Dream Lake iced over - RMNP

Larimer County Offices, Courts, and Landfill are all closed on Monday, Sept. 5, 2016 for the Labor Day Holiday. Critical services at Larimer County are not interrupted by closures. Critical services at Larimer County are not disrupted by closures.

> Meetings & Minutes > Commissioners' Minutes > BCC Minutes for 02/07/05  



Monday, FEBRUARY 7, 2005





The Board of County Commissioners met at 3:00 p.m. with Rob Helmick, Principal Planner.  Chair Rennels presided, and Commissioners Wagner and Gibson were present.  Also present were:  Al Kadera, and Porter Ingrum, Planning Department; Claudia DeLude, Code Enforcement; Doug Ryan, Health Department; Roxann Hayes, Engineering Department; Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney; and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk.


Chair Rennels opened the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance and asked for public comment on the Larimer County Land Use Code and the County Budget.  No one addressed the Board regarding these topics.   Ms. DeLude requested the Board removed Item #1 from the agenda; The Kromer Zoning Violation, File# 01-ZV0227, as the property owner has submitted an application to the County regarding this issue.  Chair Rennels then noted that the following item is on consent and would not be discussed unless requested by the Board, staff, or members of the audience.


2.  TAFT HILL MINOR LAND DIVISION; 04-S2375:  This is a request for a Minor Land Division to adjust the boundary line between two contiguous parcels and create two lots.  The 169.71 acre property is located along the southern edge of Michaud Lane, North of Burlington Northern Railroad and east of Poudre River.  The property currently contains four small office buildings associated with a mining operation.  The applicant requests a Minor Land Division to adjust the boundary line between two parcels and therefore create two lots.  The applicant originally applied for a Boundary Line Adjustment, however because one of the new parcels will be less than 35 acres the applicant is required to apply for a Minor Land Division.  The Land Surveyor of the Larimer County Engineering Department noted five corrections to be made prior to the recording of the MLD.   The Engineering Department provided comments regarding transportation /access issues, drainage/ floodplain / erosion control issues and fees.  Taft Hill Road is an Arterial Road that requires a 120-foot right-of-way.  The existing and proposed right-of-way will need to be dedicated on the Final Plat.  The permits section of the Planning Department provided comments (refer to comments from Katherine Huber) regarding addressing concerns for this property.  The current address for lot 2 will be changing to correspond to the Larimer County addressing system.   The proposed Minor Land Division is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Minor Land Division process as contained in Section 5.4.3 of the Larimer County Land Use Code.  The purpose is to create two lots.  Staff findings are that the proposed Taft Hill Minor Land Division complies with the Review Criteria for Minor Land Divisions as contained in Section 5.4.3 of the Larimer County Land Use Code.  The Development Services Team Recommendation is for approval of the Taft Hill Minor Land Division (File #04-S2375) subject to the following conditions and authorization for the chairman to sign the plat when the conditions are met and the plat is presented for signature:  1.  Prior to the recordation of the MLD Plat the applicant shall address the Engineering Comments from Dale Greer in the referral letter dated December 23, 2004.  2.  Prior to the recordation of the MLD Plat the applicant shall address the Engineering Comments from Roxann Hayes in the referral letter dated December 30, 2004.  3.  All conditions of approval shall be met and the Final Plat recorded by August 7, 2005 or this approval shall be null and void. 




Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board approve the Taft Hill Minor Land Division, File #04-S2375, as presented and outlined above.


Motion carried 3-0.


Ms. Delude then mentioned that she has been in contact with the attorney for the Carnes Zoning Violation, File #03-ZV0130, and is working with him towards a resolution on this item; therefore, Ms. Delude requested the Board table this item to March 28, 2005, at 3:00 p.m.




Commissioner Wagner moved that the Board table the Carnes Zoning Violation, File #03-ZV0130, to March 28, 2005 at 3:00 p.m.


Motion carried 3-0.


Finally, Mr. Helmick noted that the Building Code Enforcement Division has requested the Board table the Kloberdanz Building Code Violation, File #04-BV0153, to May 2, 2005, at 3:00 p.m., as they too are working with the property owner towards a resolution concerning this matter.




Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board table the Kloberdanz Building Code Violation, File# 04-BV0153, to May 2, 2005, at 3:00 p.m.


Motion carried 3-0.


The meeting recessed at 3:05 p.m.





The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 6:30 p.m. with Rob Helmick, Principal Planner.  Chair Rennels presided, and Commissioners Wagner and Gibson were present.  Also present were:  Matt Lafferty, Planning Department; Doug Ryan, Health Department; Christie Coleman, Engineering Department; Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney; and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk.


Chair Rennels opened the meeting by explaining there is one item on the agenda regarding the Moser Subdivision Preliminary Plat.  Mr. Lafferty gave a brief description of the project as noted below:


2.  MOSER SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT; 04-S2287:  This is a request for a Preliminary Plat for the subdivision of a 10 acre parcel into three (3) residential lots.  Currently, one residential use exists on the property.  Prior to the submittal of this application for Preliminary Plat, the applicant processed a General Development Plan application for the project, primarily in an effort to appeal the connectivity standards of the Larimer County Land Use Code.  Due to the lack of connectivity, the General Development Plan application received a recommendation of denial by the Development Services Team and the Planning Commission, which recommendations were upheld by the Board of County Commissioners.  Since the denial of the applicant’s General Development application, a new plan has been prepared with a plan for connectivity.  On October 20, 2004 the Development Services Team presented the Preliminary Plat for the Moser Subdivision to the Larimer County Planning Commission. The primary topic of discussion during the Planning Commission meeting revolved around the applicant’s proposal for connectivity, which would not be through their own development site, but rather through the adjacent subdivision Arleigh Acres.  After hearing from all affected parties, the Planning Commission moved to deny the Preliminary Plat application, stating that connectivity from County Road 4 to Meining Road as discussed during the General Development Plan application should occur through the applicants’ property not through the adjacent subdivision.  The Planning Commission further noted that it seemed un-fair to place the impacts of the proposed development on adjacent property owners.  Aside from the connectivity issue there were only minor discussions regarding the applicant appeal to the required road width due to the location of existing structures on the property.  After hearing the public testimony and the Planning Commissions’ discussion regarding connectivity through the adjacent development, which the Development Services Team was supporting, our recommendation has changed.  While still not a popular recommendation with the applicant and residents along Meining Road in Kent Estates, the Development Services Team still believes that connectivity is necessary between County Road 4 and Meining Road, and that such connectivity should occur along the Melody Road alignment through the subject property, which was also the position of the Planning Commission.  However, the applicant does not agree with the Development Services Team regarding this issue, therefore, a recommendation of denial is being made.


Mr. Lafferty displayed some photos of the property and of the numerous access points already in use along Meining Road.   Commissioner Gibson questioned why a 3 lot subdivision is being required to put in a road for a 30 lot subdivision when that road should have been constructed in the first place.  Mr. Lafferty stated that the Board of County Commissioners at the time felt it was important enough to obtain the easement, but the road itself was never constructed all the way through.  The applicant, Nan Fisher, addressed the Board noting that she is the daughter of Gerald Moser and that she and her sister Christina Kozowski, are working on this project as her father wished to divide the property and give building lots to each of the sisters.  Ms. Fisher agreed that the main issue surrounds connectivity and drew similarities of her application and the McDonald subdivision application that was recently approved by the Board.  Ms. Fisher stated that the McDonald subdivision was situated in a similar manner and they were not required to build a road.  Ms. Fisher explained that the Chief of the Berthoud Fire Department stated he has no issues with the access point she proposes.  Ms. Fisher stated that she will not be imposing on anyone but her father; and finally, Ms. Fisher stated that the McDonald subdivision set a precedent and that their application should not have to provide the connectivity either.  Commissioner Wagner asked if anything had changed since on her application, or if Ms. Fisher was here again before the Board due to her recent knowledge of the McDonald subdivision approval.  Ms. Fisher stated that nothing has changed in her application since it was last denied, and yes, the knowledge of the McDonald subdivision is what prompted her to request the meeting.  Commissioner Gibson asked if Ms. Fisher’s proposal was listed in the staff report.  Ms. Fisher stated that it was and some discussion ensued regarding the lots and how they were situated.  Ms. Fisher noted that with her proposal the tree line located on the lot to the north of their property would be preserved, and if in fact, the road was built as the Planning Department requires, then those trees would need to be removed or relocated.  Finally, Ms. Fisher stated that a preliminary estimate of the cost of building the road was approximately $19,000 to $20,000; she stated this alone would be cost prohibitive for them to proceed with this development.


At this time, Chair Rennels opened up the hearing for public comment and Jim Coleman addressed the Board.  Mr. Coleman stated that he is not opposed to the Moser’s subdividing their property; however, he is concerned with the idea of an increase in traffic in the neighborhood.  Mr. Coleman stated that the quiet nature of their neighborhood is most appealing and he does not want that tampered with.  Mr. Coleman then read a letter from Bill Aspden, adjoining neighbors in Kent Estates, who could not attend the meeting this evening.  Mr. Aspden stated that in his opinion, the Moser’s should be able to subdivide their property without having to “chop up” the neighborhood with additional roads.  Mr. Aspden outlined several other recently approved subdivisions in the area that used cul-de-sac entrances, or one entrance for all properties, and no emergency exits are present. 


George Hoffmann addressed the Board noting that he is Vice President of the Culver Lateral Ditch Company.  Mr. Hoffmann explained how the ditches are amassed throughout this area, and noted that in times of very wet weather, there is the potential for serious problems.  Mr. Hoffmann stated that if the Board was inclined to require the road be built, then there will need to be provisions to address the issue of crossing the ditch.


Barbara Bridgman noted her concern with additional traffic.  Ms. Bridgman stated that they moved to the area due to the fact that it was a dead end road, and they had an expectation that it would remain as such.  She strongly objected to the road being built off of Meining Road.  Ms. Bridgman then read a letter from Francis and Susan McCarley, neighbors who also could not attend the meeting.  The McCarley’s stated their concerns as follows:  1. It is not cost effective for the Moser family to build the road.  2.  Traffic on County Road 23 is already causing problems in their neighborhood, in terms of people speeding and trying to cut through the side streets that result in dead end roads.  3.  It will disrupt the quiet in their neighborhood and cause safety issues for those pedestrians and children using the roads.  4.  The Moser’s should be able to use County Road 4 as there will be minimal traffic entering/exiting their subdivision.  5.  Emergency equipment will not use the dirt road, as it will be quicker for them traveling on the major roads.  6.  The law that provides for adverse possession, in that the easement has not been used by the county for over 20 years, and the surrounding property owners have now put in pipes for ditches, fencing, planting of field grasses and alfalfa, and the have controlled the thistle on this property. 


Michael Saur also noted that they purchased land in this area due to the quiet environment; he stated that the access the Planning Department proposes seems to be backwards.  Mr. Saur reiterated that the Berthoud Fire Chief, Chief Charles, stated that he supports the Moser’s proposal. 


George Hughey stated that he does not see the need for the road, and is opposed to the additional traffic it may create. 


Alan Lawrence stated his concern that if the County forces this connectivity, it might cause homeowners in the area to further subdivide since the rural feel of the area would be damaged. 


Alfonso Mestas stated that if the County forces a road though this area, people will travel down it expecting it to take them through and they will be upset when they reach a dead end.  Mr. Mestas noted that the traffic is already bad in this area.


Peter Bridgman asked for the Board’s support in this matter; he noted that neither the neighbors nor the Moser wish to push this road through.  Mr. Bridgman also addressed the issue of adverse possession and requested the Board honor the law in this matter.  Commissioner Gibson asked the County Attorney to clarify the law on adverse possession.  Ms. Haag stated that she was not aware of the law stating that the County would lose rights to an easement once it is granted, regardless of the length of time it remains unused.  Mr. Bridgman presented a letter from Fire Chief Charles, stating that the Fire Department would prefer to utilize the paved roads (rather than the unpaved Meining Road) as they provide a more timely response to both medical and fire incidents.  Mr. Bridgman requested the Board exercise good judgment and common sense when rendering a decision about this issue.


Mr. Hoffman again addressed the Board and read a letter from Phil West, noting his opposition to construction of a new road; Chair Rennels noted that the Board was in receipt of the letter from Mr. West via e-mail.


Ladon Kee also reiterated that a precedent has been set by the approval of the McDonald subdivision.  Mr. Key stated that there are adjoining properties in this neighborhood that were not required to build a road, but use a cul-de-sac entrance/exit as well.  Chair Rennels asked staff if the adjoining properties were approved prior to the Board’s adoption of the Land Use Code.  Mr. Lafferty replied in the affirmative and explained that the two adjoining properties utilizing the cul-de-sac entrance/exit went through the Minor Residential Development process, not the subdivision process.  Chair Rennels questioned why Meining Road was never connected.  Mr. Lafferty noted that there was a dairy farm in the way of the road, and it was assumed that once the dairy farm ceased to exist, then the road would be put through; however, this never happened. 


Ken Fox stated that the Moser’s are good neighbors and it would be foolish to run a road straight up through a ditch.


Lloy Collier stated that they do not want the connectivity, and would rather have the privacy, which is why they choose to live where they are, and not in the city limits.


At this time Chair Rennels closed public comment.  Ms. Fisher wanted to be sure the Board understood that there would only be one access as the current driveway would be closed off and the access point would be moved to accommodate one entrance/exit for all three lots.  Chair Rennels also noted that it appeared there was a secondary request to appeal the 60 foot requirement for internal roads, and allow a 50 foot wide road instead.  Ms. Fisher stated that yes; this is what she is requesting as they are short by approximately 10 feet.  Commissioner Gibson noted that connectivity is always an issue and he agrees that all applications must be looked at on a case by case basis.  Commissioner Gibson explained that this application is for family use, that the lot sizes are consistent with the neighborhood, that crossing the ditch would be a concern for all, and that a precedent has been set, although reluctantly so.  Commissioner Gibson stated that he would support the application and not require the road, provided only one access is utilized.  Commissioner Wagner noted that she supports the connectivity requirement in the Land Use Code; however, she feels strongly about neighborhoods and supports connectivity in larger subdivision, versus the small three lot family development that is being considered in this application.  Chair Rennels noted as the properties originally began to develop the road connectivity should have been made and not based upon future assumptions; she further noted that this one small subdivision would not solve the connectivity problem, so in this case, she too would support the application without requiring the connectivity.  Mr. Helmick stated that the purpose of the waiver process is to look at applications on a case by case basis.  He explained that just because an application is approved with a waiver it should not be construed as precedent setting; it merely means that in the one instance deviating from the standard would be acceptable, but is should not necessarily be applied across all instances.  Mr. Helmick also noted that this neighborhood is a “poster child” for bad planning, and is a good example of why connectivity is crucial in land use planning.  Mr. Lafferty stated that since the Board was inclined to approve this application, the conditions outlined in the staff report will constitute the staff recommendation, minus condition number 6, which would have required the connectivity.  Recommended conditions are as follows: 


1.  The Final Plat of the Moser Subdivision shall be consistent with the plans, documents and representations contained in file #04-S2287, unless modified by the conditions of approval.  2.  The applicant shall execute a Development Agreement and provide a disclosure notice for final plat approval by the County as part of the Final Plat.  These documents shall be recorded with the Final Plat, and shall provide notice to all future lot owners of the conditions of approval and issues, costs and fees associated with the approval of this project.  3.  The following fees shall be collected at building issuance for new single family dwellings:  Thompson R2-J School Fees, Larimer County fees for County and Regional Transportation Capital Expansion, and Larimer County Park Fees (in Lieu of land dedication).  The fee amount that is current at the time of building permit shall apply.  4.  Passive Radon Mitigation measures shall be included in the construction of residential dwellings on the approved lots.  The results of a radon test once the structure is enclosed but prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy shall be submitted to the Planning Department.  As an alternative, a builder may present a prepaid receipt for a radon tester, which specifies that a test will be conducted within 30 days.  A permanent certificate of occupancy can be issued when the prepaid receipt is submitted.  5.  Prior to the recordation of the Final Plat the applicant shall seek approval of a variance for the setback of existing garage from the proposed Moser Road.  Should the variance not be approved the applicant shall move or remove the building from the non-conforming location.




Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Moser Subdivision Preliminary Plat, File #04-S2287, as outlined by the conditions listed above.


Motion carried 3-0.


With regard to the appeal for the internal road width, Mr. Lafferty recommended the following condition: 


1.  The internal road for the subdivision shall be constructed to the specifications of the Larimer County Engineering Department requirements for such roads.  Said road shall be contained within a 50 foot wide right-of-way, rather than the typical 60 feet.




Commissioner Wagner moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the applicants request for an appeal to Section 9.7.3 of the Larimer County Land Use Code to allow a 50 foot right-of-way internal road, rather than the 60 foot requirement, which would be the standard requirement.


Motion carried 3-0.


There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m.





(#12 & 13)


The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:30 a.m. with County Manager Frank Lancaster.  Chair Rennels presided and Commissioners Wagner and Gibson were present.  Also present were: Neil Gluckman, Donna Hart, and Deni LaRue, Commissioner’s Office; Scott Doyle, Clerk & Recorder; Wynette Cerciello, and John Gamlin, Human Resources Department; Tracy Hines, Finance Department; Larry Timm, Rob Helmick, Russ Legg, and Claudia Delude, Planning Department; and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk.


1.  PUBLIC COMMENT:   Hal Cochrane presented a slide show for the Board regarding his study of the Parks Department proposed North End Campground/RV Park.  Mr. Cochrane restated his opinion that this proposal is not cost effective and should not be considered for approval. 


Larry Lechner also addressed the Board noting his objections to the North End Campground; he stated that the project is a non-conforming use and that surrounding communities, such as LaPorte, are also not in favor of the campground being sited in Bellvue.


Gary Wamsley, Sharlynn Wamsley, and Joyce Kilmer addressed the Board regarding sales or transfer of the properties that are in the Big Thompson flood plain.  The Wamsley's presented the Board with a copy of the Book Reflection on the River, and a collection of the newspaper clippings from the Big Thompson Flood and the events afterwards.  Discussion ensued regarding the plans the County has to sell these parcels, with the Wamsley's and Ms. Kilmer noting their concerns with trespassers in the area, and their desire to maintain the sanctity of this land.  The Board invited them to the worksession scheduled for this topic on Thursday, February 10, 2005.  Mr. Wamsely noted that he would be interested and happy to serve on an advisory committee regarding this issue. 




Commissioner Wagner requested an amendment to the minutes to include the discussion regarding the primary seatbelt law.  Ms. Cookman stated that she would include this discussion item in the minutes.




Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the minutes for the week of January 31, 2005, with the addition of the discussion regarding the primary seatbelt law.


Motion carried 3-0.


3.  REVIEW OF THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK OF FEBRUARY 14, 2005Ms. Hart reviewed the upcoming schedule with the Board.






Commissioner Wagner moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the following items as presented on the Consent Agenda for February 8, 2005:


PETITIONS FOR ABATEMENT:  As recommended by the County Assessor, the following petitions for abatement are approved:   Moser Mach Tool; Milne; Mally; Clark; Donnelly; Szejna Enterprises; Blackford; Young; Pixler; Natural Fort Grazing, LTD.
























MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS:   West Hiawatha Heights Amended Plat Block 11, Lots 2A, 2B, 3A and 3B; Audit Engagement Letter from Grant Thornton for 2004 Annual Audit; Annual Certification of Larimer County Road Mileage to the Colorado Department of Transportation.


LIQUOR LICENSES:  The following licenses were both approved and issued:  Red Feather Café and Bar – Tavern – Red Feather Lakes; Blue Moon Wine and Spirits – Retail Liquor Store – Loveland; The Corner Pub – Tavern – Laporte; South Taft Liquor – Retail Liquor Store – Fort Collins.  The following license was issued:  Ptarmigan Country Club – Hotel and Restaurant with Optional Premises – Fort Collins.

Motion carried 3-0.


5.  RECOGNITION OF TRACY HINES, SALES TAX ADMINISTRATOR:   Mr. Lancaster noted that during the past two years Ms. Hines has recovered over $330,000 in sales tax owed to Larimer County.  Mr. Lancaster stated that it was hard work and diligence on behalf of Ms. Hines to accomplish this.  The Board publicly thanked Ms. Hines for her efforts. 


6.  COMMISSIONERS INPUT REGARDING ELECTED OFFICIAL ACTIVITIES ON STATEWIDE AND/OR NATIONAL LEVELS:  Mr. Doyle explained that he has been requested to serve on election committees both statewide and nationally; he noted that there are costs associated with this interaction, mainly in the form of travel expenses.  Mr. Doyle stated that he has the funds to cover the additional expenses and noted his involvement thus far has been invaluable to Larimer County in terms of impacting decisions on a nationwide level and being progressive, rather than reactive to new Federal laws and regulations that have recently be enacted. Mr. Doyle requested the Board's support his continued involvement in this capacity.  Chair Rennels noted that it is quite a compliment that Mr. Doyle has been asked to participate at this level.  Commissioner Gibson stated that Mr. Doyle's ideas and interaction with the committees has been very positive for Larimer County as a whole.  Commissioner Wagner wanted to be sure that Mr. Doyle included his constituents in making decisions and representing the county in the elections process.  Mr. Doyle assured Commissioner Wagner that he interacts with voters all across the county and they assist in determining the direction of the elections process in Larimer County. 


7.   FAMILY MEDICAL LEAVE ACT (FMLA) POLICY CHANGE:   Ms. Cerciello requested the Board’s approval on revising the Human Resources policy number 331.6.24A, regarding the Family Medical Leave Act, to ensure compliance with Federal law and regulations.  Ms. Cerciello explained that the current FMLA policy requires the concurrent use of all accrued paid leave balances when an employee is on FMLA-qualifying leave.  Ms. Cerciello noted that Federal law does not allow employers to require employees to use compensatory time concurrently with FMLA leave; therefore, she requested that and explanation to the policy be added explaining that if an employee requests to use accrued compensatory time while on FMLA leave, that time cannot be counted against the employee’s FMLA leave entitlement.  Commissioner Gibson asked if the Human Resources Department has considered combining all types of leave into one “pot” for the employee to use as they wish.  Ms. Cerciello stated that the County has looked at the option of combining all types of time off into a “personal time” bank for the employee; however, compensatory time would be excluded and would still need to be accounted for separately.




Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the revision of Larimer County Human Resources Policy and Procedure 331.6.24A as outlined to ensure compliance with Federal law and regulations.


Motion carried 3-0.


8.  DESIGNATION OF WAVERLY COMMUNITY AS A COMMUNITY INFLUENCE AREA:  Mr. Legg introduced Jane Clark, Sue Foster, and John Volarti as representatives of the Waverly Community Group.  Mr. Legg noted that the Waverly Community Group wishes to initiate a process to keep the citizens of Waverly informed of Land Use Applications that affect their community; as a result of this desire, and after meeting with the Planning Department, the group requests that the Waverly area be designated as a Community Influence Area.  Mr. Legg stated that the area would be bounded on the north by County Road 72, bounded on the east by County Road 11, bounded on the south by County Road 64, and bounded on the west by County Road 21, and that these boundaries would be considered the Waverly Community Influence Area. Some discussion ensued, with Ms. Clark noting that the group has been meeting for three years and they are most interested in the development of their community and planning for their future growth.  Chair Rennels praised their efforts stating that they have done a good job in putting together a solid group of citizens that meet on a regular basis.  Commissioner Gibson questioned what they hoped to expect from this process and how will their needs be met.  Ms. Clark stated that the Community Influence Area will create a synergy and a center around which the community can connect and assist in the direction, and voice what they feel is important to their community.  Commissioner Wagner questioned who would review the applications.  Ms. Clark stated that initially the current active steering committee would review the applications, with the goal being a more formalized group would take over this function.  The Board supported the creation of the Waverly Community Influence Area. 




Commissioner Wagner moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve that the Larimer County Planning Department designate in its notification process the Waverly area, as described above, as a Community Influence Area.  The Planning Department shall send referral information to the Waverly Community Group at the address prescribed by the group.  The referral shall be made at the public hearing application stage and shall include but not be limited to, General Development Plans, Re-zonings, Special Reviews, Special Exceptions, Minor Special Revises.  Location and extent will be forwarded to the Waverly Group with the understanding that statutory limitations may not permit adequate time for the group to comment.


Motion carried 3-0.


9. PRESENTATION OF NEW SPECIAL EVENTS PROCESS:   Mr. Lancaster demonstrated the new on-line version of applying for a Special Event in Larimer County; he noted that the new process allows individuals to apply on-line, and adds the option of utilizing a credit card for payment.  Mr. Lancaster explained that the applicant will receive e-mail notification regarding the status of their application, and they, as well as the general public, will be able to log on to the internet 24 hours a day to check on the applications of special events occurring in their neighborhoods and along the roadways.  The Board had some suggestions for improvement regarding clearer notification of the 45 day time limit for applying, and providing an opportunity for feedback right on the special events page itself.  The Board thanked Mr. Lancaster and the webmaster Steve Moore for their hard work on this project.


10.  WORKSESSION:  Commissioner Wagner requested that the scheduled citizen meetings be rotated amongst the Board, in order to afford citizens the opportunity to speak and get to know all the commissioners, not just the one assigned to their district.  The Board agreed that this would be a good idea, and Chair Rennels recommended publishing this information in advance so the citizens would be aware of which commissioner would be in attendance at their specific meeting. 


11.  LEGISLATIVE UPDATE:  Mr. Timm updated the Board on a Senate Bill 177, which in essence, allows individuals to files claims against cities, counties and the state for Land Use acts that adversely affect their property.  Mr. Timm noted that the bill might also force the counties, cities and state to create different land use regulations for different pieces of property, depending upon when owners acquired their property, and what types of zoning/re-zoning has taken place on adjoining properties.  Mr. Helmick gave the Board some background on a similar bill that was recently passed in the state of Oregon; he noted that it is estimated this bill will cost approximately $46,000,000 to $300,000,000 in administrative costs alone.  Mr. Timm and Mr. Helmick stated that it is bad legislation and requested that the Board not support it.  The Board agreed and noted that they would oppose SB 177.  Mr. Gluckman then updated the Board on SB135 which prohibits any local entity to contract with a bonding company before an election.  Mr. Gluckman noted that this could have a huge impact, particularly on the smaller entities that might not have the expertise on hand to carry out this task on their own.   Mr. Lancaster noted that this idea came about in order to stop the bonding companies from supporting citizen groups.  The Board agreed that they would oppose this legislation as well. 


12.  COMMISSIONER ACTIVITY REPORTS:  The Board noted their attendance at events during the past week.


13.   LEGAL MATTERS:  There were no legal matters to discuss. 


There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:25 a.m.




                                    KATHAY RENNELS, CHAIR

                                                            BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS







Gael M. Cookman, Deputy Clerk   

Background Image: Dream Lake frozen over in Rocky Mountain National Park by Bryce Bradford. All rights reserved.