PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MONDAY, February 7, 2000
LAND-USE PLANNING HEARING
The Board of County Commissioners met at 3:00 p.m. in regular session with Larry Timm, Director of Planning. Acting-Chair Disney presided and Commissioner Rennels was present; Chair Olson is in Denver testifying before the State Legislature today. Also present were: Carol Evans, Sean Wheeler, and Fred Starr, Planners II; Sylvester Mabry, Civil Engineer; and Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney. Recording Clerk, Sherry Graves.
Commissioner Disney noted that the following are consent items and will not be discussed in detail unless requested by the Commissioners or members of the audience.
WEST SIDE OF OVERLAND TRAIL, SOUTH OF THE CSU EQUINE
CENTER; 35.75 ACRES; 2 LOTS; FA-1 FARMING ZONING AND FORT
This is a request for a Minor Land Division to divide a 35.75 acre parcel with an existing dwelling into 2 lots of 34.12 acres (for the dwelling) and 0.94 acres for use by the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District. The request also includes a minimum lot size waiver per Section 5.4.3C of the Land Use Code. Staff findings include: 1) The proposed OFP Minor Land Division complies with the Review Criteria for Minor Land Divisions as contained in Section 5.4.3 of the Land Use Code; 2) Because of the logical location of the boundary line along the irrigation ditch and the public benefit provided by the services of the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District, it is appropriate that the Board of County Commissioners waive the minimum lot size requirement for Lot 2 of the OFP Development MLD as allowed in Section5.4.3C of the Land Use Code.
The staff recommendation is for approval of the OFP Development Minor Land Division and waiver of the minimum lot size requirement for Lot 2 with the following conditions: 1) The final plat shall dedicate additional right-of-way along the frontage of the property to provide a half right-of-way of 57.5' for Overland Trail; 2) The final plat shall include the following notes: a) Lot is subject to an Annexation Agreement recorded with this plat; b) Activities in the Western Area Power Administration, U. S. Department of Energy transmission line easement across these lots are subject to approval by that agency: i) All construction activities on the United States easement should be coordinated with the Western Area Power Administration office; ii) To avert continual severe pruning and eventual removal of tall growing trees, only low-growing plants (not exceeding 15 feet in maximum mature height) are allowed on the easement area; iii) No buildings are allowed within the easement area; iv) A minimum overhead clearance of 12 feet from the conductors of the Western Area Power Administration's Dixon Creek-LaPorte 115-kV transmission line must be maintained at all times; c) Use of Lot 2 is limited to facilities/activities of the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District.
RAMONA HEIGHTS AMENDED SUBDIVISION (#99-S1518): 28-10-73,
ON THE NORTH SIDE OF CR 78E NEAR RED FEATHER LAKES, ALONG
THE POCAHONTAS HIGHWAY; .58 ACRES; 4 LOTS; O-OPEN ZONING
This is a request for an amended plat to combine Lots 10A, 10B, 11A and 11B of Block 19, within the Ramona Heights Subdivision; said combining of lots will result in one new lot being approximately .58 in size. Staff findings are: 1) The proposed amended plat is in compliance with the Larimer County Master Plan, the Larimer County Zoning Resolution and the Larimer County Subdivision Resolution; 2) The amended plat is compatible with other development in the surrounding area; 3) Approval of the amended plat will not result in any significant impacts to neighboring properties, the natural environment or the provision of services and infrastructure, except as noted with regard to the proposed vacation of the trail easement; 4) Property values in the surrounding area would not be adversely affected by the amended plat. The staff recommendation is for approval of the Amended Plat of Lots 10A, 10B, 11A and 11B in Block 19, of the Ramona Heights Amended Subdivision, subject to the following condition: 1) All corrections as indicated above shall be shown on the Final Plat prior to recording.
RANCHETTES PUD (#99-S1524): 11-04-69 ON THE WEST SIDE OF CR 23E,
SOUTHWEST OF BERTHOUD; .927 ACRES; 2 LOTS; FA-1 FARMING ZONING
This is a request for an amended plat to adjust an existing boundary between Lots 54 and 55 of the Berthoud Lake Ranchettes; said adjustment of the boundary line will not reduce the number of lots. Staff findings include: 1) The proposed amended plat is in compliance with the Larimer County Master Plan, the Larimer County Zoning Resolution and the Larimer County Subdivision Resolution; 2) The amended plat is compatible with other development in the surrounding area; 3) Approval of the amended plat will not result in any significant impacts to neighboring properties, the natural environment or the provision of services and infrastructure, except as noted with regard to the proposed vacation of the trail easement; 4) Property values in the surrounding area would not be adversely affected by the amended plat. The staff recommendation is for approval of the Amended Plat of Lots 54 and 55 of the Berthoud Lakes Ranchettes PUD, subject to the following condition: 1) Prior to recording of the final plat, the property owner shall submit the required letters from an engineer as noted in the January 12, 2000 staff memo from the Code Enforcement Section. All remaining inspections, including the setback inspection, must be completed and approved prior to the expiration of Building Permit #99B-1039 on February 10, 2001.
SUBDIVISION, TWO MILES SOUTHWEST OF ESTES PARK ON THE
NORTH SIDE OF COLORADO HWY 66; 3.74 ACRES; 4 LOTS;
This is a request to allow development of four platted lots. Staff findings are: 1) In 1917, the Greeley-Boulder Colony Subdivision was originally platted; 2) The applicant has provided a copy of the deed recorded on April 22, 1946, which created a fourth legal parcel by splitting Lot 19 into two tracts thereby creating an additional building lot; 3) Comments received from review agencies have identified issues, which are to be noted as conditions for approval of this request.
The staff recommendation is for approval of the Amended Plat of Lots 17, 18 and 19 of the Greeley-Boulder Subdivision, subject to the following conditions: 1) The applicant will provide all information requested by the Larimer County Surveyor, as noted in the attached memo from Dale Greer, dated December 29, 1999; these corrections must be approved by the Larimer County Surveyor before recording of the Amended Plat; 2) The applicant shall identify an Ingress/Egress Easement, which will provide access to each proposed lot from Colorado Highway 66; this easement shall be identified on the plat and referenced in the Dedication Statement; 3) The applicant shall name the plat "Lots 17A, 18A, 18B and 18C, Greeley-Boulder Colony Subdivision, being an amended plat of Lots 17, 18 and 19, Greeley-Boulder Colony Subdivision, together with that portion of said Lot 19 as described and recorded in the Larimer County, Colorado Book 811 at Page 260; 4) The applicant shall identify the Utility Easement as required by the Town of Estes Park, Light and Power Department for the existing utility line located on Lot 18B and 18C; 5) The applicant shall place the following notes on the plat: a) Lots 17A, 18A, 18B and 18C are located within an area of Moderate to High Wildland Fire Potential; any building permits issued on these lots will be subject to wildfire mitigation plan review by Larimer County; b) Special development practices may be required to reduce the potential for introduction of noxious weeds into the area; c) These lots are located within the area described in the Spur 66 Corridor Management Plan, adopted by Larimer County in 1996, and are subject to the performance guidelines identified in that plan. All conditions of approval to be completed prior to recording of the Amended Plat.
EXEMPTION (#99-S1520): SW 1/4 OF 35-05-69 - ON THE NORTH SIDE OF
COUNTY ROAD 14, ONE MILE WEST OF U. S. HWY 287; 3.62 ACRES;
This is a request to amend the conditions of the Richey Exemption #111-76-EX approved by Larimer County on October 18, 1976. Staff findings include: 1) The proposed amended plat is in compliance with the Larimer County Master Plan, the Larimer County Zoning Resolution and the Larimer County Subdivision Resolution; 2) The amended exemption is compatible with other development in the surrounding area; 3) Approval of the amended plat will not result in any significant impacts to neighboring properties, the natural environment, or the provision of services and infrastructure; 4) Approval of the Amended Exemption is in conformance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement with respect to the vacation of the existing Ingress-Egress Easement and the dedication of a revised Ingress/Egress Easement as identified.
The staff recommendation is for approval of the Amended Exemption and Easement Vacation for the purpose of vacating the existing Ingress/Egress Easement and dedicating a new Ingress/Egress Easement as identified on the "Easement Exhibit Map" dated December 13, 1999; this map is to be recorded with the Larimer County Clerk as a condition of this approval.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the staff findings and staff recommendation and approve the OFP Development Minor Land Division (#99-S1526); Amended Plat of Lots 10A, 10B, 11A and 11B, Block 19 of the Ramona Heights Amended Subdivision (#99-S1518); Amended Plat of Lots 54 & 55 in the Berthoud Lake Ranchettes PUD (#99-S1524); Amended Plat of Lots 17, 18 and 19 of the Greeley-Boulder Colony Subdivision (#99-S1521); and the Amended Exemption and Easement Vacation of the Richey Exemption (#99-S1520); each, with the conditions as outlined.
Motion carried 2 - 0.
The hearing recessed at 3:05 p.m.
CONTINUATION OF LAND-USE HEARING
(#575 @ 100)
The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 7 p.m. in regular session with Jim Reidhead, Director Rural Land Use Center. Acting-Chair Disney presided and Commissioner Rennels was present; as noted previously, Chair Olson is in Denver testifying before the State Legislature today. Also present were: Rusty McDaniel, Project Engineer; Traci Downs, Civil Engineer; Doug Ryan, Environmental Health Planner; and Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney. Recording Clerk, Sherry Graves.
SECTIONS 3, 4, 9, 10 & 15-6-70, LOCATED 1/4 MILE NORTHWEST OF
THE TOWN OF MASONVILLE ON NORTH COUNTY ROAD 27; 1600
ACRES; 80 LOTS; O-OPEN ZONING
This is a request for authorization to divide 1600 acres in the following manner: Up to 80 single-family home sites ranging in size from 2 to 10 acres (including the existing home site). The residential sites will occupy a maximum of 500 acres and no residential development will be allowed on the remaining land, known as "residual land". The residual land, approximately 1100 acres divided into 3 separate parcels or outlots, will be protected in perpetuity by a conservation easement under the terms of the RLUP. Mr. Reidhead introduced the applicant, reviewed the location and pictures of the subject property, and described the proposal; he noted that the property could be divided into forty-five (45) 35-acre parcels without County input or potentially up to 160 single-family sites if brought through the subdivision process under the property's current O-Open zoning, if adequate public facilities are provided; he noted that the Little Thompson Water District will be providing the water for this proposal, which is readily available. Mr. Reidhead stated that a neighborhood meeting was held on January 5, 2000 with 55 residents attending; he noted that there was general support for the project, and although no one was happy about additional development in this area, they felt this proposal was acceptable considering the alternatives. The concerns raised at the meeting pertained to additional traffic and potential for septic systems percolating onto neighboring properties. Mr. Reidhead stated that the Engineering Department will be requiring a traffic study and with regard to the concern about the internal roads, Mr. Friend is anticipating paving the internal roads and some external roads. Mr. Reidhead stated that the applicant proposes to create a homeowner's association and prepare covenants to address the following issues: 1) Maintenance of internal private access roads; 2) Architectural control and design guidelines; 3) Home size requirements; 4) Use restrictions on all residential sites; 5) Utilities; 6) Outdoor storage of vehicles; 7) Outdoor lighting; and 8) Management of large animals, if allowed. In addition, the applicant proposes a perpetual conservation easement with an approved management plan to protect the residual land. Mr. Reidhead reviewed the findings and recommendation and submitted two revisions, which resulted from conversations with the neighbors in Buckskin Heights. It was noted that two letters were received from Val Hall and Cathleen M. Powers citing their concerns regarding this proposal.
Staff findings are that this proposal is consistent with the policies of Section 5.8-Rural Land Use Process of the Larimer County Land Use Code: 1) RLUC Staff and the Rural Land Use Advisory Board supports the Buckhorn Ranch Preliminary Rural Land Plan based on: a) The applicant's planning and design rationale for the project, which is consistent with the RLUP; b) The applicant's willingness to dedicate a perpetual conservation easement for the residual land; c) The conservation values of the residual land, including preservation of the Buckhorn River corridor and an existing ag operation; d) The suitability of the property for clustering and the willingness of the landowner to locate the residential cluster close to the existing village center; e) The applicant's willingness to dedicate a site for a future fire station; f) Senior adjudicated water rights sufficient to maintain existing ag operation will remain with the property. 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; 2) The greater number of residential units possible under the current-open zoning of the property and the general development pressure within the immediate area for use-by-right 35-acre division of land supports our belief that this is an appropriate project; 3) The site-based incentives (35 density bonus units, or 77%) provide the landowners with roughly equivalent benefits that they would obtain through dividing their property into individual 35-acre tracts, particularly in light of the fact that the development standards are increased by using the RLUP. As proposed, this project will also provide commensurate long-term benefits to citizens of Larimer County; those benefits are summarized below: a) Conservation easement in perpetuity with comprehensive management plan; b) Protection of river corridor and highly-visible land; c) Protection of wildlife habitat, including Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse habitat; d) Preservation of existing ag operation; e) Prohibition of locating homes on ridgelines with corresponding reduction in highly-visible road cuts; f) Homeowners association protective covenants with architectural controls; g) Transportation capital expansion fees charged against project; h) Ability to assess and collect school and park fees; i) Fewer residences then likely allowed through subdivision process; j) Ability to influence design of project, as compared to use-by-right division of property into 35-acre parcels; 4) The plan is generally compatible with the existing neighboring land uses; 5) This development will have considerable impact on the existing Masonville community. Because of this, frequent informal project review and consultation is proposed with planning and engineering departments; and 6) Applicant shall make reasonable efforts to reach agreement with Buckskin Heights Road Association, Inc. concerning maintenance of a section of Buckhorn Valley Road, up to 3/4 mile in length. This section of road will be used by both the Buckskin Heights Road Association, Inc. and the proposed Friend RLUP project. In any event, the Buckhorn Ranch RLUP homeowners' association covenants shall provide for the maintenance of this section of road, as well s the project's internal roads.
Applicant Arnold Friend stated that the two lots proposed in the northwest corner will probably be moved and he has been assured by the Little Thompson Water District that they can take care of all fire codes that the County requires and he has offered to donate some land for a future fire department.
At this time the hearing was opened for public comment and the following persons addressed the Board: Randy Fisher, Paul Hesson, Robert Thrift, Paul Long, Lynette McGowan, and Ed Standard. Mr. Fisher stated that the thought of this ranch being divided is not pleasant, but this proposed project is the best they can hope for under the current land use code and he endorses the proposal; he noted that the conservation easement of 1100 acres is extremely generous donation of Mr. Friend and he is not asking for the full 100% bonus to which he is entitled and this project will go a long way to preserve the habitat in the area. Mr. Hesson stated that they have 68 memberships in Buckskin Heights which will share a road in common with the new homeowners association and this is troublesome to them as they have a grant of easement to use the road and a legal obligation to maintain the road, which they have done for up to 31 years and they are very reluctant to give up control to the only entrance and exit to their subdivision. Mr. Hesson stated that they would like to see the road in common become a County road as he understands that Mr. Friend is going to bring it up to standard and black top it and if the County would pick up that small section of road, the problem would go away. Commissioner Disney stated that it is standard County policy to not take over any subdivision roads for maintenance. Ms. Sprague noted that the map of the project includes their property in the cluster and she wanted to clarify for the record that it is not a part of this proposal; she noted that she thinks this proposal is a great idea and she will certainly appreciate the road being paved. She asked if there would be a barrier between the properties, such as trees or a stone fence; Commissioner Disney responded that in the RLUP, landscaping or visual buffering is left up to the individual lot owners. Mr. Thrift stated he is not opposed to the project, but noted he has some concerns regarding drainage of polluted septic tanks or lawn water containing fertilizer/weed killer or other chemicals onto his land, horses and livestock on small 2-acre lots, provisions for children, such as a playground, a new access road onto CR 27, and privacy (noise and light pollution and trespassing). He submitted a two-page handout outlining these concerns in detail and offering suggestions for mitigating those concerns. Mr. Ryan addressed the drainage and septic concerns, noting that Mr. Thrift's suggestion for a geologic study is a good one and could be included in the recommendation that Engineering made for a drainage study. In terms of contamination from septic systems, Mr. Ryan stated they have asked for a condition that prior to the final platting that soil test information is obtained so they can coordinate the size of the lots with the types of soil and actual platting and lot arrangement. Mr. Long concurs with Mr. Hesson's comments and stated that most of the people at the hearing tonight are here because of the concern of the combined road and he suggested that the Buckskin Heights Board of Directors appoint a committee to meet with Mr. Friend and other appropriate persons to work this out before final approval. Ms. McGowan asked about the detailed traffic study; Mr. McDaniel responded that they will need to decide if CR 27 needs to be widened from two lane to four lanes and will look at site accesses and may require left-turn lanes and right-turn lanes on CR 27. Mr. McDaniel noted that the traffic study could result in improvements to the road. Mr. Standard stated that this proposal is probably the best they could hope for as it is well planned and Mr. Friend is bending over backwards to meet everyone's needs; he noted that many people have already moved into this area and yet there is still lots of wildlife. He stated that traffic is going to create an impact, but that is expected.
At this time the public testimony portion of the hearing was closed and opened for Commissioner's comments; Commissioner Disney noted for the record that one difference between the RLUP and standard subdivision process is that this plan is for preliminary approval, a little more than a concept, and that is why there is such a long list of findings and conditions which have to be satisfied before final approval. Commissioner Disney noted that the concern about number of horses and livestock on 2-acre lots will be addressed through the covenants in this type of development and, if not, they will be subject to the Larimer County regulations. Mr. Friend responded that the covenants will not allow any horses or any livestock of that size on the individual lots; however, he may have boarding stables on his ranch and allow riding on the rest of the ranch. Ms. Haag stated that with respect to the issue of the Buckskin Heights Road Association having the exclusive right to maintain the road, there is nothing to preclude them from continuing with that obligation and entering into an agreement with the new owners for them to contribute a certain amount of money on an annual basis to allow them to continue maintaining the road. Other questions from the Board and discussion followed.
The Rural Land Use Center Director, Advisory Board and Staff recommend approval of the Buckhorn Ranch Preliminary Rural Land Plan, with the following revised contingencies to be met prior to approval of final plat: 1) A detailed traffic impact study must be completed to determine if any additional transportation improvements are necessary. The landowner will be required to work with the Larimer County Engineering Department if improvements are needed; 2) Internal road design and other engineering requirements, including utilities, roads, right-of-way dedication, storm water plan, and erosion control plan, shall meet minimum design standards set forth in Appendix G of the Larimer County Road Manual. Design shall be prepared and stamped by a qualified professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado with review and approval by the County Engineering Department. In response to drainage issues raised by area residents, a geologic study of the substrate on the west side of the proposed clusters shall be performed to identify groundwater movement and potential impacts to existing properties to the west; 3) Public water shall be provided for this project. A letter of commitment from the Little Thompson Water District needs to be provided prior to final plat approval. This 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; 4) Preliminary representative soil test data for the major cluster areas and soil groups shall be submitted prior to final approval with the understanding this could affect the final placement of the home sites; 5) Procedure for reservation and/or conveyance of proposed fire station site to fire district or appropriate alternative entity be reviewed and approved by County Attorney ; 6) At least one fire hydrant capable of providing a minimum of 500 gpm fire flow at 20 psi pressure must be provided within 1 mile of all building sites within south cluster before any building permits are issued; 7) Residual land conservation easement and management plan review and approval by County Attorney and the RLUC Director prior to final plat approval; 8) Homeowners' association covenants, including architectural controls, and provisions for internal road maintenance, (including a section of Buckhorn Valley Road, up to 3/4 mile in length, used in common with Buckskin Heights Road Association, Inc.) review and approval by County Attorney prior to final plat approval; 9) Review and approval of final development agreement by County Attorney; 10) Building envelopes shall be located on each lot to accommodate Health Department and Wildfire Safety Coordinator requirements. Prior to footing and foundation permits, there shall be a certificate by a surveyor confirming that the construction is within the building envelope designated on the final plat; 11) Consultation with the USFWS to determine if Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse habitat exists and incorporate any design changes into the plan if required by USFWS; 12) The following should either be listed as a note on the final plat or a disclosure statement, approved by the County Attorney, shall be prepared for lot buyers at the time of purchase: a) Automatic fire protection sprinklers are required for all new residential structures; b) 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; c) The Colorado Division of Wildlife will not be responsible for conflicts or damage feeders, and pet food are made accessible to these predators. Pets and backyard livestock should be confined to predator-proof kennels, coops, or hutches. The Division will be happy to provide brochures to assist in this process; d) Transportation Capital Expansion Fees in effect at the time of building permit issuance shall be assessed on each lot; e) Park fees-in-lieu of land dedication in effect at the time of building permit issuance shall be assessed on each lot; f) RLUP fees in effect at time of building permit issuance shall be assessed on each lot; g) School fees in-lieu-of-land dedication shall be collected at the time of building permit issuance; h) The applicants agree 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; i) At time of real estate closing, owner shall provide purchasers of residential lots and residual lands with Code of the West, a County document which addresses differences between urban and rural living in Larimer County; j) The owners of the residual land parcel shall be responsible for providing an annual monitoring report for the residual land to Larimer County Rural Land Use Center; k) Mosquitoes: During certain times of the year, mosquitoes may present a significant nuisance. The County does not have a mosquito control program. Any spraying or other control will be the responsibility of the property owners; l) Wildlife: Wildlife such as skunks, snakes, and prairie dogs occur more frequently than in more built-up 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; m) 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; n) Adjacent agricultural uses: Farming practices on this and adjacent properties can produce odors, noise and dust. These are a normal part of agriculture and should be expected to occur; o) 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.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the staff findings and the Rural Land Use Center Director and Advisory Board and Staff recommendation and approve the Buckhorn Ranch Preliminary Rural Land Plan (#99-RLP0033), with the findings and conditions as revised and outlined.
Motion carried 2 - 0.
The hearing adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2000
(#576 & #577)
The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 in regular session with Frank Lancaster, County Manager. Chair Olson presided and Commissioner Disney was present; also present were: Dave Spencer, Director of Facilities; Carol Block, Director of Finance; Donna Hart, Commissioners' Administrative Manager; Ralph Jacobs, Director Human Resources; Rob Helmick, Senior Planner; Kathy Snell, Director Health & Human Services; Ginny Riley, Director Human Services; Glen Rathgeber, Deputy Director Human Services; and Deni LaRue, Community Information Manager. Recording Clerk, Sherry Graves.
1. OPEN SESSION FOR PUBLIC COMMENT: John Meleski submitted and read aloud a memo prepared by him as an individual, not as a member of an ad-hoc citizens committee, regarding the remodeling of the existing Larimer County Courthouse versus constructing a new office building. The memo described Mr. Meleski's reasons for his objections to the hiring of Hensel Phelps Construction Company and the deviations being made from the design, and listed the items he has scrutinized during the past week (such as construction drawings, memos, etc.). In the memo, Mr. Meleski outlined his reasons for reaching the conclusion that the Commissioners should go back to the drawing board before proceeding with a decision whether or not to remodel the existing building or build new. Mr. Meleski asked for clarification from the Board of the questions he raised and asked why the rush? Commissioner Disney responded to Mr. Meleski that the design he has reviewed was a conceptual design and changes have been made to it. Chair Olson stated that the reason this question has to go to election is because of the way the ballot language was written when approved and they cannot build new without voter approval. Mr. Lancaster stated that requests for proposals are out for a 3rd party architectural firm to do a comparative analysis of build versus remodel, which are due back February 16, 2000, and that information will be used to help make the decision. Mr. Lancaster further explained to Mr. Meleski that to allow Mr. Spencer to waste time and taxpayers money working on a final design and provide the details he is requesting in his memo, would be unwise. Much discussion followed.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR WEEK OF JANUARY 31, 2000:
M O T I O N
Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Minutes for the week of January 31, 2000, as submitted.
Motion carried 2 - 0.
3. APPROVAL OF SCHEDULE FOR WEEK OF FEBRUARY 14, 2000:
M O T I O N
Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Schedule for the week of February 14, 2000, as submitted.
Motion carried 2 - 0.
-- Ms. Hart reviewed the pending invitations with the Board.
4. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA:
M O T I O N
Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the following Petitions for Abatement and documents as listed on the Consent Agenda for Document Review on February 8, 2000:
PETITIONS FOR ABATEMENT, as recommended by the County Assessor, were approved for the following: S.G. Maxwell & Sons, Ltd. (4 Petitions); Dana E. Shirk; Gateway American Properties, LLC.; Lawrence L. & Jacquelyn D. Bebo (2 Petitions); Fred Blesch; and TCI Satellite Entertainment.
MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS: Revised Inclement Weather Policy Section 410 of the Larimer County Personnel Policy Manual; Request to Increase a current vacant half-time Public Health Nurse Position to full time (PUBH 3010); Rescind the appointment of Karen Wagner made on January 25, 2000 to the Environmental Advisory Board; and Appoint Karen Wagner to the Planning Commission to fill an unexpired term ending June 30, 2001.
LIQUOR LICENSES: County approval for renewal of liquor licenses was granted to Schmidts Olde Time Bakery, LTD. - 6% - Loveland, CO.; Cloverleaf Race Track - 6% - Loveland, CO.; Horsetooth Marina Resort, Inc. - 3.2% - Fort Collins, CO.; and A Hunt Club - 6% - Fort Collins, CO. Licenses were issued to: Columbine Lodge - 3.2% - Bellevue, CO. and a Temporary License to Windjammer Roadhouse, LLC. - 6% - Loveland, CO.
A00-19 PURCHASE OF SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE WELD COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS ON BEHALF OF THE WELD COUNTY
DIVISION OF HUMAN SERVICES AREA AGENCY ON AGING
(Reciprocal Ombudsman Services for OOA Ombudsman Program)
A00-20 AGREEMENT CONCERNING ROAD IMPROVEMENTS ON COUNTY
ROAD 17 AND COUNTY ROAD 28 BETWEEN THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND CROSSROADS COVENANT
A00-21 CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT PURCHASE OF SERVICES
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AND COLORADO CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES,
INC. (Collection Services)
A00-22 CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT PURCHASE OF SERVICES
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AND GENOMICS INTERNATION DBA
NATIONAL LEGAL LABORATORES, INC. (Genetic Testing)
A00-23 CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT PURCHASE OF LEGAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AND GEORGE HASS, LARIMER COUNTY
ATTORNEY (Legal Services)
D00-02 DEED OF DEDICATION OF PROPERTY AS RIGHT-OF-WAY
FOR PN #162 FROM MARION MONROE
D00-03 DEED OF DEDICATION OF PROPERTY AS RIGHT-OF-WAY FROM
QUIN M. L.L.C. FORMERLY QUIN M. INVESTMENTS, LTD.
(Mall Road Improvements)
R00-27s FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MARIANNA
PARK SUBDIVISION RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION
Motion carried 2 - 0.
5. APPOINTMENT OF THE CHAIRMAN FOR GRIEVANCE REVIEW BOARD: Mr. Jacobs informed the Board that the Larimer County Personnel Policy Manual provides employees with an opportunity to grieve dismissal from employment, if they choose to do so; he noted that a former employee is exercising this right and a review board must be appointed to hear his grievance and the County Commissioners must select a chairperson for this board who has labor relations, personnel management and/or legal background. Mr. Jacobs stated that the County Attorney's Office has recommended Dan Daly be selected as the chairperson for the review board, as he has the necessary experience and training required and provides this kind of service for Poudre R-1 School District, and is available on February 24, 2000, when the grievance is scheduled; Mr. Jacobs stated that he concurs with this recommendation.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the selection of Dan Daly to be the Chairperson of the Guzman Grievance Review Board.
Motion carried 2 - 0.
6. CONSIDERATION OF FORT COLLINS PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION FOR SHERIFF'S ADMINISTRATION BUILDING: Mr. Lancaster informed the Board that last week the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board voted 5 to 1 to disapprove the County's proposed plans for the Sheriff's Administration Building for the following three reasons: 1) The access to the proposed facility did not align with the existing or approved driveways across Midpoint Drive; 2) There was a lack of information to determine if public improvements in the public right of way were to be designed to City standards; and 3) The design of the temporary retention pond was not adequate to determine that it could be converted to a detention pond consistent with the approved drainage master plan for the Prospect East Industrial Park. Mr. Lancaster submitted a memo he received this morning from the City Manager addressing this issue and stating that the County does not have the authority to build this building without their approval. Much discussion followed; Mr. Spencer explained the proposed design in detail, noting that what the City is requiring would interfere with a detention pond planned for the site. Commissioner Disney suggested that this matter be discussed further with the County Attorney during Legal Matters today. Mr. Lancaster stated that the Board needs to take action today to affirm or overrule the City's recommendation of denial for the Sheriff's Administration Building.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners reject the recommendation of denial from the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board for the proposed Sheriff's Administration Building on Midpoint Drive in Fort Collins.
Motion carried 2 - 0.
7. DISCUSSION OF HUMAN RESOURCE GRANT PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS: Ms. Riley stated that at the end of the last budget process, they were asked to review how the Human Resource Grant (HRG) Program is operated; she noted they are in the planning and thought stages for a recommendation, but wanted to discuss their thoughts with the Board. Ms. Riley stated that a meeting was held to review all the issues of this program and she submitted and reviewed in detail a draft outlining the questions raised about the current HRG program and assumptions made to start formulating a recommendation. Ms. Riley stated that what they are proposing is that current contracts with community nonprofits expire June 30, 2000 and the HHS Director will design a criteria and process involving the HHS department heads to recommend to the Commissioners which of those contracts should be extended for the period of July 1, 2000 to December 31, 2000; this should be completed by March 30, 2000 to give adequate notice to the current grantee agencies. By the submittal deadline for 2001 budget proposals, the HHS Director will work with the HHS department heads to recommend to the Commissioners the priorities for funding for 2001, the allocation process and amount of funds requested for fiscal year January 1 to December 31, 2001. A new name, which adequately expresses the intent of this funding. will be proposed to replace the current "grant program". Much discussion followed.
Commissioner Disney stated that he is not sure these assumptions and solutions address the problem, as he sees it; he understood they were going to re-examine the allocation process because instead of just handing out money, we should be contracting for services that compliment or support County programs and have contractual expectations based on the money allocated. Ms. Snell stated that they need to determine if they are actually making a difference; the Board stated that, in their opinion, they are going in the right direction. Mr. Lancaster stated that this subject should be included on the agenda for the meeting this Thursday night with the Fort Collins City Council.
-- Mr. Lancaster asked the Board for additional agenda items they would like to discuss at the Joint Meeting with the Fort Collins City Council this Thursday evening; he noted that Planning Director Larry Timm stated that the subjects of Fossil Creek, TDU's, and IGA's are active at the staff level and premature for discussion with the City. The Board concurred. Mr. Lancaster asked if the Board wanted to discuss the truck bypass; Commissioner Disney stated the process for problem identification for transportation issues in northeast Fort Collins and northern Larimer County should be discussed. Other discussion items should be construction of facilities in each others jurisdictions and a briefing on the Fairgrounds.
-- Commissioner Disney reported that he was part of a consultant selection team for the North Front Range Transportation and Air Quality Planning Council and two consultants were interviewed to perform the task of doing a regional study of transportation funding alternatives; he noted that a consultant has been selected. He noted that once the results are in from this study, we need to have some regional discussions to see if there are means within whereby the municipalities, counties, and state can meet some of their needs regionally rather than each one doing their own thing, such as asking for an additional sales tax to meet our transportation needs.
-- Commissioner Disney reported that Ben Herman, the lead consultant for the I-25 Corridor Study, has quit and gone to work for a firm in Boulder; he also reported that Weld County decided not to participate financially in this Study.
At this time, County Attorney Jeannine Haag, Mark Peterson, County Engineer, and Rex Burns, Project Engineer, joined the meeting for Legal Matters.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners go into Executive Session at 10:50 a.m. to discuss potential litigation.
Motion carried 2 - 0.
The Executive Session ended at 12 o'clock noon; no action taken.
LIQUOR LICENSE SHOW CAUSE HEARING
REGARDING MISHAWAKA INN
(#577 & 578)
The Board of County Commissioners met at 1:30 p.m. with County Attorney George Hass for a Show Cause Hearing concerning Christopher Jones, DBA the Mishawaka Inn, 13714 Poudre Canyon Road, Bellvue, CO 80512, License Number 05-39005-0000. Chair Olson presided, Commissioners Disney and Rennels were present. Recording Clerk: Gael Cookman.
Mr. Hass, acting as the Hearing Officer, noted that this Show Cause Hearing was being held in response to a possible liquor violation that was held at the Mishawaka Inn on October 15, 1999 during which a private party was held and the possibility of underage drinking took place. Mr. Hass then introduced Don Johnson, Special Prosecutor for Larimer County.
Erik Fisher, Attorney for Christopher Jones, conducted an opening statement during which he noted that the underage individuals attending this private party at the Mishawaka on the evening of October 15, 1999, had all consumed alcohol prior to entering the establishment, and that they had not been served alcohol at the Mishawaka Inn during the course of the evening.
Mr. Johnson called Deputy Sheriff Perry Malasani to the podium to be sworn in. Mr. Johnson asked Deputy Malasani to review the night in question for the Board. Deputy Malasani explained that he and Deputy Sunken were first called to the Mishawaka Inn to escort an ambulance down the mountain; he explained that part of their duties now include responding to both fire and ambulance calls for assistance. Deputy Malasani noted that the ambulance, which had transported an extremely intoxicated woman from the establishment to Poudre Valley Hospital, had already left the scene when they arrived, but when they entered the Mishawaka Inn they immediately noticed two intoxicated individuals "passed out", one on the floor and one on a table in the rear of the bar; he noted that there were between 50 - 60 college-aged patrons within the bar, and lots of beer bottles and glasses with alcoholic beverages in them on the tables within this establishment. Mr. Johnson presented Plaintiff's Exhibit 1, which was a drawing of the Mishawaka Inn interior and surrounding area, and Deputy Malasani further explained that after speaking with the bartender, the cook and the event coordinator, he determined that a CSU Fraternity had rented the Mishawaka Inn to host a private party for the evening, and that the patrons had been bused to the establishment; he noted that after initially assessing the condition of the two individuals that were passed-out, he and Deputy Sunken split the patrons in groups of two - those under the age of 21, and those over the age of 21. Deputy Malasani explained that they began administering breathalyzer tests to those patrons that were under the age of 21; he stated that he issued 14 citations for underage drinking after conducting the tests. Mr. Johnson introduced and reviewed the Field Incident Report filed by Deputy Malasani (Plaintiff's Exhibit 3). Finally, Deputy Malasani noted that after questioning the bartender, he determined that there was no accurate system in place to check for identification to ensure that underage drinking was not taking place.
Mr. Fisher cross examined Deputy Malasani and asked if Deputy Malasani knew whether or not the two "passed-out" patrons were under the age of 21. Deputy Malasani responded that indeed both of those individuals were underage. Mr. Fisher noted that of all the individuals that were cited on that evening, not one admitted to being served alcohol at the Mishawaka Inn, and that all charges against the bartender have been dismissed; he then noted for the record that the Mishawaka Inn does not sell bottled beer, or serve alcoholic beverages in glasses. Mr. Fisher asked Deputy Malasani if he was certain that there were beer bottles in the establishment, or if they may have been beer cans instead, and Deputy Malasani noted that he was sure there were numerous bottles of beer within the establishment.
Mr. Johnson then called Deputy Wayne Nestlerode to the podium to be sworn in and presented Plaintiff's Exhibit 2, Deputy Nestlerode's Supplemental Field Incident Report regarding Sara Ward - the woman that was transported to Poudre Valley Hospital (PVH). Deputy Nestlerode stated that he did interview Ms. Ward while she was at PVH, and determined that Ms. Ward had been drinking on the bus while enroute to the Mishawaka Inn; however, she did not consume any alcoholic beverages at the Mishawaka Inn as she was too intoxicated and suffering from alcohol poisoning soon after her arrival at the Mishawaka Inn. Mr. Fisher cross examined and emphasized that Ms. Ward never consumed any alcoholic beverages while at the Mishawaka Inn; he also noted that the bartender of the Mishawaka Inn was the person who called the ambulance for Ms. Ward.
At this time Mr. Johnson called Deputy Sunken to the podium to be sworn in. Deputy Sunken explained that he was in charge of clearing the bus, and moving the patrons into the bus; he noted that the bus was littered with both open and unopened liquor bottles. Deputy Sunken explained that after clearing the bus, he removed four large trash bags full of various types of alcohol bottles.
Mr. Fisher called Christine Walen, to be sworn in. Ms. Walen explained that she has been employed at the Mishawaka Inn for eight years and that she was the bartender at the Mishawaka Inn on the night of October 15, 1999. Mr. Fisher asked Ms. Walen how she determined who was of legal age to consume alcohol and she replied that there was one doorman checking for identification at the front door, and that he stamped the hands of the 21 year olds with an owl, and that she did not serve any alcohol to anybody without a stamp. Ms. Walen explained that she stopped serving alcohol at midnight because the kids were getting out of hand; she also noted that she called the ambulance for Ms. Ward because she could tell that Ms. Ward had had too much to drink and needed some assistance. Ms. Walen explained that the Mishawaka Inn had not served beer in bottles, or used glasses to serve drinks in, for about 6 years; she noted that all of their mixed drinks are served in plastic glasses, and if there were bottles of beer in the establishment, then the kids must have smuggled them in. Mr. Johnson cross-examined and asked Ms. Walen if she ever confiscated beer or other alcoholic beverages that get smuggled in. Ms. Walen explained that she did confiscated these items if she becomes aware of them. Mr. Johnson asked Ms. Walen why she did not offer assistance to the two individuals that were passed out and she explained that she did not see these individuals and was not aware of them until the Deputies arrived.
Deputies Malasani and Sunken were recalled to the podium to clarify some facts for the Board, specifically whether or not there were actually bottles of beer in the establishment rather than cans of beer. Deputy Malasani stated that he was positive that he saw numerous bottles of beer within the establishment. The Board also asked Deputy Sunken if he noticed any "stamped owls" on the patrons, since he was in charge of the 21-year-old group after they split them apart. Deputy Sunken noted that he did not observe a stamp on any individual.
At this time Chair Olson closed the public portion of the hearing, and Mr. Hass gave the Board their options for action concerning this incident: 1) to revoke the license, 2) to suspend the license, 3) to suspend the license but allow for some of that time to be held in abeyance, or allow for a fine to be paid in lieu of suspension, and 4) to place certain conditions on the license.
During discussion, Commissioner Disney stated that in his opinion at least two violations occurred at the Mishawaka Inn during the evening of October 15, 1999: 1) that the establishment was negligent in providing adequate staff to screen for underage drinkers, and 2) that the license holder was guilty of allowing alcoholic beverages to be brought in from the outside; he recommended a 30 day suspension for the Mishawaka Inn. Commissioner Rennels agreed that they were not adequately staffed and the bartender should have shut the place down sooner, with only one doorman, one bartender, and one off-duty cook on site. The Board unanimously agreed that the suspension should go into effect June 1 - June 30, 2000, because if they were to impose the suspension now, it would not make as much of an impact on the owners since the Mishawaka Inn is only open on the weekends during the winter months.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners suspend the liquor license of Christopher Jones, d/b/a Mishawaka Inn, license number 05-39005-0000, for a period of 30 days effective June 1 - June 30, 2000. In addition, the following conditions will be placed on the license whenever the licensee agrees to host private parties: 1) Security will be required at both entrances, 2) wrist bands will be required for proper identification of legal age drinkers, and 3) the licensee will be required to hire off duty policemen/deputies as additional security to patrol during these private parties.
Motion carried 3-0.
Meeting adjourned at 4:00 p.m.
CHERYL OLSON, CHAIR
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MYRNA J. RODENBERGER
LARIMER COUNTY CLERK & RECORDER
( S E A L )
Sherry E. Graves, Deputy County Clerk
Gael M. Cookman, Deputy County Clerk