize a common access easement from County Road 18; c) The access easements, driveways and paved apron are not maintained by Larimer County; d) Lot specific geotechnical testing should be performed and the results should be incorporated into the building design. Engineered footings and foundations are required for new residential construction and any subgrade construction must include perimeter drains; e) Residential fire sprinkler systems are required in all new residential construction; f) Any fences now encroaching into the ditch easement must be moved by the property owner at property owner's expense when required by the ditch company; g) The results of a radon test must be submitted to the Planning Department prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 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; h) All utilities must be installed underground unless the providers state in writing that this is not possible; I) Park fees will be collected at the time of building permit; j) County Road Fees will be collected at the time of building permit; k) School fees in-lieu of land dedication for the Thompson R2-J school district will be collected at the time of each residential building permit; l) There are existing agricultural activities and livestock in this area that may produce dust, odors and noise. Larimer County will not take any action to stop or hinder legal agricultural uses of nearby properties; m) Mosquitoes may be a nuisance on this property. Larimer County is not responsible for mosquito abatement and any land owner initiated abatement activities must meet all Federal, State and local rules and regulations; n) Prairie dog colonies exist in the area of this property and may migrate to this property. Prairie dogs have been known to carry plague. Larimer County does not perform prairie dog control; o) Property owners should be aware that smaller, rural lots are subject to overgrazing if livestock is kept on the property. Weeds, erosion, and other problems can result. Property owners should contact the Extension Service for information on keeping livestock; p) There is the potential for wildlife interaction or property damage in this area. Property owners should take appropriate measures to protect property. The State Division of Wildlife is not responsible for damage or control of wildlife; q) This development is the subject of a Subdivision Improvements Agreement that has been recorded in the office of the County Clerk and Recorder and is also on file in the Larimer County Planning Office. There are also recorded covenants associated with this plat.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners staff findings and Planning Commission/Staff recommendation and approve the Shilo Falls Subdivision (#98-SU1260), with the conditions as outlined.

Motion carried 2-0.

2.. LAMPERT MINOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (#98-EX1290):

NE 11-05-70 - NORTH SIDE OF U. S. HIGHWAY 34, ¼ MILE WEST OF

THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 34 AND COUNTY ROAD 27; 5.07

ACRES; FA-1 FARMING AND T-TOURIST ZONING

This is a request to divide a 5-acre parcel with an existing restaurant and detached accessory dwelling into two lots of 2.5 acres, creating separate lots for the restaurant and the dwelling. Staff findings include: 1) A Minor Residential Development appeal was approved by the Board of Commissioners to allow this land division request to be reviewed under the exemption process. The applicants have proposed to divide the property to create separate lots for an existing restaurant and detached accessory dwelling; 2) This property has a split zoning (T-Tourist and FA-1 Farming), an existing restaurant with an accessory dwelling, and a detached accessory dwelling. In conjunction with the proposed Minor Residential Development, the applicants proposed to rezone a portion of their property so that the zoning district boundaries coincide with the new lot lines. The resultant zoning will be FA-1 Farming for all of Lot 2 and T-Tourist (no change) for all of Lot 1 of the proposed Lampert MRD; 3) By condition on the prior issuance of the building permit for the detached accessory dwelling, the apartment unit in the restaurant will be eliminated. The net result is no increase in traffic or other impacts from the detached dwelling. There is no additional impact created by the proposed land division; 4) Approval of the proposed Lampert Minor Residential Development shall not result in any significant changes or negative impacts on area services, transportation, the natural environment or neighboring properties nor should it impair the public health, safety or welfare.

The staff recommendation is for approval of the Lampert Minor Residential Development, with the following conditions: 1) A legal description of the portion of Lot 2 that is being rezoned shall be submitted; 2) The signage on the property shall be brought into conformance with zoning sign requirements. This requires removal of 2 of the free-standing signs and the "European Cuisine" sign which is painted on the fence. Other "signs" that list hours and a customer parking notice are informational and may remain; 3) The Final Plat materials shall include a description of how the conversion of the apartment in the restaurant to a non-residential use has been accomplished; 4) Flood plain areas must be shown on the Final Plat and labeled as non-buildable; 5) All easements and rights-of-way of record, and as required by utility providers and the Colorado Department of Transportation, shall be dedicated on the Final Plat. Additional utility easements shall be provided for utility service lines, including gas, electric and water, which cross these lots; 6) The property owners shall be responsible for maintenance of the common access area. An access/road maintenance covenant shall be submitted with the Final Plat materials. The covenant should include provisions for maintaining clear access through the parking lot to the driveway for Lot 2. Signage shall be provided in the parking lot as needed to ensure that the driveway for Lot 2 is not blocked; 7) The following notes shall be included on the Final Plat: A) The common access area serving these lots shall not be maintained by Larimer County. Maintenance shall be the responsibility of the property owners. A maintenance covenant is recorded with this plat; B) Passive radon mitigation measures shall be included in construction of any new residential structures 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 Planning 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; C) Engineered footing and foundation plans shall be required for all new construction on these lots; D) A restaurant is located on Lot 1 of this development and is allowed under the T-Tourist Zone District. Restaurant operations may result in increased traffic, lights, noise and odors; E) Rockfall hazard potential for the lots has been evaluated and found to be minimal. The Colorado Geological Survey recommends that furniture, such as couches or chairs, be kept away from the windows that face the slope in the event that small rolling rocks hit the windows. To further protect the house from rockfall, property owners may consider constructing a gabion wall along the length of the house. To be effective, the wall would need to be 3 feet think and as high as the windows. Property owners can also refer to the Geologic Engineering Report prepared by Terracon (project number 20985140), as contained in the file for the Lampert MRD for more information; F) Rural area issues: a) Lot owners should be advised that there is a potential for nuisance conflicts from wildlife (such as skunks, raccoons, prairie dogs and snakes). Lot owners should be prepared to address wildlife conflicts if they arise. The Colorado Division of Wildlife may be contacted for information on preventative measures to avoid conflicts and wildlife; b) 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; c) 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; d) There are agricultural and mining activities in this area that may produce odors, noise and dust. These are a normal part of these activities and should be expected to occur. Larimer County will not take action to hinder or stop legal agricultural or mining activities; 8) These conditions of approval shall be completed and the Final Plat approved and recorded prior to June 15, 1999, or this approval shall be null and void.

Ms. Fletcher asked several questions about this proposal; she asked if there will be further dwellings allowed on the property, other than the current dwelling and restaurant. Ms. Evans responded that one of the conditions of approval is removal of the dwelling unit from the restaurant and all that will be allowed are the current dwelling and the restaurant. Ms. Fletcher also asked about the handwritten sign on the rocks that say "No Trespassing", etc. because it doesn't look natural and she asked if there could be a retaining wall built to protect her house and other people that live around this property. Lynn Hammond, attorney for the applicants, stated that with reference to the sign painted on the rock, there is a cave up there and in the past the Lamperts had trouble with people crossing the property to gain access to the cave; he stated that the Lamperts will remove the painted sign, but they need something there to keep people off the property. With regard to the second issue concerning the danger of rockfall, Mr. Hammond pointed out that the Colorado Geological Survey stated that there is no danger from rockfall.

3. LAMPERT REZONING (#98-Z1278): NE 11-05-70 - NORTH SIDE OF U.S.

HIGHWAY 34, ¼ MILE WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 34

AND COUNTY ROAD 27; 5.07 ACRES; FA-1 FARMING AND T-TOURIST

ZONING

This is a request for rezoning of a portion of a parcel that currently has a split zone of T-Tourist along its frontage with U.S. Highway 34 and FA-1 Farming on the rear portion of the parcel. The proposed rezoning will down-zone that portion of the proposed Lot 2 of the Lampert MRD that is now zoned T to FA-1 in order that the zoning district boundaries may then coincide with the proposed lot lines of the Lampert MRD. Staff findings are: 1) This property has a split zoning (T-Tourist and FA-1 Farming), an existing restaurant with an accessory dwelling, and a detached accessory dwelling. The applicants have proposed to divide the property through the Minor Residential Development process so that the restaurant and the detached accessory dwelling are on separate lots; 2) In conjunction with the proposed Minor Residential Development, the applicants proposed to rezone a portion of their property so that the zoning district boundaries coincide with the new lot lines. The resultant zoning will be FA-1 Farming for all of Lot 2 and T-Tourist (no change) for all of Lot 1 of the proposed Lampert MRD; 3) The proposed rezoning is a benefit to the public and the property owner because it removed confusion about what uses might be allowed on certain portions of the proposed new lot. The rezoning to coincide with specific parcels will also provide accurate legal descriptions for the zoning districts at that location. The proposal is consistent with the Larimer County Master Plan; 4) Approval of the proposed Lampert Rezoning shall not result in any significant changes or negative impacts on area services, transportation, the natural environment or neighboring properties nor should it impair the public health, safety or welfare.

The Planning Commission/Staff recommendation is for approval of the proposed Lampert rezoning from T-Tourist to FA-1 Farming for that portion of Lot 2 of the proposed Lampert Minor Residential Development that is currently zoned T-Tourist. The resultant zoning will be FA-1 Farming for all of Lot 2 and T-Tourist (no change) for all of Lot 1 of the proposed Lampert MRD.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the staff findings and Planning Commission/Staff recommendations and approve the Lampert Minor Residential Development (#98-EX1290) and the Lampert Rezoning (#98-Z1278); each, with the conditions as outlined.

Motion carried 2 - 0.

4. MORNING STAR FARM PRELIMINARY RURAL LAND PLAN (FKA

YELEK PROJECT) (#98-RLP0022): 35-05-68 - 1 ¼ MILES EAST OF

JOHNSON'S CORNER ON COUNTY ROAD 16; 80.0 ACRES; 4 LOTS;

FA-FARMING ZONING

This is a request to divide 80 acres into three single-family residential sites ranging in size from 2.5 acres to 8 acres and one 67 acre irrigated farm with a 2.5 acre farmstead for a single-family home and ag buildings, including accessory dwelling, all protected by covenants for 40 years. Staff findings are that this proposal is consistent with the policies of the Rural Land Use Process and the Rural Land Use Center (RLUC) staff supports the Morning Star Preliminary Rural Land Plan based on the following: 1) Potential of 34 single-family residential units possible under the current FA-1 Farming zoning of the property; 2) Property's proximity to I-25 and inclusion in the Johnstown Future Planning Area (with the likelihood of 2-4 residential units/acre if annexed); 3) General development pressure within the immediate area, especially use-by-right 35-acre division of land; 4) Planning and design rationale for the project's residential cluster, and the potential for continued agricultural use of the residual land; 5) The site-based incentives (2 density bonus units, or 100%) provide the landowners with roughly equivalent benefits that they would obtain through dividing their property into individual 35-acre tracts. As proposed, this project will also provide commensurate benefits to Larimer County; 6) Mr. Vern Haefele, Town Manager for Johnstown, attended the Morning Star Farm neighborhood meeting at Johnson's Corner on November 4, 1998; both at that meeting and in a memo dated November 19, 1998, Mr. Haefele said that, based on the preliminary rural land plan, his community had no problem with this project. He also said that he looks forward to being informed of any RLUC activity in the Johnstown area, just as he has been notified of this project; 7) The plan is compatible with the existing neighboring land uses; the neighboring farmers on the west and east have expressed support for the project. To a considerable degree, this project promises to preserve both open space and continued agriculture activities within full view of the I-25 corridor. Preservation of open space and agriculture are stated RLUP goals, as well as respect for property rights and neighborhood concerns.

Ken Ludwig addressed the Board and stated that he was one of the first persons to go through the rural land use process and he was limited to two houses per 35 acres and this proposal is for 5 lots on 80 acres and he asked if the entire program is being changed or if they will maintain what they started out to do. Mr. Reidhead stated that there will be 4 lots with this proposal, plus the accessory dwelling tied to Lot 1; he noted that because of the location and other factors, they are being awarded an additional two units and he stated that the accessory dwelling has to be used by someone associated with the farm. Patty Hill stated she has serious concerns about having five additional homes and 10 more cars on the road every day; she also has concerns about construction of a new water line and the removal of trees and destruction of their landscaping and she is worried about the people that buy these homes will complain of the silage smells, dust, flies, etc., and she doesn't see how it can continue to be a peaceful environment. Mr. Reidhead responded that the covenants require notification of farming operations going on in the area. Richard Rouse, adjacent property owner and Secretary-Treasurer of the Harry Lateral Ditch Company, asked what is in the covenants for people buying this land that informs them they won't be able to get irrigation water to a lot for a house and just because they see an irrigation ditch, they can't put a pump in it. Ted Yelek, applicant, stated that they are going to deed only to the easement where the fence line will go; he noted there is a 110 ft. easement, so 55 feet on each side will not be deeded to these lots. Mr. Yelek stated that he has a letter from the Little Thompson Water District requiring him to put in a 8-inch water line for ½ mile. Linnea Sidi, adjacent property owner to the north of the subject property, stated that currently there is runoff irrigation water draining from this farm through a culvert under the road and through a ditch that runs through her property down to their collection pond and she asked what are the plans for this; Mr. Yelek stated that it won't be disturbed at all.

Following discussion and the addition of condition #8 regarding a drainage plan, as recommended by the Engineering Department, the conditions of the recommendation of approval to be met prior to approval of the Final Plat for the Morning Star Farm Preliminary Rural Land Plan were amended as follows: 1) Demonstration of adequate water service provided by Little Thompson Water District; 2) Protective covenant and management plan will be reviewed and approved with final plat; 3) Homeowners' covenants, including architectural controls, will be reviewed prior to final approval; 4) Verification of transfer of irrigation water shares for the benefit of the residual land (the Farm) and the residential lots shall be provided at time of final plat approval; 5) The applicant agrees to provide sales and other information to the Rural Land Use Center Director as necessary to insure that monitoring of the incentives can be conducted; 6) Owner or real estate professional shall provide purchasers of residential lots and the Farm with "Code of the West" at time of real estate closing; 7) The following notes shall also be included on the final plat: a) Engineered footing and foundations shall be required on all structures; b) Mosquitoes: During certain times of the year, mosquitoes may present a significant nuisance. The County does not have a mosquito control program, so any spraying or other control will be the responsibility of the property owners; c) Wildlife: Wildlife, such as skunks, snakes, and prairie dogs occur more frequently than in more built-up urban areas. Lot owners should be aware of these occurrences and be prepared to address them as residents if they arise. The County is not able to mitigate nuisances if they develop, although information on managing these issues is available. Prairie dog colonies do exist in the general area surrounding this proposal. Prairie dogs can be a nuisance if they migrate to developed residential property. The County does not perform prairie dog control, but can advise owners on how to obtain the services of licensed firms that do; at times, prairie dogs are implicated in the transmission of plague to people or their pets. The County does monitor prairie dog colonies for evidence of plague. Animal control requirements for both dogs and cats should be observed; d) Farming practices on adjacent properties can produce odors, noise, and dust. These are a normal part of agriculture and should be expected to occur; e) Horse pasture management: If livestock is to be kept on the smaller parcels, the owners must be aware 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 results 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. Lot owners should contact that office if they intend to keep livestock; f) 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 Planning Department. As an alternative, a builder may present a prepaid receipt for 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; g) Road fees shall be paid at the time of building permit, if determined applicable by the Engineering Department; h) Park fees shall be paid at the time of building permit issuance; i) RLUP fees of $850 per residence shall be paid at the time of building permit issuance; j) School fees shall be paid at the time of building permit issuance; 8) A drainage plan needs to be submitted to show where drainage easements may be needed, and the sizing and specifications for driveway culverts. Erosion control information should be included also in the drainage report. The format for these reports can be found in the Larimer County Stormwater Management Manual.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the staff findings and the Rural Land Use Center Director and Advisory Board's recommendation and approve the Morning Star Farm Preliminary Rural Land Plan (#98-RLP0022), with the conditions as amended and outlined.

Motion carried 2 - 0.

The hearing recessed at 3:45 p.m.

PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION

OF A UNIFIED LAND USE CODE

(#405 & #406)

The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 6:30 p.m. to consider adoption of the Unified Land Use Code for the Partnership Land Use System. Chair Olson presided and Commissioners Clarke and Disney were present. Also present were: Commissioner-Elect Kathay Rennels; Larry Timm, Director of Planning; Russ Legg, Chief Planner; Al Kadera, Planner II; Frank Lancaster, County Manager; Deni LaRue, Community Information Manager; Tom Clayton, CSU Fall Intern; George Hass, County Attorney; and Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney. Recording Clerk, Sherry Graves.

Chair Olson opened the hearing, introduced the Commissioners and staff, and welcomed the approximately 700 citizens attending tonight's hearing; she reviewed the rules of conduct for the evening and noted that speakers will be allowed 5 minutes and taken in the order in which they signed the sign-in sheet.

Mr. Kadera provided a brief staff report, noting that the PLUS process began four years ago with a series of symposiums and search conferences to discuss the future of land use in Larimer County; he continued that the process proceeded to the adoption of the Master Plan in November of 1997 and the proposed Land Use Code is the tool that will implement the guidelines and strategies contained in the Master Plan. Mr. Kadera reviewed the clarifications and significant changes that were made to the proposed draft of the Land Use Code following the Planning Commission hearings and the staff comments regarding those changes.

At this time the public hearing was opened for citizens' comments; the following persons addressed the Board in favor of the proposed Land Use Code: Anne Manvel, Janna Six, Verna Fletcher, Brad Edwards, Martha Roden, Linda Stanley, Dave Theobald, Kelly Ohlson, Richard Bachand, and Mike Sherman; their comments were as follows: A letter was read from the League of Women Voters expressing their strong support for the passage of the Land Use Code. One speaker stated that better mapping of wildlife habitat and an in-house expert on ecology and wildlife habitat are both needed to create a master vision for guidance where development is appropriate in the County. The Board was asked to adopt the Code before Commissioner Clarke leaves office, but noted that it should have periodic reviews. A description was given of what Larimer County was like a few years ago with the wildlife and open fields, which are now gone, and it was stated that there is a definite and desperate need for a set of land use regulations in the County to control growth. It was noted that since the first land-use symposium was held in 1994, the County has grown by 20,000 people and the question was asked if all the work that has gone into drafting this code can be derailed at the last minute, what is the incentive for volunteerism groups to work on projects in the future? The Board was asked to honor the long process of those that have generated the Code. One proponent of the Code stated that he believes the proposed Code is a pathetic land-use system, but better than nothing and he urged the Board to move forward with the Code. One speaker stated he supports the 80/20 plan and is interested in protecting undeveloped forest land for traditional uses and he doesn't want to see the County become more urbanized. Another speaker stated he is a proponent of the wise and long-term stewardship of our lands and he thanked the Board for their role in compiling the current draft of the proposed Land-Use Code, even though he is not happy with it, but he noted that the existing code is outdated and cannot cope with the skyrocketing growth rate; he suggested that instead of a 50 ft. buffer for wetlands, he would like to request setbacks of 100 ft. or greater be required. It was noted that as Larimer County is one of the fastest growing counties in the country, it is both embarrassing and ludicrous that we are without a land-use plan sufficient to meet our current needs and the Board was urged not to delay the decision on the Land Use Code.

Those persons speaking in opposition to the proposed Land Use Code were: Evelyn King, Fred Anderson, Dan Stroh, Joyce Kitchen, Paul Ehrlich, Sky Weitzel, Lucille Schmidt, CeCe Green, Larry Patterson, Steve Anderson, Steve Rochat, Karen Rose, Del Black, John Throckmorton, Charles Throckmorton, Roland Dixon, and Paul Schaaf; their questions and comments were as follows: The question was asked why the County is even going through this process because since 1994 when PLUS was first started, the voluntary Rural Land Use Process has been approved, the Open Space Sales Tax approved, the voluntary transfer density unit program approved, and the Master Plan adopted with goals for the County, and all without citizen outcry and isn't that enough? It was noted by many of the speakers that the 80/20 rule is unproven, ill-conceived, irresponsible, premature, oppressive, and will be very costly and unfair to a small minority. It was pointed out that the 80/20 rule will financially hurt the landowner because the price of lots will have to be so high that only a minimal amount of people can afford them; it was noted that there are too many regulations in the Code and we need to keep farming profitable and adoption of this Code should be tabled. A concern was raised regarding the fiscal impact the 80/20 plan will have on the State School Finance Act, noting that it will create a real problem for the children of Larimer County. The Board was advised that petitions had been signed by 5,124 residents asking that the Code be postponed until a clear and concise, less regulatory document is produced through the direct involvement of property owners. Many questions were asked regarding the cost involved in drafting the Code and for printing the flyer "Let's Set the Record Straight". One speaker stated that the objective of streamlining and simplifying the Code didn't happen and easing the pain for the people that have to live with this didn't happen; it was noted that the fear the group expressed at the first land-use symposium was that their participation in working on a new Code would be used to validate what staff already decided should be in the document and, in their opinion, that is exactly what has happened. The statement was made that the public is speaking loudly and the Board was asked to please listen to everybody with respect as this Code doesn't resemble what they envisioned. The plea was made to give the citizens more time to review the code and that there be comprehensive educational program of the Code for the public. It was noted that it was understood that there would be incentives in the Code for using the 80/20 rule, but those could not be found and, after talking to the IRS, it was evident they are not aware of incentives for tax breaks. Many of the speakers stated that their land is their retirement and they resent the fact they are being told what to do with their land. Time and time again the Board was asked not to approve the Code at this time, but to wait until the Code is completed and not full of blanks; the Board was asked to consider the economic impact on the properties in the outlying parts of the County. The Board was asked repeatedly why the rush and to go slow and listen to the people. Several times, it was alluded to that for the County to expect neighbors to report violations on neighbors, would be like living in Russia and that the Code is Socialistic and Communistic. One speaker stated that PLUS is not about growth, it is about power and control and the foundation of America was based on centuries-old common laws of property rights and without property rights you do not have individual rights or civil rights.

Several breaks were taken during the evening when the rules of conduct laid out at the beginning of the evening were disobeyed by the crowd applauding to show their support for some of the speakers' statements; it was noted that the rules of conduct were imposed in an attempt to avoid the out-of-control actions exhibited at the Planning Commission hearings. As many people considered their good-natured applause appropriate, several hundred of them left the hearing in protest.

After one of the breaks, the Board took time to address some of the comments they have heard this evening; Chair Olson noted that the Commissioners cannot change the 80/20 rule because that is in the already approved Master Plan and would need to go to Public Hearing. Further comments from those in opposition continued: One rancher agreed that the County needs a new land use code, but not the strong restrictions that take their rights away; it was noted that the proponents of this Code want a small minority of people, who are struggling to keep their land or farms, to support this new land-use code so they, the proponents, can enjoy the wildlife and open space. One speaker estimated that the 80/20 rule will probably take away 40% value of his land; another speaker stated that the incompleteness of the Code makes people very nervous and he noted that some of the regulations are minuscule, such as the regulation of outdoor lighting. The Board was asked to provide leadership and incentives for people to do what they think is right to provide open space, but not dictatorship, regulations, and laws to set aside 80% of their land for open space.


M O T I O N

Commissioner Clarke moved that the Board of County Commissioners continue this land-use hearing until tomorrow night, December 15, 1998, at 6:30 p.m. in the Arizona Room at the Holiday Room.

Motion carried 3-0.

The hearing adjourned at 10:00 p.m.

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 15, 1998

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

(# 410)

The Board of County Commissioners meet at 9:00 a.m. in regular session with Frank Lancaster, County Manager. Chair Olson presided; Commissioner Disney was present. Also present were: Commissioner-Elect Kathay Rennels; Ginny Riley, Director of Human Services; Barbara Arnett, Foster Parent Case Worker; Greg Pickett, Director of Parks and Open Lands; Ralph Jacobs, Director of Human Resources; Joni Friedman, Employment and Training Services Director; Deni LaRue, Community Information Manager; Donna Hart, Commissioner's Office Administrative Manager; and Tom Clayton, CSU Intern. Recording Clerk, Gael Cookman.

1. OPEN SESSION FOR PUBLIC COMMENT: Kelly Ohlson addressed the Board suggesting that the Commissioners might want to look at reviewing the Land-Use Code on a quarterly basis at first and then switch to a biannual review schedule; he also stated that he feels it is very important for the Board to have true representation whenever they put together a citizen committee and suggested that different persons be rotated in rather than letting the same persons serve on numerous committees or boards. Mr. Olson noted that during last nights Land Use hearing, he did not name call or discredit any group and did not direct personal comments to anyone. Commissioner Disney suggested to the Chair that in the continuation hearing this evening, anyone who strayed from discussing the specifics of the Land Use Code would be out of order.

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE WEEK OF DECEMBER 7, 1998:

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Minutes for the week of December 7, 1998.

Motion carried 2-0.

3. APPROVAL OF SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK OF DECEMBER 21, 1998:

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Schedule for the week of December 21, 1998.

Motion carried 2-0.

4. CONSENT AGENDA:

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved for approval of the following documents as listed on the consent agenda on document review for December 15, 1998:

A98-182 SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLBY AND LUCERO REGRADING SPAULDING LANE MHP LOT 8 EXEMPTION

A98-183 LOW-INCOME ENERGY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (LEAP) VENDOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND KN ENERGY, INC.

A98-184 LOW-INCOME ENERGY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (LEAP) VENDOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND TOWN OF ESTES PARK

A98-185 LOW-INCOME ENERGY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (LEAP) VENDOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND FERRELLGAS OF ESTES PARK, CO

A98-186 LOW-INCOME ENERGY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (LEAP) VENDOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY/NEW CENTURY ENERGIES OF DENVER, CO

A98-187 CONVEYANCE OF PERMANENT DRAINAGE DETENTION EASEMENT AGREEMENT GRANTED TO LARIMER COUNTY BY KIRK DEAN WILSON

D98-22 DEED OF DEDICATION OF PROPERTY AS A PUBLIC HIGHWAY USE AT 208 LARIMER COUNTY ROAD 56 FROM REUBEN, RICHARD AND DEWAYNE FOLOT

R98-209s FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FLETCHER MINOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT APPEAL

R98-210s FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION DENYING THE VIENNA MINOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT APPEAL

R98-211z SPECIAL REVIEW FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PETITION OF RESTHAVEN FUNERAL CHAPEL

R98-212s FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION AMENDED PLAT/CHANGE IN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF LOT 16 IN BERTHOUD LAKE RANCHETTES PUD

R98-213s FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING STREET NAMING IN INDIAN CREEK RANCH

R98-214s FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE TILEY MINOR LAND DIVISION AMENDEMENT OF CONDITIONS

R98-215s FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PHASE PLAN OF BONNELL WEST PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT

R98-216g RESOLUTION ADOPTING AMENDMENT TO LARIMER COUNTY CONTRIBUTORY RETIREMENT PLAN AND TRUST AGREEMENT

R98-217g RESOLUTION ADOPTING AMENDMENT TO LARIMER COUNTY DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN

R98-218g RESOLUTION ADOPTING AMENDMENT TO ESTABLISHMENT OF CUSTODIAL ACCOUNT AND LIFE INSURANCE TRANSFER AUTHORIZATION

MISCELLANEOUS: Approval of Request for Authorization of Secretary I Position in Human Resources Department; Approval of Request for Revised Purchasing Procedures regarding Increase in Purchase Orders Amounts and Capital Outlay Procedures.

LIQUOR LICENSES: County approval was granted to: Tagliamonti Associates, Inc. - 6% - Ft. Collins, CO; St. Louis Liquors LLC, - 6% - Loveland, CO.

Motion carried 2-0.

5. WORKER OF THE YEAR: The Board congratulated Barbara Arnett on being selected as Foster Parent Case Worker of the Year and thanked her for her hard work. Ms. Riley noted that Ms. Arnett had received letters of support from both foster parents and staff members alike and agreed that she was well deserving of this award.

6. FAIRGROUND FEES: Mr. Pickett presented the Board with the 1999 proposed Fairground Fees explaining that the fees have not increased since 1996 and the proposed increase in rental fees for organizations to use the Fairgrounds was necessary to offset inflation. Mr. Pickett explained that, as in the past, entities would only be charged the fee if they were hosting an event for which they charged admission. Some discussion followed regarding whether or not the increase in fees would cover costs; Mr. Pickett stated that they will never fully recover costs as long as non-profit organizations are allowed free use of the facility when not charging admission for activities. Commissioner Disney suggested that in the future Mr. Pickett should consider revising his fees on a yearly basis to keep up with inflation rather than waiting in between years and then having to impose a greater increase to "catch-up".

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the increase in Fairground facility rental fees for 1999, as per proposed fee schedule.

Motion carried 2-0.

7. TANF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE STATE OF COLORADO: Ms. Riley requested approval of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the State of Colorado; she noted that after much negotiation the counties, State Department and Colorado Counties Inc. have reached an agreement on the content of the required performance contract for Human Services. Ms. Riley stated that the MOU expired on December 31, 1998 and an addendum would need to be approved and signed in January for the entire next year.

Ms. Riley also requested Board approval on revisions of the Policy on Reporting Employment Hours and the Job Readiness Policy; she explained that the revision to the Reporting Employment Hours Policy would require their employees to complete their Monthly Contact Sheet (a self reporting form) each month rather than each pay period, as pay periods can cross over months and create confusion. Ms. Riley explained the changes to the Job Readiness Policy, such as removing the requirements of participation in a work activity prior to the 24 months of being enrolled in their work programs, and removing the requirement of being able to lift up to fifty pounds. Commissioner Disney questioned why these stipulations were initially written into the policy as he did not want to delete something that may have good reason to be enforced. Ms. Riley stated that when they first began their job assistance placement programs, they used industry standards as guidance since they had no experience of their own to go by; she noted that they now feel these changes would better serve their clients.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve both the Memorandum of Understanding between Larimer County and the State Department of Health and Human Services, and the revisions of the Policy on Reporting Employment Hours and the Job Readiness Policy.

Motion carried 2-0.

A98-188 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE STATE OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES

8. AMENDMENT TO PERSONNEL MANUAL DEALING WITH RELEASE OF EMPLOYEE INFORMATION: Mr. Jacobs requested the Board to approve an amendment to the County Personnel Policy Manual in order to provide policies to assist departments in making decisions regarding obtaining information and releasing information pertaining to job applicants and current employees; he noted that even though most departments have handled this issue properly, there has been some confusion about this issue and he felt it was time for a formal policy to be written. Some discussion followed regarding what types of information could be disclosed and to whom.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve amending Chapter 2 of the Larimer County Personnel Policy Manual by adopting policy Section 215 dealing with applicant or employee background checks and Section 216 dealing with providing employee information to other employers and the public.

Motion carried 2-0.

9. COURT SECURITY RESOLUTION: Mr. Lancaster requested Board approval on a resolution pertaining to court security; he noted that the courthouse now includes secure areas in addition to the courtrooms and the punishment for violating security in these areas was not clear. Mr. Lancaster stated that this resolution defines the punishment of possession of a gun, knife or other weapon within these secure area as a class 3 misdemeanor.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Court Security Resolution.

Motion carried 2-0.

R98-219g RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR COURTHOUSE SECURITY

10. APPOINTMENT TO ESTES VALLEY PUBLIC LIBRABY DISTRICT: Mr. Lancaster stated that the Board of Trustees for the Estes Valley Public Library District have appointed Cami Sebern to fill a vacancy on the Library Board which resulted when Jan Bode resigned; they are requesting Board approval of that appointment.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the appointment of Cami Sebern to the Board of Trustees for the Estes Valley Public Library District, term to expire 12/31/2001.

Motion carried 2-0.

11. WORKSESSION: Mr. Lancaster explained that Dr. Adrienne LeBailly, Director of the Health Department, has requested a one-time salary adjustment of $650.00 for Jerry Blehm, Director of Environmental Health, in order to compensate for an oversight in last years' budget revisions for his position; he noted that the funding for this adjustment will come from the Health Department's existing budget.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the one-time salary adjustment of $650.00 for Jerry Blehm, to be funded out of the Health Department's existing budget.

Motion carried 2-0.

12. COMMISSIONER REPORTS:

- Commissioner Disney briefly mentioned that he attended the Johnstown, Loveland, and Berthoud meeting and noted that there was some discussion pertaining to the delivery of fire fighting services, law enforcement, and sewer services if the three communities were to annex portions of their cities with each other.

13. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION FOR BONUS PAY FOR AN EMPLOYEE IN EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING SERVICES: Ms. Freedman requested an exemption to policy in order to award a performance bonus to their Fiscal Accountant Steve Smith; she explained that Mr. Smith's job responsibilities have tripled over the past year and he has continually put in extra unpaid hours, without hesitation or complaint, in order to get the job done. Mr. Jacobs explained that the Board has approved this type of request in the past, but since there is no formal policy written to address the award of bonuses, this action requires Board approval.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the request for waiver of the salary provisions of the Larimer County Personnel Policy Manual and award a $500.00 bonus to Steve Smith.

Motion carried 2-0.

14. LEGAL MATTERS:

At this time County Attorney George Hass, Assistant County Attorney Jeannine Haag and District Attorney Stu VanMeveren joined the meeting for Legal Matters.

Ms. Haag requested the Board's signature on the closing documents for purchase of the Seeton property located at 2909 S Centennial Drive, Fort Collins, CO 80526.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Real Estate Water and Sewer Agreement, Tax Agreement, Buyer's Closing Statement and Closing Instructions for purchase of the Seeton property located at 2909 Centennial Drive, Fort Collins, CO 80526.

Motion carried 2-0.

.

A98-189 REAL ESTATE TAX AGREEMENT, REAL ESTATE WATER AND SEWER AGREEMENT, BUYER'S CLOSING STATEMENT AND CLOSING INSTRUCTIONS (for purchase of Seeton property)

Mr. Hass recommended the Board go into Executive Session to discuss possible litigation.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners go into Executive Session at 10:40 a.m. to discuss possible litigation.

Motion carried 2-0.

Executive Session ended at 11:15 a.m.; no further action taken.





CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS TO CONSIDER

ADOPTION OF A UNIFIED LAND USE CODE

(#408 & #409)

The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 6:30 p.m. to consider adoption of the Unified Land Use Code for the Partnership Land Use System. Chair Olson presided and Commissioners Clarke and Disney were present. Also present were: Commissioner-Elect Kathay Rennels; Larry Timm, Director of Planning; Russ Legg, Chief Planner; Al Kadera, Planner II; Frank Lancaster, County Manager; Deni LaRue, Community Information Manager; Tom Clayton, CSU Fall Intern; and Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney. Recording Clerk, Gael Cookman.

Chair Olson opened the hearing, introduced the Commissioners and staff, and welcomed the approximately 150 citizens attending tonight's hearing; she reviewed the rules of conduct for the evening and noted that speakers will be allowed 5 minutes and will be taken in the order in which they signed the sign-in sheet. Chair Olson noted that there would still be no applause, booing or hissing allowed, but she would ask for a show of hands after each speaker so the citizens could show support or opposition for statements made by that speaker; she noted that comments must be limited specifically to the land-use Code and no personal attacks on persons or organizations will be tolerated.

Chair Olson then opened the public comment portion of the hearing and the following persons addressed the Board in support of the proposed land-use code: Mark Easter, Ramon Ajero and Howard Pomranka.

The following points were made by those in support of the proposed Land Use Code: 1) Clustered development does work and will preserve open space while preserving natural resources. 2) Our Country has a history of resource extraction which practically wiped out the Bison and caused millions in order to clean up the poisons left behind from rock mining, and the very resources that people move to Larimer County for are being over developed. 3) The Code, as written, goes to great lengths to assist agriculture. 4) Property rights increase as land value increases and any land use code will increase the value of all property in Larimer County. 5) Better knowing what neighbors will do, makes better neighbors. Those in support requested that the Commissioners refrain from compromising their position and pass the Land Use Code as written.

The following persons addressed the Board in opposition to the Code: Tom Jackson, Tom Bender, Gary Wright, John Smethurst, Don Weixelman, Leland Asa, Kevin Lundberg, Kent Kadlub, John Chilson, Dale Culver, Ray Ezinga, Ron Klein, Fred Boekel, Sandy Karn, John Culver, Ken Kechter, Lenora Knisley, J.A. Kechter, Tracy McConnell, Jim Gibson, Mary Somervell, Martha Noonan, Robert Sandmann, and Bill Roberts.

The following concerns were raised by those in opposition: 1) Eliminating the use of single-wide mobile homes will cause a great hardship on those who cannot afford anything else. 2) Micro-management of home businesses is not right, non-conforming use would be tough on small business, and required parking spaces are not consistent with many of the rural home businesses and those details should be worked out with planning staff and the business owner on a case by case basis. 3) The 80/20 rule is too restrictive and it should be voluntary with incentives for property owners to use it if they ever planned to develop. 4) Property owners should not have to bear the brunt of preserving open space. 4) Issuance of septic permits is already a problem for some and the Code does not make this issue any easier. 5) The number of principle buildings allowed in the Code is unreasonable and an explanation was requested for exactly what constitutes an "accessory" for a certain business. 6) If the Code is adopted in its current form it would make much of their property unmarketable. 7) A suggestion was made to give some sort of economic incentive (tax relief) to encourage farming and to possibly lobby with Colorado Counties Inc. to increase the 1% tax cap currently imposed on Counties in order to help find a way to increase taxes to support and preserve agriculture. 8) Clustering will only work if there is a central water/sewer system and it is very difficult to do this in the mountainous terrain. 9) 35 acre development does not slam the door on wildlife as there is abundant wildlife on their property. 10) The Code destroys the fundamental rights of property owners. 11) It will not make economic sense to develop under the new Code. 12) It will cause problems when "city folk" start moving to the country and then start complaining about the smell of the farm animals/operations and the noise of farm equipment. 13) It causes conflict with the Larimer County Right to Farm Bill. 14) It destroys a family dream of being able to pass property on to children. 15) The noxious weed problem will get worse. 16) The restrictions on farm hands living on the property should be reevaluated.

Many speakers indicated that they were not opposed to having a Land Use Code, but felt it needs more work as the proposed Code is too restrictive and still full of too many holes; they requested that the Commissioners delay adopting the Code until these issues have been resolved. Some felt the Land Use Code was a poorly written document and was not acceptable at all because it is too controlling.

Commissioner Clarke noted that with regard to the single-wide mobile homes, those in place are grandfathered in and there just needs to be a technical rewrite in order to reflect this in the Code. Commissioner Disney noted that he attended a transportation meeting and the Homebuilders Association has volunteered their help in order to make the different types of homes and mobile home uses compatible with each other.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners continue this land-use hearing until tomorrow night, December 16, 1998, at 6:30 p.m. in the Arizona Room at the Holiday Inn.

Motion carried 3-0.

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 16, 1998

CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS TO CONSIDER

ADOPTION OF A UNIFIED LAND USE CODE

(#407 & #411)

The Board of County Commissioners met at 6:30 p.m. for continuation of a series of public hearings to receive public comment and consideration of the Unified Land Use Code for the Partnership Land Use System. Chair Olson presided and Commissioners Clarke and Disney were present. Also present were: Commissioner-Elect Kathay Rennels; Larry Timm, Director of Planning; Al Kadera, Planner II; Frank Lancaster, County Manager; Deni LaRue, Community Information Manager; Tom Clayton, CSU Fall Intern; and Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney. Recording Clerk, Sherry Graves.

Chair Olson opened the hearing, introduced the Commissioners and staff, and welcomed the approximately 125 citizens attending tonight's hearing; she reviewed the rules of conduct for the evening and noted that speakers will be allowed 5 minutes and taken in the order in which they signed the sign-in sheet. Chair Olson also noted that after each speaker, a hand count will be taken showing support or non-support for statements made by that speaker; she noted that comments must be limited to the Land-Use Code and no personal attacks on persons or organizations will be tolerated.

First, in response to the concern raised Monday night about the fiscal impact the 80/20 rule might have on the State School Finance Act, Mr. Lancaster reported that County Attorney George Hass stated that per capita student funding is guaranteed at a certain level in every school district across the State and changes in the tax assessment will make no difference in the amount of per student funding; if less property tax is generated, then more State money is used - the per student funding stays the same no matter what happens to property values. Mr. Lancaster continued, however, that it does make a difference on bonded debt retirement.

Chair Olson asked Mr. Timm to explain, using flip charts, the choices a property owner has in doing the 80/20 development; Mr. Timm explained in detail the options available and Commissioner Clarke reviewed the five exceptions to the Code that are allowed. Questions from the audience and discussion followed.

Afterwards, the public comment portion of the hearing was opened and the following persons addressed the Board in support of the proposed Land-Use Code: Roger Hoffman, Gina Adams, and Glen Colton. Their statements included that approval of the code is necessary if we are going to keep the rural character at all and the Code is a significant improvement over what we have now. One speaker stated that there is a need for an education process regarding the Code and does think that a technical re-write should be done.

Those persons addressing the Board in opposition to the proposed land-use code were: Rick Mainval, Kay Bokelman, Glen Gibson, Thomas Allen, Jerry Berg, Joseph Ford, Steve Schauer, Rich Samples, Sonja Warberg Mast, J. Matt Martindale, Kerwin Stover, Doug Kindsfather, Scott Thomas, Robin Jones, Gary Lindquist, Linda Allen, Brad Cole, Tom Brady, and Mark Linder. One speaker stated that the people that live in the country want it to stay the way it is - there is a need for a new Land-Use Code, but this one needs to be rewritten and needs to be voted on by the citizens of the County. Another speaker stated that the proposed Land Use Code is regulatory theft and open space is going to be expensive to maintain. One speaker asked many questions, such as: 1) Why are rural residents being penalized by having to pay 29% in property taxes for open space, which forces residents to put houses on their property? 2) Since this is a rural issue, why are the people in the City concerned with the property rights of the rural residents? 3) Why are the three Commissioners voting on this issue since they don't own rural property? 4) How much money has been spent on the land-use code to date; 5) How does this Land Use Code have anything to do with cutting growth; 6) Etc. Commissioner Clarke responded to the questions. Another speaker stated that the plan has a number of problems that need to be addressed, the document is incomplete, and he asked why the big rush to get this document passed so quickly. Another speaker asked how can you vote on something that has so many interpretations - you don't do enough to protect the people making a living by agriculture. One speaker was upset that the Board has said, "The way we interpret the Code", and he asked how will it be interpreted by the next Board? An attorney read a statement that this Land Use Code amounts to a set of "protective covenants" superimposed on all agricultural properties subsequently developed and is both arbitrary and amounts to a regulatory "taking of private property without compensation". She continued that the statement that it is not legal under State Law to take the Code to a vote of the citizens is an absolute misstatement of the law, as under the U. S. Constitution and Colorado Constitution, "Initiative and Referendum" are absolute rights reserved to the people and the Board of County Commissioners is not above the voice of the people, is not above the will of the people and is not above the vote of the people. Commissioner Clarke stated he was very interested in hearing more specifics about this and he asked the speaker to contact him; she agreed to do that. She continued that the citizens of this County are intelligent and concerned and they have no "misconceptions about the proposed Land Use Code" and are extremely opposed to its adoption and adoption of this Code is confiscatory action prohibited by the U. S. and Colorado Constitutions. Another speaker stated that the Larimer County citizens do not want this Code in the form it is in now. A main complaint voiced by many was with the incompleteness of this document and asked again and again what is the rush? One speaker stated he is more of a Jeffersonian in thinking that less government is better and the Commissioners were elected because the voters thought you could be trusted and would do what is right for them. Another speaker asked what happened to the 30% open space requirement before and stated that 80% is plain ridiculous. One speaker noted that he was told in the beginning that the new Code would be easier, but it is harder and more expensive than the old one. Another speaker stated that PLUS goes too far - it is similar to covenants and only the wealthy will be able to develop under this Code and it is the result of an overzealous planning staff and the Board should not be influenced by them. One speaker stated that he is in favor of clustering, but this plan is not it and he appealed to the Board to not rush into this because it impacts everyone and for generations to come. Over and over speakers pled with the Board to delay adoption of the proposed Land Use Code; they said that the citizens don't want to be angry, but they are afraid. Another speaker stated that he thinks the 80/20 plan will devalue the land and he checked throughout the Country and couldn't find the 80% open space requirement anywhere else.

After each speaker, a hand count was taken and those raising their hands supporting statements in opposition to the proposed Land-Use Code comprised approximately 98% of the audience and, as a rule, only three hands were raised in opposition.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners continue this land-use hearing until tomorrow night, December 17, 1998 at 6:30 p.m. in the Arizona Room at the Holiday Inn on Prospect Street.

Motion carried 3-0.

The hearing adjourned at 10:00 p.m.

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1998

CERTIFICATION OF MILL LEVIES AND REVENUE

AND APPROVAL OF PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND

The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 a.m. in regular session with Budget Manager Bob Keister to approve the Certification of Mill Levies and Revenue and a Resolution authorizing assignment to the City of Loveland of a Private Activity Bond Allocation. Chair Olson presided and Commissioner Disney was present. Also present were: Kathay Rennels, Commissioner-Elect; Carol Block, Director of Finance; Dave Dwyer, Bond Counsel; and Frank Lancaster, County Manager. Recording Clerk, Sherry Graves.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the 1998 Certification of Levies and Revenue by the Larimer County Commissioners, and authorize the Chair to sign same.

Motion carried 2 - 0.



M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Resolution authorizing Assignment to the City of Loveland of a Private Activity Bond Allocation of Larimer County pursuant to the Colorado Private Activity Bond Ceiling Allocation Act and the Assignment of the 1998 and 1999 Private Activity Bond Allocation by Larimer County, a designated issuing authority, and authorize the Chair to sign same.

Motion carried 2 - 0.

R98- 220g RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ASSIGNMENT TO THE CITY

OF LOVELAND OF A PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND ALLOCATION

OF LARIMER COUNTY PURSUANT TO THE COLORADO

PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND CEILING ALLOCATION ACT

The meeting adjourned at 9:10 a.m.

CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS TO CONSIDER

ADOPTION OF A UNIFIED LAND USE CODE

(#412 & #413)

The Board of County Commissioners met at 6:30 p.m. for continuation of a series of public hearings to receive public comment and consideration of the Unified Land Use Code for the Partnership Land Use System. Chair Olson presided and Commissioners Clarke and Disney were present. Also present were: Larry Timm, Director of Planning; Al Kadera, Planner II; Frank Lancaster, County Manager; Deni LaRue, Community Information Manager; Tom Clayton, CSU Fall Intern; and Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney. Recording Clerk, Gael Cookman.

Chair Olson opened the hearing, introduced the Commissioners and staff, and welcomed the approximately 125 citizens attending tonight's hearing; she reviewed the rules of conduct for the evening and noted that speakers will be allowed 5 minutes and will be taken in the order in which they signed the sign-in sheet. Chair Olson also noted that after each speaker, a hand count will be taken showing support or non-support for statements made by that speaker; she noted that comments must be limited to the Land-Use Code and no personal attacks or persons or organizations will be tolerated.

The following persons addressed the Board in support of the proposed land-use code: Steve Furness, Clark Mapes, and David Lauer. The comments for those in favor of the Code were as follows: 1) There are lots of problems that come with suburban sprawl which this Code will eliminate. 2) Those in opposition are attacking the solution. 3) Land values will increase. 4) The Code should also offer incentives for affordable housing. Those in favor of the Code requested the Commissioners not to buckle to public pressure, but to adopt the Land Use Code as written.

The following persons addressed the Board in opposition to the Code: Tom Jones, Gladys Russell, Maxine Weaver, Cindy Ridenour, Jack Swets, Donald Trock, Sabre Middlekoff, Connie Barnes, Willis Somervell, Marion Ford, Max Criswell, Tracey Emslie, James Sedmen, Pat Conner, Bryan Provty, Patricia Sweanor, Alton Johnson, Greg Wild, Anita Rochat, Pat Clarke, and Steve Rochet.

The following concerns were raised by those in opposition: 1) If clustering happens out in the county it will cause a greater hardship on fire protection, police protection, etc. 2) The Code as written is too complicated. 3) The Commissioners should try to determine how much of Larimer County should be preserved as open space rather than placing a blanket over all private property owned within the county. 4) The cost to change or add to business will be too great for them to afford. 5) There is no trust in the regulations as they are too vague. 6) The fact that no pets can be off a leash in wildlife areas will cause farm animals to be sitting ducks for wildlife predators. 7) Rental homes on farms have been working just fine and should be allowed under the new code. 8) The 80/20 plan should provide incentives and should be voluntary not mandatory. 9) The farmers and ranchers should be able to place their buildings where they see them fitting in with their operation. 10) The wells in the mountainous areas are marginal at best and will probably not support clustering homes. 11) Farming needs to be innovative and progressive; having to go through long review processes will hinder the farmers ability to react to changes in the industry. 12) Local government should guide not control. 13) There are other ways to do this rather than putting it on the backs of the farmers. 14) The Code has alienated people and should be rewritten in layman's terms. 15) The County should buy the development rights if they want to maintain open space. 16) The Code will hinder farming operations as contract farmers will not want to farm around clusters of homes. 17) If you want to stop suburban sprawl, do not enter into Intergovernmental Agreements with the cities. 18) Do not put neighbor against neighbor.

The vast majority felt the Commissioners should not adopt the Code until all of the controversial sections have been rewritten and there has been more opportunity for public input at the planning stage.

Chair Olson explained that there are "holes" in the Code because they are acting as "placeholders" in order to add to the items to the Code that they know are forthcoming; she noted that this is common practice in government documents and she assured those in attendance that nothing could be added and no changes could be made to the Code without a public hearing.

Chair Olson thanked everyone for their comments and participation during the last four nights; she then explained that the next step in this public process would be to move into the discussion phase which would take place on January 4, 1999 at the Commissioners Hearing Room in the County Courthouse.


M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners continue this land-use hearing until January 4, 1999, at 6:30 p.m. in the Commissioners Hearing Room.

Motion carried 3-0.

___________________________________________

CHERYL OLSON, CHAIR LARIMER COUNTY

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

MYRNA J. RODENBERGER,

LARIMER COUNTY CLERK & RECORDER

( S E A L )

ATTEST:

___________________________________

Sherry E. Graves, Deputy County Clerk


____________________________________

Gael M. Cookman, Deputy County Clerk

Background Image: Rocky Mountain National Park by Sue Burke. All rights reserved.