Elk in Rocky Mountain National Park
 
> Meetings & Minutes > Commissioners' Minutes > BCC Minutes for 11/17/08  

MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

 

 

MONDAY NOVEMBER 17, 2008

 

 

EXECUTIVE SESSION

(No Audio Available)

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:15 a.m. with Frank Lancaster, County Manager.  Chair Gibson presided and Commissioners Eubanks and Rennels were present. Also present were Neil Gluckman, Commissioners’ Office; and Melissa Lohry, Deputy Clerk.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners go into Executive Session to discuss personnel matters, as outlined in 24-6-402(4)(f) C.R.S.

 

Motion carried 3-0. 

 

Session adjourned at 10:00 a.m.

 

 

LAND USE HEARING

(#29)

 

The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 3:00 p.m. with Matt Lafferty, Principal Planner.  Commissioner Gibson presided and Commissioner Rennels was present.  Also present were:  Rob Helmick, Samantha Mott, Larry Tim, and Sean Wheeler, Planning Department;  Christie Coleman, Eric Tracy, Martina Wilkinson and Ed Woodward, Engineering Department;  Doug Ryan, Environmental Health Department; Karlin Goggin, Building Inspection Department;  Jeannine Haag and William Ressue, Assistant County Attorneys; and Melissa Lohry, Deputy Clerk.

 

Chair Gibson opened the hearing with the Pledge of Allegiance and asked for public comment on the County Budget, Land Use Code or Rubbish Ordinance.  No one from the audience addressed the Board regarding any of these topics.

 

Staff requested that item one, “Aleman Expansion of a Nonconforming Use” and item eight, “Loveland Police Gun Range Fee Appeal, file #08-G0163,” be removed from the agenda at the direction of the applicants.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the “Aleman Expansion of a Nonconforming Use” and the “Loveland Police Gun Range Fee Appeal, file #08-G0163,” be removed from the agenda.

 

Motion carried 2-0.

 

Chair Gibson noted that the following items were on consent and would not be discussed unless requested by the Board, staff, or members of the audience.

 

2.         NEWT PIPELINE FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL REVIEW:  This is a request for approval of a Floodplain Special Review based on the Flood Review Board’s recommendation.

 

The East Larimer County Water District and the North Weld County Water District are planning to construct a 42-inch water transmission line in the floodplain of the Poudre River.  Land Use Code requires a recommendation from the Flood Review Board with a final approval from the Board of County Commissioners, through a Floodplain Special Review, before construction may begin.

 

The Flood Review Board met on Thursday, September 25, 2008, to review the  hydraulic modeling report dated July 11, 2008, at that time, the Board found the hydraulic analysis to be  acceptable. 

 

Staff also finds that all review criteria in Section 4.2.2.G.2 of the Land Use Code have been met; and therefore, recommend approval of the Flood Plain Special Review for the NEWT Pipeline, 42-inch transmission waterline project.

 

3.         RASER CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY PLAT, FILE #07-S2749:  This is a request for a Conservation Development on 46-acres.  This request appeared on the Planning Commission’s consent agenda on October 15, 2008, where it was found to contain no outstanding items of concern.

 

Staff recommends the Raser Conservation Development, file #07-S2749, for approval, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.         The final plat shall be consistent with the approved preliminary plan and the information contained in the Raser Conservation Development (file #07-S2749) except as modified by the conditions of approval or agreement of the county and applicant.  The applicant shall be subject to all other verbal or written representations and commitments of record for the Raser Conservation Development.

 

2.         The applicant shall sign a Final Development Agreement for approval by the county as a part of the final plat, and to be recorded with the final plat.  This agreement shall provide notice to all future lot owners of the conditions of approval and special costs or fees associated with the approval of this project.  The notice shall include, but is not limited to, the issues related to rural development, the need for engineered footings and foundations, the need for passive radon mitigation, the provision of fire protection measures and the issues raised in the review and/or related to compliance with the Larimer County Land Use Code.

 

3.         The applicant shall sign a Disclosure Notice for approval by the county as a part of the final plat, and to be recorded with the final plat, that provides important information to potential buyers about conditions of approval, rural area issues, water rights, etcetera.

 

4.         The following fees shall be collected at building permit issuance for new single family dwellings: the Poudre R1 school fee, the Larimer County fees for County and Regional Transportation Capital Expansion, Larimer County Regional Park Fees in lieu of dedication.  The fee amount that is current at the time of building permit application shall apply.

 

5.         Passive radon mitigation measures shall be included in construction of 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 Building Department.  As an alternative, a builder may present a prepaid receipt from a radon tester which specifies that a test will be done within 30 days.  A permanent certificate of occupancy can be issued when the prepaid receipt is submitted.

 

6.         Residential sprinkler systems, fire system horns and strobes are required for all new residential construction, per the requirements of the Wellington Fire Protection District.

 

7.         Engineered footings and foundations are required for all new habitable construction.  Engineering for any new residential and/or septic system construction shall be done in consideration of the recommendations of the Colorado Geological Survey.

 

8.         As part of the final plat, the applicant shall make all technical corrections required as part of this review, and provide the additional information requested by the referral agents as part of this review.

 

The final plat will show an access easement to the well on Residual Lot A, for access to the well from by Residential Lot 2.  The applicant shall provide a shared well access and maintenance agreement for Residual Lot A and Residential Lot 2.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Consent Agenda for November 17, 2008.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

4.         BECKER SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT, FILE #07-S2736:  This is a request to subdivide approximately 34.97-acres in the Laporte area into three lots for single-family residential uses.  The request includes two appeals to the Land Use Code.  The first appeal is to Section 8.14.2.Q, related to the maximum length of a dead-end road and a requirement for a second point of access.  The second appeal is to Section 8.14.2. S, pertaining specifically to connectivity.

 

This item was on the Board of County Commissioners agenda for the October 20, 2008, hearing, at which time, neighboring property owners raised concerns about the impact of this development on existing wells and an access easement.  There were also questions regarding the safety of the access onto US Highway 287 from Greenmile Drive, with the increase in traffic caused by the development.  Commissioner Rennels asked that the Board table the project to clarify the easements, road maintenance, and to formally request that Colorado Department of Transportation evaluate traffic safety at the Highway 287 and Green Mile Drive intersection.

 

Staff recommends that the Becker Subdivision, file #07-S2736, for approval, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.         The final plat of the Becker Subdivision shall be consistent with the information contained in the file, #07-S2736 or as modified by conditions of approval.

 

2.         The following fees shall be collected at the time of building permit for new single-family dwellings:  the Poudre School fees in lieu of dedication, the Larimer County Capital Transportation Expansion fee and the Larimer County Park Fee in lieu of dedication.  The fee amount that is current at the time building permit application shall apply.

 

3.         The applicant shall sign a Final Development Agreement, to be prepared by staff and approved by the County Attorney, which details in standard language the conditions of approval and other important information related to the subdivision. 

 

4.         The applicant shall sign a Final Disclosure Notice for approval by the county to be recorded with the final plat.  This notice will provide information to all lot owners of the conditions of approval and special costs or fees associated with the approval of this project.  The notice must include, but is not limited to, all issues related to rural development, the requirement for engineered footings and foundations and the requirement for passive radon mitigation.  Other items raised in the review, or related to compliance with the Larimer County Land Use Code, may also be included.

 

5.         The final plat of the Becker Subdivision shall include building envelopes for Lots 2 and 3 to define the areas outside of designated hazard zones and the minimum 100-foot setback from the irrigation ditch.

 

6.         The final plat, construction plans and supporting documents shall comply with the requirements related to the irrigation standards contained in Section 8.8 of the Larimer County Land Use Code.

 

7.         The final plat of the Becker Subdivision shall define the area of the shared water well in an outlot to be owned in common by each of the lot owners within the subdivision.  The out lot shall be of sufficient size to allow for the installation and maintenance of any necessary appurtenances such as storage cisterns and control structures.

 

8.         The final plat of the Becker Subdivision shall include adequate access and utility easements to provided for piping connections from the well to Lot 2 and Lot 3 and to allow for maintenance purposes.

 

9.         Prior to the recordation of the final plat of the Becker Subdivision, the applicant shall provide a Well Sharing Agreement outlining how the three lot owners will share in the ownership, operation and maintenance of the water system shall be provided, to be recorded as an attachment to the Development Agreement.

 

10.       Prior to the recordation of the final plat of the Becker Subdivision, the applicant shall provide a Water System Plan, prepared by a Registered Professional Engineer, for the pumping, storage and distribution of water from the shared well, for inclusion in the subdivision file and for use by the lot owners.  Installation of the improvements identified in the water system plan shall be completed in conjunction with the initial development of this subdivision. 

 

11.       The developer shall construct all sections of the access road within the bounds of the existing access easement, and outside of any neighboring residential properties whose owners have not agreed to have the access road within the boundaries of their property.

 

12.       The final plat of the Becker Subdivision shall provide right-of-way dedications for the area contained within the subdivision to be shown on the final plat.  The developer shall also make all required improvements to Greenmile Drive required by the County Engineering Department.  These improvements shall be shown on construction plans provided for review and approval, prior to recording of the final plat.

 

13.       For exterior lighting, all lots are required to use shields that direct lighting downward to minimize lighting impacts off-site.

 

15.       Residential sprinkler systems are required for all new habitable construction for lots at this subdivision.

 

In their discussions with CDOT, staff discovered that the threshold for turn lanes off of US Highway 287 is ten left hand turns per day.  Staff noted that this threshold has probably already been reached, if not exceeded.  CDOT stated that while turn lanes were the best and safest option, installing a “pork chop,” (a wedge type median) to allow only right hand turns in and out of the intersection, would also suffice.

 

Mark Oberschmidt addressed the Board on behalf of the applicant and stated that he was in agreement with staff regarding installation of the pork chop.  Mr. Oberschmidt also noted that he would include the access easement to the Dewitt property on the final plat of the subdivision and the costs of road maintenance would be covered by the establishment of a Home Owners’ Association.

 

Pete Cottier, Log Knowledge Inc., stated that he would be willing to donate a portion of the land he owns at the intersection to accommodate a turn lane.  He stated that the installation of a pork chop would significantly impact his business and employees by rerouting traffic through the town of LaPorte and its school zones, a distance he estimated to be seven miles.

 

Brian Garrington, Don Weixelman, Claudia Schimert and Gary Weixelman all addressed the Board to offer safe, and more convenient, alternatives to the installation of a pork chop, such as lowering the speed limit on Highway 287 or creating alternative entrances to the proposed subdivision.  Ms. Schimert also informed the Board that with the addition of a pork chop, residents would not be able to receive packages or certified mail at their addresses.

 

Kathleen Dewitt addressed the Board to provide them with a copy of her deed, which contains to provide documentation of her access easement across the Becker property.

 

Chair Gibson stated a solution needs to be reached before any new traffic can be added to the area.  Commissioner Rennels agreed and encouraged all of the concerned parties to try to reach a solution to the traffic and safety problems.  Commissioner Rennels also requested that the item be tabled until January 5, 2009, to allow for a solution to the traffic problems to be reached.

 

M O T I O N         

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners table the Becker Subdivision Preliminary Plat, file #07-S2736, until January 5, 2009, at 3:00 p.m.

 

Motion carried 2-0.

 

5.         RUBBISH ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 2ND READING:  This is the second reading of the proposed amendments to the existing Rubbish Ordinance.  Larimer County Ordinance No. 04212008-001 Concerning Accumulation and Removal of Rubbish (“Rubbish Ordinance”), effective May 24, 2008, was adopted, in part, to streamline an enforcement process for complaints associated with rubbish, derelict/unlicensed vehicles, illegal outdoor storage and other junk.  An appeal process to notices of violation issued pursuant to the Rubbish Ordinance was not included in the Ordinance. 

 

Based on current case law, the County Attorney’s Office recommends the Rubbish Ordinance be amended to include an appeal process to notices of violations issued under the Ordinance.  Ms. Haag read the amended portion of the Rubbish Ordinance as written below:

 

Sec. 30-256     Notice of Violation/Hearing:

 

If probable cause exists to believe that a violation of this Ordinance has occurred, notice of the violation shall be sent by the Planning and Building Services Division Director, or his/her designee as follows:

 

(1)        Written notice of the violation shall be sent via first class mail to the property owner at the address listed in the records of the Larimer County Assessor’s Office and to the mailing address of the property if such address is different from the address in the Assessor’s records.

 

(2)        The notice shall:

 

a.         Provide a description of the violation and measures required to correct the violation.

 

b.         Require that the violation be corrected within 30 days after the date of the notice unless the Planning and Building Services Division Director, or his/her designees, determines in his/her sole discretion, that a longer time should be allowed, or that a shorter time is justified because the violation appears to present an immediate risk to the public health, welfare or safety.

 

c.         Include a statement that if the property owner believes that notice has been issued in error or without just cause, the property owner may request in writing, no later than seven business days after the date of the notice, a hearing before the Board of County Commissioners in order to obtain a written determination from the Board whether the condition of the property violates this Ordinance. 

 

(3)        The date of any requested hearing shall be as soon as practicable considering the Board’s calendar.  Written notice of the date of the hearing shall be sent via first class mail to the property owner at least seven business days prior to the date of the hearing.  

 

(4)        At the hearing, the Board will receive relevant information from the property owner and others bearing on the issue of whether the condition of the property violates this Ordinance.  The property owner shall have the burden to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the property does not violate this Ordinance.

 

(5)        The Board will provide a written determination within ten [10] days of the hearing.  If the Board determines the condition of the property violates this Ordinance, the Board shall set the date by which the violation must be corrected.   The Board’s determination is final and appealable only through applicable civil court procedures.     

 

Sec. 30-257     Administrative Entry and Seizure Warrant:

 

If the violation of this Ordinance is not fully corrected within the time period established in the written notice of violation, or within the time period established in the Board’s written determination if a hearing was requested, the Planning and Building Services Division Director, or his/her designee, without further notice to the property owner, may initiate proceedings for an administrative entry and seizure warrant through the district or county court of Larimer County authorizing the County to enter the Property and remove the rubbish.  In seeking an administrative and seizure warrant, a sworn or affirmed affidavit shall be presented to the court which sets forth the factual basis for the warrant as follows: (i) a general description of the location of the property, (ii) a general description of any rubbish to be removed from the property, (iii) evidence that the property owner has received notice of the violation and has failed to abate the violation within the time prescribed by such notice, and (iv) a proposal about whether the rubbish to be removed should be disposed of or temporarily impounded.

 

(1) Execution of warrant.  Within ten days following the date of issuance of an administrative entry and seizure warrant, the county, by and through county forces, contract, agent or otherwise, shall execute the warrant in accordance with the directions of the issuing court.  A copy of the issued warrant shall be provided or mailed to the property owner.  Proof of the execution of such warrant, including a written inventory of any property impounded by the executing authority, shall be submitted to the court by the county. 

 

(2) Disposal and impoundment.  Any rubbish removed pursuant to an administrative entry and seizure warrant shall be dealt with in accordance with the terms of such warrant, including the impoundment of rubbish and/or the disposal of rubbish in the manner specified by the court in the warrant. 

 

(3) Costs of removal.  All reasonable costs associated with the removal of rubbish, and impoundment if ordered by the court, shall be paid by the property owner, including an additional five percent of such costs for inspection of the property and incidental expenses.  A bill of costs shall be mailed to the property owner and payment in full shall be due within 15 days of the date of the bill.  In the event that the bill remains unpaid after 15 days, the costs may be assessed as a lien against the property until paid and shall have priority over all other liens except general taxes and prior special assessments.  If the costs remain unpaid after 90 days from the date of the bill, such costs together with a ten percent penalty for collection expenses shall be certified to the Larimer County Treasurer for collection in the same manner as other taxes are collected. The laws of the State of Colorado for assessment and collection of general taxes, including the laws for the sale and redemption of property taxes, shall apply to the collection of assessments pursuant to this section 2-397.  (Ord. No. 04212008O001, § 7, 4-21-2008)

 

Chair Gibson noted for the record that there was no one present who wished to address the Board regarding the Rubbish Ordinance.

 

M O T I O N         

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the amendments to Sections 30-256 and 30-257 of the Code of Larimer County as proposed.

 

Motion carried 2-0.

 

6.         ISON LOT SIZE APPEAL, FILE #08-G0161:  This is a request for approval of a lot size variance to allow for the creation of two 4.7-acre lots in the RE-Rural Estate zoning district, where the minimum lot size is 10-acres.  The applicant requests an appeal be granted to allow two lots of 4.7-acres each in the RE-Rural Estate zoning district.  As a 10-acre site, the site is a currently conforming.  The applicant contends that there have been two dwellings on the site.  Staff finds no evidence of this in the records back to 1981 and the site is currently occupied by only a ranch style home.  In 1981 a prior owner had applied to the Board of Adjustment to allow a second dwelling on the site.  This variance was denied.  If in fact a second residence has or did exist on the site, it would been in violation of the regulations.

 

Staff finds that while the request is technically feasible, the given size and configuration of the lot cannot meet the test of the criteria.  It is clear that while there have been historical decisions to allow lots of a smaller size in the area, the planning history strongly suggests that the pattern should not be repeated.  This is evidenced by the RE zoning and the La Porte Area Plan adoption all which indicated the preferred pattern is the 10-acre density.  Therefore, staff recommends denial of the ISON Lot Size Appeal, file #08-G0161. 

 

However, if the Board is inclined to approve the lot size appeal, staff recommends the properties be split along the ditch that occurs on the property instead of directly in half.

 

Jim Borland addressed the Board on behalf of the applicant and stated that the subject property is surrounded by subdivisions with lots averaging less than the 10-acre requirement.  He also stated that the property has been occupied by two mobile homes in the past without incident.

 

M O T I O N         

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the ISON Lot Size Appeal, file #08-G0161, with the division of the lots subject to the landmarks that currently appear on the property.

 

Motion carried 2-0.

 

7.         HAUX APPEAL, FILE #08-G0162:  This is a request for approval to use the subdivision process to develop a 35-acre parcel instead of using the standard Conservation Development (CD) process.  Section 5.3.2.A of the Land Use Code states that the development of parcels over 30-acres in size must be done as a Conservation Development.  If the appeal is approved, the applicant desires to subdivide the property into three single-family residential lots, under a separate request.  According to the applicant’s project description, the current layout of the existing house and farm outbuildings, along with a drainage basin on the property, preclude their ability to use the CD process to create smaller, clustered residential lot.

 

Staff finds that use of the Conservation Development process is appropriate at this site.  Issues related to access, the layout of existing buildings and the location of the pond/wetland area provide some challenges in laying out lots to meet the CD standards.  However, there are 20-acres of land located west of the pond and wetlands, and there should be sufficient area in this portion of the site to meet the CD standards.  The applicant has not lost any development rights using the CD process, and the density allowed is the same as it would be under the subdivision process.  Based on a review of the Section 5.3.2.H standards above, the staff has concluded the use of the CD process would be more appropriate at this site and can not support the appeal  to this standard.

 

Staff recommends denial of the appeal to Section 5.3.2.A of the Land Use Code to allow a property larger than 30-acers in size outside of a designated Growth Management Area to be developed as a subdivision, and requiring the use of the Conservation Development process for the subject property.

 

Jerry Robinson addressed the Board on behalf of the applicant and stated that due to a portion of the property being naturally occurring wetlands, a CD would not be practical.  Mr. Robinson stated that the applicant would like to keep the existing ranch on the west end of the property, create two smaller lots in the middle of the property and one small lot on the east end of the property across from the wetland area.

 

Commissioner Rennels stated that the Conservation Development regulations were put in place to protect the land and people of the county, and approval of this appeal would create a pattern that would negate the entire CD process.

 

M O T I O N         

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners deny the Haux Appeal, file #08-G0162.

 

Motion carried 2-0.

 

9.         SCOTT SCHMER ADDRESSING APPEAL, FILE #08-CA0014:  This is a request to reverse the decision to change an address as part of the Rural Addressing Project.  As part of the Rural Addressing Project, staff reviewed addresses in the Fort Collins area for compliance with the adopted county code.  During the analysis of this area, the property owned by Scott Schmer at 3708 La Mesa Drive, was found to be non-compliant. The access to the property is solely and directly from E. Douglas Road.  Consistent with the Addressing Resolution and best practices for addressing, this address was changed from La Mesa Drive to 208 E. Douglas Road, based upon the access to said property.

 

The applicant seeks to retain the address of 3708 La Mesa Drive.  However, access to the property is not from La Mesa Drive but rather E. Douglas Road.  The address was changed in association with the Rural Addressing Project, which, coincides with the access to the house being solely from E. Douglas Road. 

 

In discussion with the applicant, Mr. Schmer, he was advised that in order to retain a La Mesa Drive address that a direct access from said road would be required.  He declined to create a new driveway from La Mesa Drive, stating that would still cost him money.  He denotes that changing his address is inconvenient, costly and time consuming. 

 

In an appeal letter Mr. Schmer states, anyone presently looking for 3708 La Mesa Drive would turn onto La Mesa, and if they did not see the address on the mail box, and/or the residence directly up from the box, they would drive past the residence, and upon reaching the next house, be forced to backtrack.  This type of “backtrack” is the exact rationale behind the intent of the project.  Backtracking is time consuming and costly, particularly for emergency service personnel.  Looking for an address of 3708 La Mesa Dr  on La Mesa Dr is logical.  Looking for an address that accesses a different road completely is illogical.

 

The appellant states that even emergency services is confused with E. Douglas Road being west of Highway 1.  After checking with the Dispatch Center, emergency services, including Poudre Fire Authority, it was determined all parties concerned know the dividing line for the Fort Collins grid is not Highway 1.  Maps in the communication center give cross streets and deputies have laptops so they can respond without problem to the address of 208 E. Douglas Road. 

 

As for the vacant lot, an address will be determined for this lot at the time of building permit application.  The driveway access will determine whether the address will be from La Mesa Drive or E. Douglas Road.  The Assessor currently holds the address of 3700 La Mesa Drive, however this is considered solely a place-holder address until the access is officially determined.

 

During a review of the application, staff found the following:

 

1.    LETA and the county have funded monies toward this project to ensure a systematic addressing system is achieved and without re-addressing this road, the intent of the resolution would not be met.

 

2.    The purposes of the Site Addressing and Road Naming System is to provide property owners, the general public, and Larimer County with an accurate and systematic means of identifying and locating property.  This includes the modification of address numbers on existing addresses and road name changes as part of administering the resolution and addressing standards.  The county is to establish a system of unique and consistent road names and address points while providing efficient public services and response.

 

3.    LETA, in response to this appeal requests that the address be assigned from E. Douglas Road as there is no access to the property from La Mesa Drive.

 

4.    The County Emergency Communications Manager finds the address, 3708 La Mesa Drive, to be inconsistent and confusing 3708 La Mesa Drive.  Responders would find the road and have to turn around, taking valuable response time and negating the intent of logical addressing schemes.

 

5.    By allowing this appeal and exempting this address as an exception to the Rural Addressing System, would be negating the efforts to create a logical, systematic, and consistent addressing scheme in Larimer County.  Creation of such “ pockets” will only hinder this project, increase the potential for similar appeal pursuits, and disrupt the guiding principals and intent for improvement as requested by funding providers.

 

6.    Changing this address would be considered out of scope work by SDR and additional fees, not budgeted for this project, would be required.

 

Staff recommends the Board deny the request to retain 3708 La Mesa Drive and re-address the property as recommended by the Rural Addressing Project to 208 E. Douglas Road.

 

Mr. Schmer addressed the Board and requested that his address remain La Mesa Drive due to the business he operates from his home and the expenses that would be encountered in changing his address. 

 

Commissioner Rennels stated that Mr. Schmer had not created an access to his property from La Mesa Drive as he indicated on the final plat that had been provided to staff before building commenced; therefore, the address must be changed as the property is access from E. Douglas Road.  Commissioner Rennels stated that in order to keep his current address, Mr. Schmer would have to create a new access to his property from La Mesa Drive.

 

M O T I O N         

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners deny the Scott Schmer Addressing Appeal, file #08-CA0014.

 

Motion carried 2-0.

 

There being no further business, the hearing recessed at 5:00 p.m.

 

 

 

LAND USE HEARING

 

The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 6:30 p.m. with Matt Lafferty, Pricipal Planner.  Chair Gibson presided and Commissioner Rennels was present.  Also present was:  Chad Gray and Sean Wheeler, Planning Department;  Mark Peterson, Traci Shambo and Martina Wilkinson, Engineering;  Doug Ryan, Environmental Health Department;  Dale Miller, Road and Bridge Department;  Marc Engemoen, Department of Public Works; Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney; and Melissa Lohry, Deputy Clerk.

 

Chair Gibson asked for public comment on the County Budget, Land Use Code or Rubbish Ordinance.  No one from the audience addressed the Board regarding any of these topics.

 

1a.       COMPLETE EQUESTRIAN SPECIAL REVIEW, FILE #07-Z1669:  This is a special review for approval of an existing riding academy and horse boarding business.  The applicant appeared before the Planning Commission on October 15, 2008, during which time a number of issues that revolved around this operation were discussed, including access and compatibility.  It was determined that the question of access is a legal issue that must be resolved in civil court, then the question of using an access created for a residential development could be considered by the county.  In regards to the question of compatibility, the applicant indicated there are other equestrian facilities operating near the site which provide justification for this use.  The size and scope of these other operations is unknown.  They may also be pre-existing, thus non-conforming uses, and therefore not subject to the Special Review process unless they seek to expand.

 

Under the O-Open zoning, lots residents are allowed to have one horse per ½-acre, provided the animals belong to the property owners who are also responsible for the costs of caring for them.  In the past the applicant has boarded horses, taught riding lessons and provided training for individual horses.  The business also operated a day camp over the summer of 2008 as part of the riding academy.  The applicant indicated there is  room on site to park up to 20 personal vehicles and seven horse trailers.  Customers have been told they could visit the site seven days a week during daylight hours, with exceptions allowed in emergency situations.  Access to the property is provided by a private driveway that is shared with two other property owners.  The driveway easement used by all three property owners was created by a separate deed following County approval of the Minor Residential Development (MRD) plat.  That easement was not shown on the recorded plat and it was not reviewed or approved by the county.  The easement shown on the recorded MRD plat ran along the south property line to provide access to the  site, but is not in use.

 

Staff recommends denial of the Complete Equestrian Special Review, and that the applicant be directed to stop all business activities at the site.

 

Nicole Collins, the applicant, addressed the Board.  Ms. Collins explained that she currently has shelters for 16 horses and does not wish to expand her boarding business beyond that number.  In addition to the horses she boards, Ms. Collins also teaches riding lessons and offers equine therapy for at risk and handicapped children. She stated that there are many horse boarding businesses in the area that generate considerably more traffic than hers.

 

Ms. Collins stated that her business receives, on average, only 5.5 vehicle trips per day. This number includes horse owners, students, deliveries and veterinarians.  She also stated that she is willing to create her own driveway from E. Douglas Road; however, staff previously informed her that they would not support such a request, because they attempt to limit the number of private drives accessed from E. Douglas Road. 

 

James Barber, Marsha Lotz, Geraldine Zell, Donna Brown and Norman Brown, Chase Swift, Byron and Martha Nielson, Barry Feldman, Dennis Ralph, Michelle Simpson-Watts, Amy Zelenak, Anthony Marzullo, Polly Morrison and LeAnn Dingman all spoke in favor of approval of the special review.  Most praised Ms. Collins for her work with children and offering affordable horse boarding.  Many of these individuals live near Ms. Collins and stated they had not noticed any increased traffic due to her business.

 

Ron Lonneman and Scott Doyle addressed the Board and spoke against approval of the special review.  Mr. Lonneman and Mr. Doyle stated that they were not speaking against Ms. Collins or the work she does, they were simply against commercial operations occurring on a lot zoned strictly for residential use.  Mr. Doyle stated that he conducted extensive research before purchasing his property to be sure he would not be living in a commercial area.    

 

Commissioner Rennels questioned staff about their refusal to allow Ms. Collins to create a separate driveway from E. Douglas Road.  She requested staff reconsider and allow Ms. Collins to formally apply for a separate, private drive in order to resolve the dispute.

 

Chair Gibson stated that the issue of the driveway should not be considered as the commercial use of the property should not be allowed due to the residential status of the property.

 

Commissioner Rennels requested that the item be tabled until staff could present information about the proposal of a private drive at which time the entire Board could be present to vote. 

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners table the Complete Equestrian Special Review, file #07-Z1669, until January 5, 2009, at 6:30 p.m.  Until that date, Ms. Collins is allowed to continue operations but may not increase business operations or the number of horses on the property beyond the 15 currently boarded on the property.

 

Motion carried 2-0.

 

1b.       COLLINS CODE COMPLIANCE, FILE #06-CC0435:  Staff requested this item be tabled until January 5, 2009, as it directly relates to the previous item.

 

M O T I O N         

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners table the Collins Code Compliance, file #06-CC0435, until January 5, 2009 at 6:30 p.m.

 

Motion carried 2-0.

 

2.         OWL CANYON CORRIDOR PROJECT:  The Owl Canyon corridor (the connection between the I-25 / Larimer County Road 70 interchange and the US 287 / Larimer County Road 72 intersection) includes several miles of roadway that are non-paved despite traffic volumes (including both cars and trucks) that are in some areas more than three times larger than the county's paving threshold.  This surface deficiency and several other factors are contributing to maintenance, function, air quality and safety concerns.

 

During 2007, the Board of County Commissioners and engineering staff concurred that the current conditions cannot continue indefinitely, and that some improvements will need to occur in the corridor.  Although no construction funding has been identified, the Board of County Commissioners indicated that uncertainty about route location and the unknown scope of necessary improvements should be addressed.  Therefore, in the  fall of 2007, the engineering staff outlined the Owl Canyon Corridor Project to be completed within 12 months using existing staff. 

 

The project includes corridor planning and conceptual design intended to identify a specific alignment for road surfacing, function, and safety improvements to accommodate both the existing and likely future traffic using these county roads.  The project included significant public outreach and citizen input. To date, the process has included the following actions:

 

1.    The Owl Canyon Corridor Project was been discussed several times with the Board of County Commissioners during Commissioner Worksessions and Administrative Matters meetings. 

 

2.    The Owl Canyon Corridor Project was undertaken with a strong public input and outreach effort that included newsletters, web pages, open houses, community meetings, individual meetings etc. 

 

3.    The Owl Canyon Corridor Project was presented to the Environmental Advisory Board (EAB) at a regular meeting on August 12, 2008.  The corresponding EAB findings have been presented to the Board. 

 

4.    The Owl Canyon Corridor Project was presented and discussed at a joint work session with the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners on September 10, 2008.

 

5.    The Owl Canyon Corridor Project was presented at a public hearing to the Planning Commission on Wednesday, October 15, 2008.  The Planning Commission unanimously recommended adoption of the project to the Boar of County Commissioners.

 

Staff has found that roadway improvements to the Owl Canyon Corridor are needed, albeit not funded.  The specifics regarding the improvements, including the location of an eventual paved road, have been unknown and uncertain for some time. 

 

In conjunction with extensive public outreach, the project included corridor planning and conceptual design to identify a specific alignment to accommodate both the existing and likely future traffic using these County Roads.   

 

The adoption of this project will allow staff to begin implementation of identified safety improvements in the corridor, and if/when funding is identified, to begin planning for the extension of County Road 19 and the eventual paving of the road.

 

Staff recommends adoption of the Owl Canyon Corridor Project.

 

JoAnn Blehm, Kevin Spear, Daryl and Helen Boggs, Niles and LeAnn Dingman, Lawrence Bosch, Marsha Lotz and Lou Kinsley all addressed the Board and spoke against the Owl Corridor Project.  All feared that improvements to the road would increase traffic, large trucks and speed, creating safety and noise problems.

 

Chair Gibson and Commissioner Rennels both agreed that improvements must be made to the road because resurfacing the existing gravel is too costly to the county. Both also agreed that the alignment chosen by staff was the best option.

 

M O T I O N         

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the Owl Canyon Corridor Project as detailed in the project report dated November 3, 2008, that includes the analysis and staff recommendations regarding a specific alignment (including an extension of County Road 19 between County Road 70 and County Road 72) for road surfacing, function, and safety improvements in the corridor.

 

Motion carried 2-0.

 

There being no further business, the hearing adjourned at 10:15 p.m.

 

TUESDAY, November 18, 2008

 

 

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

(#30)

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:30 a.m. with County Manager Frank Lancaster. Chair Gibson presided and Commissioners Eubanks and Rennels were present. Also present were: Deni LaRue and Donna Hart, Commissioners’ Office; Gary Buffington, and Tim D’Amato, Natural Resources Department; Duane Pond, and Ken Mathias, Weed District Advisory Board; George Hass, County Attorney; and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk.

 

1.         PUBLIC COMMENT:  There was no public comment today.

 

 

2.          APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE WEEKS OF OCTOBER 27 AND NOVEMBER 3, 2008:

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the minutes for the week of October 27, 2008.

 

Motion carried 3-0. 

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the minutes for the week of November 3, 2008.

 

Motion carried 3-0. 

 

 

3.    REVIEW OF THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK OF NOVEMBER 24, 2008Ms. Hart reviewed the upcoming schedule with the Board.

 

4.    CONSENT AGENDA

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the following items as presented on the Consent Agenda for November 18, 2008:

 

PETITIONS FOR ABATEMENT:  As recommended by the County Assessor, the following Petitions for Abatement are presented for approval:  Dwyane and Carole Herman Trusts; James and Zena Wyse.

 

11182008A001           FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND RESIDUAL LAND USE RESTRICTIONS FOR WESTVIEW II R.L.U.P 04-S2326 BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AND COLORADO BEEF INC  

 

11182008A002           HUMANE SOCIETY AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AND THE LARIMER HUMANE SOCIETY

 

11182008A003           WARRANTY MEMORANDUM FOR BRAUCH SUBDIVISION 06-S2596 BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AND RICHARD BRAUCH

 

11182008A004           SECTION 415 AMENDMENT TO QUALIFIED RETIREMENT PLAN

 

11182008A005           CABLE TELEVISION AGREEMENT – INFORMAL RENEWAL PROCESS WITH NEXHORIZON BROADBAND OF COLORADO

 

11182008A006           CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THUNDERPUP CONSTRUCTION, INC., FOR THE CAMPER SERVICES BUILDINGS AT HORSETOOTH RESERVOIR, PROJECT NO. 5014

 

11182008P001            GUIDELINES FOR BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS’ POLICY WORK SESSIONS

 

11182008R001           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY WITH RESERVATION FOR UTILITIES AT THE INTERSECTION OF COUNTY ROADS 74E, 73C, AND 162

 

11182008R002           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDED PLAT OF TRACTS A AND B IN THE TREIBER EXEMPTION

 

11182008R003           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE EHMANN MINOR LAND DIVISION AND APPEAL TO SECTION 5.4.3B OF THE LAND USE CODE

 

11182008R004           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CHANGE OF DESIGNATION FOR LOT 6 FORBES RANCH ESTATES AMENDED 2ND SUBDIVISION

 

11182008R005           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF EAST FIRST STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY

 

11182008R006           LOT CONSOLIDATION RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CONSOLIDATION OF LOTS 12 AND 13 OF GLACIER VIEW MEADOWS PUD THIRD FILING AND VACATION OF UTILITY EASEMENT

 

11182008R007           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE COUNTY ROAD 1 / WELD COUNTY ROAD 13 FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL REVIEW

 

11182008R008           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDED PLAT OF LOT 2 OF THE ROBBS MRD AND EASEMENT VACATION

 

11182008R009           RESOLUTION DECLARING LARIMER COUNTY PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 42 ORGANIZED

 

11182008R0010         RESOLUTION DECLARING LARIMER COUNTY PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 37 ORGANIZED

 

11182008R011           RESOLUTION REGARDING EXTENSION OF APPROVAL OF ZIMMERMAN/RAJEWSKI MINOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOTS 1 & 2 AMENDED PLAT

 

11182008R012           RESOLUTION ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO LARMER COUNTY LAND USE CODE FOR AREAS AND ACTIVITIES OF STATE INTEREST (1041 POWERS FOR POWER PLANTS)

 

11182008R013           RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR ADMINISTRATIVE FEE FOR WORK-RELEASE PROGRAM

 

11182008R014           RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE, BLOCK ELEVEN

 

11182008R015           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION REGARDING WASTE NOT RECYCLING SPECIAL EXCEPTION SHOW CAUSE HEARING

 

11182008R016           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LETTIS RIDGE ESTATES SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT

 

11182008R017           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PITTS MINOR SPECIAL REVIEW

 

11182008R018           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDED PLAT OF LOT 6, BLOCK 2, NEWELL LAKE VIEW THIRD SUBDIVISION AND REPLAT OF LOT 2, BLOCK 2 AND OUTLOT “C” OF NEWELL LAKE VIEW SECOND SUBDIVISION AND VACATION OF UTILITY EASEMENTS

 

11182008R019           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING FOSSIL CREEK MEADOWS PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL REVIEW

 

11182008R020           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE BROWNSTONE QUARRY SPECIAL REVIEW AMENDMENT

 

11182008R021           RESOLUTION REVOKING THE FRONTIER EQUINE MINOR SPECIAL REVIEW, FILE NO. 08-Z1677

 

11182008R022           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE COLORADO YOUTH OUTDOORS SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND APPEAL TO SECTION 8.6.3 OF THE LAND USE CODE

 

11182008R023           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE BILLENSTIEN APPEALS TO SECTIONS 4.3.10.F.1.A, 4.3.10.F.1.B, AND 4.2.10.F.1.D OF THE LARIMER COUNTY LAND USE CODE 

 

11182008R024           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CHANGE OF CONDITION FOR THE PEARL VISTA CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT AND AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

 

11182008R025           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDED PLAT OF LOT 46A, BLOCK 31 OF THE AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 46 & 47, BLOCK 31 AND LOT 48, BLOCK 31 IN THE EAST OWASSA SUBDIVISION

 

11182008R026           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE VACATION OF AN EASEMENT ON LOT 23A OF THE AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 23-27 IN SPRING CANYON HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION, 2ND FILING

 

11182008R027           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE RAMONA HEIGHTS LOT 17 BLOCK 18 AND LOTS 5A AND B, 6A AND B, AND 7A AND B BLOCK 17 ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT VACATION

 

11182008R028           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 9A AND 9B OF BLOCK 12 AND LOT 11A OF BLOCK 13 IN THE RAMONA HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION AND EASEMENT VACATION

 

11182008R029           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 11A & B, 12A & B IN BLOCK 17, LOTS 11A & B IN BLOCK 18, LOTS 4A & B, LOTS 5A & B IN BLOCK 20A, LOTS 4A & B IN BLOCK 20B, AND LOTS 7, 8, 9 IN BLOCK 20C OF RAMONA HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION AND EASEMENT VACATION

 

11182008R030           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE VACATION OF AN EASEMENT IN LOT 31 CRYSTAL LAKES 12TH FILING

 

MISCELLANEOUS:  Appointment to Larimer County Office on Aging Advisory Council; Appointments to Estes Valley Public Library District.

 

LIQUOR LICENSES:  The following licenses were approved and/or issued:   Poudre Spirits and Wine – Retail Liquor Store – Bellvue; Young’s Liquors – Retail Liquor Store – Fort Collins; Wolverine Publishing – Special Event 6% - Fort Collins; Horsetooth Market – 3.2% - Fort Collins.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

5.    NATIONAL ADOPTION MONTH PROCLAMATION:  Foster Parent Steve Dosher introduced his newest foster son to the Board, and explained that he and his wife are in the process of their third adoption.  Mr. Dosher emphasized the importance of giving children permanent, safe and loving families through adoption.  Commissioner Rennels read the proclamation aloud.  

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners proclaim the month of November 2008 as National Adoption Month.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

6.    2009 FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS AT HORSETOOTH RESERVOIR COUNTY PARK:  Mr. Buffington explained construction has begun on twelve additional campsites and two new camper services buildings at Horsetooth Reservoir County Park.  He noted that 8 of the twelve campsites will have water, electricity and sewer services at an additional cost of $25 per night.  Mr. Buffington further explained that the camper services buildings, (one located at South Bay and the other at Inlet Bay), will have flush restrooms and showers.  The showers will be on timers and will cost $2.00 for every 5 minutes.  The Board was pleased with the additional services and thanked Mr. Buffington for the update.

 

7.   RESOLUTION TO EXTEND THE TERMINATION DATE OF THE PEST CONTROL DISTRICT:  Mr. Buffington explained that the Pest District must be renewed every five years, and presented a resolution to extend the termination date of the Pest Control District to December 31, 2013.  Mr. D’Amato,  Mr. Pond, and Mr. Mathias explained the importance of public outreach and controlling noxious weeds within the county.   Chair Gibson asked about the public outreach program, and Mr. D’Amato stated that provide education and information, loan spray equipment, and offer herbicides at a discount to the public.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the resolution to extend the termination date of the Larimer County Pest Control District.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

11182008R031           RESOLUTION TO EXTEND THE TERMINATION DATE OF THE LARIMER COUNTY PEST CONTROL DISTRICT

 

8.  APPOINTMENTS TO THE LARIMER EMERGENCY TELEPHONE AUTHORITY (LETA) BOARD:  Mr. Lancaster presented the following recommendations for appointment to the LETA Board:  Dennis Harrison (representing the City of Fort Collins), Randy Lesher (representing hospital districts), John Baudek (representing outlying towns), and Justin Smith (representing Larimer County), for two-year terms, expiring December 31, 2010.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve appointments to the LETA Board as outlined above.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

9.  WAIVER OF ANNEXATION IMPACT REPORT FOR THE TOWN OF TIMNATH:  Mr. Lancaster explained that Colorado law requires municipalities to file an impact report with the county when they annex a piece of land; however, the Commissioners’ may waive this requirement if they deem appropriate.  Mr. Lancaster stated that Timnath is annexing a single parcel in their old town area, and is asking the Board to waive the impact report requirement.  He further noted that the Planning Department concurs with this request.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve waiving the requirement for an annexation impact report from the Town of Timnath for the annexation of the 1.4 acre parcel at 3916 Main Street in Timnath.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

10.  COUNTY ENDS AND OBJECTIVE STATEMENTS:  Mr. Lancaster stated that the Board has been working on County ends statements for the County Policy Governance document and objective statements to be used in developing the budget process.   He presented the County ends statements and requested Board approval on the same.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the County ends statements as proposed.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

11.  WORKSESSION:  Mr. Lancaster asked if the Board would consider closing county offices on the Fridays after Christmas and New Years Day since both holidays fall on Thursday this year, and county business is pretty much non-existent when the holidays occur in this manner.  The Board agreed to this suggestion.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve of extending county holidays and closing county offices on the December 26, 2008, and on January 2, 2009.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

12.  COMMISSIONER REPORTS:  The Board discussed events they attended during the previous week.

 

13.  LEGAL MATTERS:  Mr. Hass requested that the Board go into Executive Session for legal advice.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners go into Executive Session for conferences with an attorney for the purpose of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions as outlined in 24-6-402 (4) (b) C.R.S.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

The Board came out of Executive Session and the following action was taken:

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Ebuanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners authorize the county to defend and indemnify all counts and claims made against the following employees in the Timothy Masters case:  Terry Gilmore, Jolene Blair, Stu VanMeveren, and Larry Abrahmason and the 8th Judicial District of Colorado.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

The meeting adjourned at 10:45 a.m.

________________________________

                        GLENN W. GIBSON, CHAIR

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

SCOTT DOYLE

CLERK AND RECORDER

 

ATTEST:

 

 

­­­______________________________________

Melissa E. Lohry, Deputy Clerk

 

______________________________________

Gael M. Cookman, Deputy Clerk

 

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