Elk in Rocky Mountain National Park
 
> Meetings & Minutes > Commissioners' Minutes > BCC Minutes for 01/05/09  

MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

 

 

Monday, January 5, 2009

 

LAND USE HEARING

(#43)

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 3:00 p.m. with Matt Lafferty, Principal Planner. Chair Gibson presided and Commissioners Eubanks and Rennels were present. Also present were Tom Garton and Karlin Goggin, Building Department; Doug Ryan, Environmental Health Department; Traci Shambo, Engineering Department; Wendy Dionigi, Chad Gray, Toby Stauffer, Larry Timm, Sean Wheeler, and Michael Whitley, Planning Department; Diane Webber, Sheriff’s Office; 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.

 

1.         BECKER SUBDIVISION, FILE #07-S2736:  This item, tabled from November 17, 2008, was withdrawn at the request of the applicant.

 

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

 

2.         NAGEL MINOR SPECIAL REVIEW, FILE #08-S1725:  This is a request for approval of a Minor Special Review for a detached accessory living area on a 2.73-acre property.  The property has an existing 2,134-square-foot home built in 1967.  There is a second detached 399-square-foot home built on the property but there are no permits on record relating to this home. Based on aerial photos, the second home was built sometime between 1974 and 1981 and is currently being rented by a person unrelated to the property owner. The property owner would like to convert an existing 480-square-foot detached building into an additional accessory living area to be occupied by the property owner’s son. 

 

As the second home did not receive a building permit or Minor Special Review approval, it must be converted into a non-habitable structure, regardless of whether the proposed Minor Special Review is approved. Change of occupancy permits would be required to convert the second home into a non-habitable structure and to convert the 480-square-foot detached structure into an accessory living area.  

 

The county Land Use Code states that accessory uses are intended to allow property owners the full use of their property, while maintaining the integrity and character of the neighborhood.  To meet these goals, accessory uses and buildings must be erected and used only for purposes that are clearly secondary and incidental to the principal use of the property, they must be located on the same lot with the principal use, and the accessory living area should not be used as a rental unit. 

 

Staff recommends approval of the Nagel Minor Special Review, file #08-Z1725, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.         The site shall be developed consistent with the approved plan and with the information contained in the Nagel Minor Special Review, file #08-Z1725, 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 Nagel Minor Special Review.

 

2.         This application is approved without the requirement for a development agreement. In the event the applicant fails to comply with any conditions of approval, or fails to use the property consistent with the approved Minor Special Review, the applicant agrees that in addition to all other remedies available to the county, the county may withhold building permits, issue a written notice to the applicant to appear and show cause why the Minor Special Review approval should not be revoked, and/or bring a court action for enforcement of the terms of the Minor Special Review.  All remedies are cumulative and the county’s election to use one shall not preclude use of another.  In the event the county must retain legal counsel and/or pursue a court action to enforce the terms of this Minor Special Review approval, the applicant agrees to pay all expenses incurred by the county including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney’s fees.  The county may conduct periodic inspections of the property and reviews of the status of the Minor Special Review as appropriate to monitor and enforce the terms of approval.

 

3.         The findings and resolution shall be a servitude running with the property.  Those owners of the property or any portion of the property who obtain title subsequent to the date of recording of the findings and resolution, their heirs, successors, assigns or transferees, and persons holding under applicants shall comply with the terms and conditions of the Special Review approval.

 

4.         All applicable fees, including permit fees and Transportation Capital Expansion Fees, shall apply to this use. 

 

5.         Within 90 days of the approval date, the owner shall obtain change of occupancy permits for the conversion of the second home to non-habitable space and for the conversion of the 480-square-foot detached building into an accessory living area.  The detached accessory living unit shall not be occupied until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the unit.

 

6.         This Minor Special Review approval will automatically expire without a public hearing if the use is not commenced within three years of the date of approval.

 

3.         RUSTIC 2ND SUBDIVISION AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 1-3 AND LOT 5, FILE #08-S2844:  This is a request to amend the plat of Rustic Subdivision #2, Lots 1, 2, 3, and 5, to add an entire adjacent metes and bounds parcel to all four lots. 

 

Staff recommends approval of the  Amended Plat of Lots 1, 2, 3, and 5 of Rustic Subdivision #2, and the Duncan Boundary Line Adjustment, file #08-S2844. Staff requests authorization for the chairman to sign the plat when the conditions are met and the plat is presented for signature, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.         The final plat shall be recorded by July 5, 2009, or this approval shall be null and void.

 

2.         Prior to the recordation of the final plat, the applicant shall make all technical corrections as requested by referral agencies.

 

3.         Prior to the recordation of the final plat, the applicant shall place a note on the plat indicating “Portions of these lots are in the 100-year floodplain of the Poudre River and are subject to floodplain regulations at the time of building permit application.”

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Consent Agenda for January 6, 2009.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

4.         BACON QUARRY SPECIAL REVIEW AND APPEALS, FILE #06-Z1590:  This is a request for approval to operate a commercial sandstone quarry on 2.5-acres of an 8.8-acre site in the Masonville area and an appeal to Section 8.6.3 of the Land Use Code, related to paved parking. This request was originally presented to the Board on December 12, 2008, at which time it was tabled until today.

 

The applicant has agreed to the conditions of approval as proposed by staff, but has asked for a 25-year permit life. As the applicant will not be able to operate 6 days a week, unlike other quarries in the area, staff supports the requested permit life increase.

 

The original project description stated the applicant would have two to four employees.  However, the applicant has since asked for a maximum of five employees. The applicant has agreed to using new “white noise” technology for the back-up sensors on vehicles, and to turn alarms down to the lowest permitted level allowed by law, thus reducing noise impacts.

 

As part of the final review of the site plan materials, the applicant will provide for landscape screening in compliance with County Land Use Code standards in Section 8.5. Fencing is typically part of a landscape screening plan; however, if the neighbors object to fencing, the landscape buffering standards can be applied, although landscaping may not fully obscure the view into the site.

 

Staff recommends approval of the appeal to the paving standard for parking areas, required by 8.6.3 of the county Land Use Code, to allow the use of gravel in the parking area for the Bacon Quarry Special Review. Staff also recommends approval of the Bacon Quarry Special Review, file #08-Z1678, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.         This special review approval shall automatically expire without a public hearing if the use is not commenced within three years of the date of approval. Quarry activities shall be limited to 25-years from the start of operations, unless Larimer County grants approval to extend the permit time.

 

2.         The site shall be developed consistent with the approved plan and with the information contained in the Bacon Quarry Special Review, file #08-Z1678, 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 Bacon Quarry Special Review.

 

3.         The applicant shall execute a development agreement, to be signed by the Board of County Commissioners and recorded with the Larimer County Clerks Office. Both must be completed before the commencement of any excavation activities and no later than January 5, 2010.

 

4.         No operation of the quarry shall occur on the weekends or county designated holidays. Monday through Friday hours of operation shall be between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., to include time for equipment warm-up.

 

5.         The county may conduct periodic inspections of the property and reviews of the status of the special review as appropriate to monitor and enforce the terms of the approval.

 

6.         Reclamation shall begin as soon as possible after the completion of quarry activities and no later than the start of the next growing season.

 

7.         The applicant shall comply with requirements of the Ordinance Concerning Noise Levels in Unincorporated Larimer County.

 

8.         The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the county Engineering Department listed below:

 

a.         Within 90-days of special review approval, the applicant is required to apply for a Development Construction Permit (DCP) and Access Permit.

b.         The site and access improvements will need to be completed prior to the commencement of mining operations.

 

c.         The applicant shall provide a right-of-way deed of dedication (50 foot half right-of-way) to be recorded prior to, or with, the development agreement.

 

d.         The applicant shall pay the Transportation Capital Expansion Fee of $2,833.00 prior to recording of the development agreement.

 

e.         The State of Colorado approved Mining and Reclamation Permit, State Storm water Discharge Permit, and State Fugitive Particulate Emissions Permit (if required by the state) shall be submitted to the county Engineering Department within 90-days of special review approval.

 

f.          The temporary northern access shall only be used for the pick up of material, no more than twice per week. The access must be abandoned once the mining operation ceases.

 

g.         No parking, loading or unloading of any vehicles is allowed in the county right-of-way.

 

h.         Trucks shall not back onto or use the county road for a turnaround.

 

i.          Larimer County will not issue overweight permits for trucks and reserves the right to spot check weight on loaded trucks.

 

j.          The applicant is responsible for prompt and complete removal of any site material in the county right-of-way.

 

9.         The operator shall provide the Larimer County Planning Department a copy of their annual report to the state that details overall compliance with the storm water management plan and a copy of the annual report required by the State Mined Lands Reclamation Board.

 

10.       The applicant shall provide copies of all final plans including mining, landscape, and reclamation plans within 90-days of the date of approval by the Board of County Commissioners, for review and approval by staff prior to commencement of mining operations.

 

12.       No on-site fuel storage shall be allowed.

 

13.       All back-up alarms shall be the broadband type, using the white noise technology, and shall be reduced in volume to the lowest level allowed by law.

 

14.       No retail sales are allowed on site.

 

15.       The quarry is allowed a maximum of five employees, and no more than two semi-trailer truck loads of quarried material may be removed from the site each week.

 

16.       The final plans shall show the truck entrance is located 55-feet south of Wood Rose Lane. The entrance width shall be sufficient to meet the minimum requirements of the fire department and county Engineering Department requirements for safe access onto a county road.

 

Chair Gibson opened the hearing to public comment and Jim Martell, representative for surrounding land owners, addressed the Board. Mr. Martell stated his clients are in agreement for approval of the request, thanks to the cooperation of county staff and the applicant.

 

Reid Bond, applicant, also addressed the Board and agreed to the conditions of approval. 

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that that Board of County Commissioners approve the Bacon Quarry Special Review, file #06-Z1590, subject to the conditions outlined above.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the appeal to the paving standard for parking areas, required by section 8.6.3 of the Larimer County Land Use Code, to allow the use of gravel in the parking areas of the Bacon Quarry Special Review.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

5.         CONTRACTOR LICENSING:  This is a request for adoption of the proposed resolution establishing a program in the county Building Department for the licensing of building contractors who conduct business in unincorporated Larimer County. The resolution, if approved, would be contained in Chapter 10, Article VIII, of the Larimer County Land Use Code. This request was originally presented to the Board on December 15, 2008, at which time it was tabled until today.

 

Chair Gibson opened the hearing to public comment and Mike Menard addressed the Board. Mr. Menard asked that contractors working in the Estes Valley be exempt from licensing due to the stringent guidelines already in place for contractors in the valley.

 

Jeff Schneider, from Northern Colorado Homebuilder’s Association, also addressed the Board. Mr. Schneider spoke in favor of the proposed licensing program, its insurance requirements, and the fees proposed by staff.

 

Chair Gibson closed public comment and stated that he was in favor of allowing contractors working in the Estes Valley to be exempt from licensing for two years. He stated that after those two years, their work should be reviewed and if there were no problems, the exemption could be made permanent.

 

Commissioners Rennels and Eubanks expressed concern with the exemption and spoke in favor of providing consistency through the entire county.   

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Contractor’s Licensing Resolution, as proposed, with an effective date of September 1, 2009.

 

Motion carried 2-1, Chair Gibson dissenting.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the contractor license fee schedule as proposed.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

6.         AMENDMENT TO THE RURAL ADDRESSING RESOLUTION:  This is a request to amend Chapter 10, Article VII, Sec. 10-175 of the Code of Larimer County Road Naming and Site Addressing System, to require city, community, or place names for site location addresses to be US postal code compliant.

 

Mr. Timm explained that in 2006, residents of the Glen Haven area approached the Board to request that the place name “Glen Haven” be included in their site location address.  Currently, the only residents that have a Glen Haven address are those that have a post office box in the Glen Haven post office, all other residents in the area have either a Drake or Estes Park address.

During a worksession with the Board in November 2006, attendees from the Address Management System (AMS) of the United States Postal Service (USPS), Glen Haven residents, and county staff, residents requested Larimer County honor the place name of “Glen Haven” in their address rather than postal service compliant city names. AMS informed residents that there were two avenues for them to pursue regarding the use of Glen Haven as a postal delivery boundary and city name,  petition for a rural delivery boundary, or incorporate.  

Since that time, residents have requested that the county pursue the rural delivery boundary option. Ms. Goggin met with AMS on this matter and AMS stated that it will not approve the creation of a new delivery boundary because residents currently receive their free source of mail delivery at Post Office boxes and the creation of a boundary is not cost effective for the USPS. The area referred to as Glen Haven is in an “unassigned delivery area” for postal delivery.  Within an “unassigned delivery area,” a petition for rural delivery is determined by the best rural carrier route. In the case of Glen Haven, rural delivery would either be Drake, or Estes Park.  Should anyone petition for rural delivery and be accepted, the postal delivery service boundary (either Drake or Estes Park) would be extended at the digression of AMS.

Ms. Goggin has also discussed the option of preferred last line (PLL) addressing. A PLL would allow the listing of another community name in the mailing address using the same zip code; however, in site addressing, only one community name can be selected. For example, the USPS created a PLL for Loveland/Johnstown, but the PLL is Loveland and the primary delivery name is Johnstown. In site addressing, the county can only select one site address as the primary city name and zip. Therefore, in the example above, the county uses the original derived name and zip of Johnstown, as the site address. This causes complications because one simply cannot obtain accurate Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data by having one property assigned as Johnstown and the adjacent property as Loveland. For this reason alone, staff cannot recommend the practice of a PLL for the Glen Haven area. 

Staff has conducted research regarding best practices and national standards and found that Qwest AMC (Address Management Center) of Omaha, NE, regulates the telephone number and address association for 911 related calls. When the call comes in to 911, the telephone number and address of the call’s origination is relayed to the dispatcher. These addresses are listed according to standard practice and/or best practice as follows:

 

1.         Inside city limits – city name

2.         Outside city limits – postal delivery route

3.         PO Box delivery – general consensus is to extend to nearest postal delivery route

 

Listing of the city name or community name should be consistent with 911 and the official site location.  Some exceptions exist, most of them being those using Preferred Last Line city names.

 

The Rural Addressing Improvement Project was tasked with correcting an ineffective, inefficient addressing system to create a systematic, logical, and consistent means to addressing properties in the county. Creating a boundary that is not recognized by 911 databases and creates “inconsistency creep” would be problematic from an addressing standpoint as the project was tasked with eliminating anomalies, not creating more of them. If a boundary of Glen Haven is to be recognized, it must be kept in mind that the county has already been approached by residents in Livermore desiring to re-create a Virginia Dale address, not to mention Stout, Campion, Pinewood Springs, and Poudre City. It is unknown to county staff how a boundary would be created and maintained if the county were to start self-creating boundaries for name and vanity places. 

 

Staff recommends approval of the amendment to section 10-175, road naming and site addressing system requirements, by adding the following: “All site location addresses shall be based upon the city, state, zip code, and extended delivery areas as assigned by the United States Postal Service.”

 

Chair Gibson opened the hearing to public comment. Duke Sumonia, Steven Childs, Bob Clark, John McKinley, Steve Peterson, Jim Broomfield, Doug Grice, Tricia Cobb, Tony Fink, Steve Jackson, and Victoria McCoy all spoke in favor of keeping the name Glen Haven.

 

Chair Gibson closed public comment and Mr. Timm reiterated that the amendment would not create new boundaries or move existing ones, it would only ensure compliance with the USPS.

 

Commissioner Eubanks encouraged the residents of Glen Haven to take their argument to higher forms of government as the county’s discussions with USPS and AMC have proven fruitless. Chair Gibson and Commissioner Rennels agreed and Commissioner Rennels warned the residents that addressing the issue on a higher level would not be an easy or quick process.

 

The Board elected to withdraw the amendment until the residents of Glen Haven have had a chance to resolve their conflict with the USPS.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners withdraw the Larimer County Amendment to the Rural Addressing Resolution.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

7.         MAJESTIC ROOFING ZONING VIOLATION, FILE #08-CC0141:  This is a code compliance violation of Section 4.1.1, FA-Farming Zoning District of the Larimer County Land Use Code, by virtue of allowing the operation of a roofing business from the property in the FA-Farming Zoning District. The subject property owner was also in violation of Section 10 of the Larimer County Land Use Code, by virtue of erecting signs on the property for a commercial business without first obtaining approval for the business and signs.

 

There is a residence on the property, built in approximately 1962, and a storage building, built in 1970.  Both structures were constructed prior to building permit requirements.

 

In 1995, a concept technical review application, file #95-ZN0646, was submitted to the Larimer County Planning Department for the purpose of pursuing rezoning of the subject property from FA-Farming to C-Commercial, to allow the construction and operation of a car sales business on the property. It was determined that although retail uses may have occurred on an intermittent basis on the property in the past, there was no evidence the uses pre-dated the county Zoning Resolution adopted in 1963, or that the commercial uses continued uninterrupted since 1963.  Staff determined that the property could not be used for commercial purposes unless prior approval from the county was obtained. 

 

On April 10, 2008, Dennis Jones called the county to inquire about county requirements to put up a 33-foot tall windmill on the property. Staff explained no commercial uses are allowed in the FA-Farming Zoning District, but a windmill used for private property purposes was allowed.  After the phone call, Mr. Jones obtained Building Permit #08-B0359, issued on May 5, 2008, for a 33.5-foot tall wind turbine monopole tower. The permit was issued on the condition that the tower not be used for commercial or industrial purposes without first obtaining county approval.  Although the tower has been installed, no inspections have been conducted to date. 

 

On July 7, 2008, Ms. Dionigi noticed various signs on the property advertising a roofing business. These signs were noted to be in violation of the Larimer County Sign Code, as commercial businesses are not allowed on site. Ms. Dionigi has since spoken with Mr. Jones and all signs have been removed.

 

The property owner, Chris Christopherson, is in the process of applying for annexation with the City of Loveland and in the meantime is operating as a home business.

 

As the property is now code compliant, there was no action taken by the Board of County Commissioners in regards to the Majestic Roofing Zoning Violation, file #08-CC0141.

 

8.         SUMMIT VIEW LANDSCAPING ZONING VIOLATION, FILE #08-CC0229:  This is a code compliance violation of Section 6, of the Larimer County Land Use Code, which of require completion of the Special Review process prior to the development of a property for nonresidential use.

 

The subject property was purchased by Don Lovell in February of 2004. Soon after, his business, Summit View Landscape Supply, was moved to the property and a zoning violation file was opened, requiring a Site Plan approval to continue business on the subject property. Mr. Lovell submitted a Site Plan application in May of 2006, and the zoning violation file was closed. A newer code compliance file was initiated in the fall of 2008, when staff sent Mr. Lovell a letter directing him to resubmit his Site Plan application. To this date, Mr. Lovell has not submitted the Site Plan application requested in 2008.

 

Staff recommends that the Board finds a violation exists and authorize legal action if Summit View Landscape Supply does comply with the conditions set forth by the Board.

 

Chair Gibson noted that Mr. Lovell was not present at today’s hearing.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners find a violation of the Larimer County Land Use Code does exist. To remedy this violation, the Board will require the requested Site Plan application be resubmitted by February 5, 2009. The subject property owner must obtain approval of the Site Plan by July 5, 2009, and finish all site improvements by November 1, 2009. If these deadlines are not met, the Board has authorized the commencement of legal action.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

There being no further business, the hearing recessed at 5:30 p.m.

 

 

LAND USE HEARING

(#43)

 

The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 6:30 p.m. with Matt Lafferty, Principal Planner. Chair Gibson presided and Commissioners Eubanks and Rennels were present. Also present were Tom Garton, Building Department; Doug Ryan, Environmental Health Department; Traci Shambo, Engineering Department; Chad Gray, and Sean Wheeler, Planning Department; 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, originally presented to the Board on November 17, 2008.

 

At the hearing on November 17, 2008, the Board was informed that Nicole Collins, the applicant, has boarded horses, taught riding lessons, provided training for horses, and operated a day camp for children. The Larimer County Land Use Code, states that properties zoned O-Open may house one horse per ½-acre, provided the animals belong to the property owners who are also responsible for the costs of caring for them. Therefore, Ms. Collins’ business is in direct violation of the Larimer County Land Use Code.

 

Adjacent landowners have continuously expressed displeasure over the inappropriate use of the property and the increased traffic this use has caused. Currently, access to the property is provided via a private driveway that is shared with the two adjacent property owners. The driveway easement was created through a deed following the county’s approval of the Minor Residential Development (MRD) plat. That easement was not shown on the recorded plat and was not reviewed or approved by the county. The easement shown on the recorded MRD runs along the south property line to provide access to the  site, but is not in use, therefore, it was determined that access is a legal issue that must be resolved in civil court. 

 

During the hearing on November 17, 2008, the Board directed staff to provide possible solutions to the problem of access to Ms. Collin’s property. The solutions, presented at today’s hearing, include:

 

1.         To maintain a single access point, the Engineering Department’s preferred alternative is to relocate the existing shared access to the eastern limits of Tract 1.  This would allow Ms. Collins to have a driveway entirely on her own property. 

 

2.         To maintain the current access and have the driveway servicing Tract 1 relocated to the existing easement that runs parallel to Douglas Road. This option would still require a determination that the easement can be utilized for non-residential purposes.  

 

3.         To approve a variance to the access spacing criteria of the Larimer County Rural Area Road Standards and allow the applicant to have a separate access point off of Douglas Road.  If an additional access point is granted near the eastern property of Tract 1, the access spacing to the west and east would both be approximately 280-feet, in lieu of the required 660-feet that is typical for arterial roadways. 

 

Each of these three options would require the applicant to absorb the costs associated with the construction and maintenance of the new access.

 

The applicant, Nicole Collins, addressed the Board and stated that her preferred access method is from Douglas Road. Ms. Collins also stated that she is willing to absorb all costs associated with a new access.

 

Chair Gibson opened the hearing for public comment and Sally Doyle and Ron Lonneman spoke against approval of the special review, stating the use was not allowed in areas zoned O-Open.  Ms. Doyle stated she and her husband researched the zoning in the area prior to purchasing their land to ensure they would not be living next to a commercial operation.

 

Merlue Frasier-Davies and Davie Ellis, stated that they were not against the proposed use, but that the property was in disarray. The poor shape of the property, according to Ms. Frasier-Davies, seems to be a result of the riding academy and horse boarding business.

 

Donna Brown, Marsha Lotz, Polly Morrison, Lucy Brickman, Bob Craft, Dennis Ralph, and Mary Jane McCulley all spoke in favor of approval of the special review.

 

Tom Turner stated that the issue should not be about those fore or against the operation, the issue should be compliance with the Larimer County Land Use Code.

 

Chair Gibson closed the hearing to public comment and the Board questioned staff about the uses allowed on the property. Commissioner Eubanks also questioned staff about the animosity between adjacent land owners and the seemingly excessive amount of time Ms. Collins required to turn in materials requested by staff in October of 2006.

 

Commissioner Rennels stated that the Larimer County Land Use Code is unacceptable for matters such as this and the problem is only going to become more prevalent, pitting neighbor against neighbor.

 

Commissioner Eubanks stated that while businesses such as Ms. Collins’ are plentiful and well intended, the use is not compliant with the zoning of the property and incompatible with the area.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners deny the Complete Equestrian Special Review, file #07-Z1669.

 

Motion carried 2-1, Commissioner Rennels dissenting.

 

1b.       COMPLETE EQUESTRIAN CODE COMPLIANCE, FILE #06-CC0435:  This is a violation of the Larimer County Land Use Code, Section 4.1.5, O-Open Zoning District, by virtue of operating a riding academy and horse boarding facility in the O-Open Zoning District without Special Review approval.

 

The Board questioned Ms. Collins as to the amount of time that would be required to find new homes for the horses she boards and a new location for the riding academy. Ms. Collins stated that the process would probably take about six months.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners find a violation of the Larimer County Land Use Code exists by virtue of operating a horse boarding/riding academy facility in the O-Open Zoning District on the subject property pursuant to the Board of County Commissioner’ denial of the owner’s Special Review application, file #07-Z1669, on this date.

 

If the riding academy and horse boarding facility has not ceased all business operations on the subject property by June 30, 2009, legal action is authorized.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:00 a.m.

 

TUESDAY, JANUARY 6, 2009

 

 

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

 

 

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; Ginny Riley and Margaret Long, Human Services Department; Major Justin Smith, Sheriff’s Department; Kimberly Culp, Larimer Emergency Telephone Authority (LETA); Gary Buffington, and K-Lynn Cameron, Department of Natural Resources;  Jerry White and Charlie Johnson, Engineering Department; Linda Coxen, District Attorney’s Office; George Hass and Jeannine Haag, County Attorney’s Office; and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk.

 

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

 

2.          APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE WEEKS OF DECEMBER 22 AND DECEMBER 30, 2008:

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the minutes for the weeks of December 22 and December 30, 2008.

 

Motion carried 3-0. 

 

 

3.    REVIEW OF THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK OF JANUARY 12, 2009Ms. Hart reviewed the upcoming schedule with the Board.

 

4.    CONSENT AGENDA

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the following items as presented on the Consent Agenda for January 6, 2009:

 

01062009A001           INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT REGARDING ALLOCATION OF TAX INCREMENT REVENUES BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, AND  THE FORT COLLINS DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY. 

 

01062009A002           AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE SERVICES – HOMELESS PREVENTION INITIATIVE – TANF BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF THE LARIMER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES AND HOMELESS PREVENTION INITIATIVE

 

01062009A003           AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE SERVICES – UNITED WAY OF LARIMER HOUSING SERVICES DAY CENTER – TANF BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF THE LARIMER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES AND UNITED WAY OF LARIMER COUNTY

 

01062009D001           DEED OF DEDICATION BY THOMAS W. BALLA AS PARTNER OF BALLA INVESTMENTS, LLC FOR SAID PROPERTY AS A PUBLIC HIGHWAY

 

01062009R001           RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COMPENSATION FOR LARIMER COUNTY APPOINTED OFFICIALS EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2009 (Supersedes 12302008R003 approved on December 30, 2008.)  

 

01062009R002           RESOLUTION FOR REGULATIONS RELATING TO LARIMER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AREAS AND FACILITIES

 

MISCELLANEOUS:  Amendment to Bylaws for the Community Corrections Advisory Board; CDHS Certification of Compliance County Merit System Year 2009.

 

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.    CHANGE OFFICE ON AGING RESOURCE SPECIALIST POSITION TO REGULAR STATUS:  Ms. Riley and Ms. Long requested approval to change a limited term position to regular status, and to fill the position with the current incumbent, as this person is already trained to provide the assistance the position requires. Ms. Riley explained that there are no additional costs associated with this request, just a change in status for the position.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve changing the Resource Specialist position from limited term to regular status, and to fill the position with the current incumbent, Laura Sutherlin.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

6.    POLICY FOR GRANTING EASEMENTS ON COUNTY-OWNED OR COUNTY-MANAGED OPEN SPACE:  Ms. Cameron reviewed changes made to the policy based on the Board’s previous feedback. She noted that the changes mainly concerned the strength of the verbiage such as changing wording from “not allowed” to “will be discouraged.” Commissioner Eubanks expressed concern with the possibility that some of the language might “water down” the protections that have been put in place for open spaces in Larimer County. Commissioner Rennels stated that, in her opinion, it simply allows for consideration of alternatives, and the Department of Natural Resources staff would continue to be good stewards of the land, and  will perform due diligence in protecting the land, in conjunction with easement requests. Chair Gibson agreed, and felt it important to work with individuals to obtain the best possible result.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Policy for Granting Easement on County-owned or County-managed Open Space.

 

Motion carried 2-1; Commissioner Eubanks dissenting.

 

7.   LARIMER EMERGENCY TELEPHONE AUTHORITY (LETA) AGREEMENT AND UPDATE ON LETA ACTIVITIES:  Ms. Culp presented the Board with an update on LETA in terms of budget, legislative changes, projects completed in 2008, and anticipated projects for 2009. She then reviewed the changed to the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the small towns and cities, noting that this had previously been reviewed by the commissioners, and asked for approval on the same. 

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Third Amended Intergovernmental Agreement for the Establishment of the Larimer Emergency Telephone Authority.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

01062009A004           THIRD AMENDED INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE LARIMER EMERGENCY TELEPHONE AUTHORITY

 

8.         SALARY RESOLUTION FOR DISTRICT ATTORNEY:  Ms. Coxen presented a request to continue the resolution that establishes a salary increase of 5% per annum for the four years of the District Attorney’s term, commencing on January 13, 2009. She explained that the DA’s salary is being raised by the state and that Jackson County Commissioners will also approve this resolution. Discussion ensued regarding how to endorse and support a 5% annual increase for the DA. Mr. Lancaster stated that Colorado Revised Statutes treat DA’s differently and that the state does supply the funds to pay for the DA’s salary. 

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the salary resolution establishing compensation for the District Attorney, commencing January 13, 2009, for the four-year term of office.

 

Motion carried 3-0.   

 

01062009R003           RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COMPENSATION AGREEMENT WITH THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY

 

9.  REVISIONS TO THE FAIR BOARD BY-LAWSCommissioner Rennels explained that changes to the by-laws mainly pertained to filling unexpired terms on the Fair Board, and that if an individual steps in to fill an unexpired term, then that time applies to the individual. She also noted that it establishes the structure for the Executive Board.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the revision to the Larimer County Fair Board By-Laws.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

10.  APPROVAL OF POLICY 100.16 – AUTHORITY TO WAIVE POLICY:  Mr. Lancaster explained that the Board has the authority to delegate certain routine items, that are routine in nature, to the County Manager; however, those delegated items have never been pulled together and placed into one policy. He stated that this policy only includes those items that have previously been delegated.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve Policy and Procedure 100.16 – Authority to Waive Policy.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

11.  WORKSESSION:  There were no worksession items to discuss.

 

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.

 

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:05 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.