PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

MONDAY, DECEMBER 16, 1996

ABATEMENT HEARING FOR ESTHER STEINMAN,

TRUSTEE EAS PROPERTIES

(#124)

The Board of County Commissioners met at 11:00 a.m. for an Abatement Hearing for Esther Steinman, Trustee EAS Properties. Chair Clarke presided and Commissioner Disney was present. Also present were: Patty Ring and Christine Murray, Commercial Department Senior Appraisers. Recording Clerk, S. Graves.

Ms. Ring informed the Board that with regard to the Petition for Abatement and Refund of Taxes for Parcel #97123-18-018, property owner Esther A. Steinman, Trustee EAS Properties, the matter has been settled with Mr. Dick Venn of Venn Property Consultants; she noted that the Assessor originally placed a total actual value on the parcel of $267,100 and the petitioner was requesting a value of $180,000. After further negotiations, Ms. Ring noted that the value arrived at for this parcel will be $241,000 and the amount of abatement to be received for 1995 will be $945.40; the amount for 1996 is still to be determined by the Assessor's Office.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners partially approve the Petition for Abatement and Refund of Taxes for Parcel #97123-18-018 for Esther Steinman, Trustee EAS Properties, as recommended by the Assessor's Office; the amount of abatement for 1995 will be $945.40, and the amount for 1996 still to be determined by the Assessor's Office.

Motion carried 2 - 0.

The hearing recessed at 11:05 a.m.

LAND-USE PLANNING MEETING

(#124 @ 200)

The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 3:00 p.m. in regular session with Larry Timm, Director of Planning. Chair Clarke presided; Commissioners Disney and Duvall were present. Also present were: Al Kadera, Subdivision Administrator; Doug Ryan, Environmental Health Planner; Jill Bennett, Senior Planner; and Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney. Recording Clerk, S. Graves.

1. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY BOARD STEWARDSHIP AWARDS: Mr. Ryan noted for the record that the Environmental Advisory Board (EAB) is a twelve-member citizen board appointed by the County Commissioners to advise the County on important matters of environmental concern. Mr. Ryan stated that this year the Advisory Board worked on a number of very important issues and their annual report containing a summary of those issues will be submitted in a month; he noted that 1996 is the second year that the Advisory Board has been involved in a joint partnership project with the County Commissioners to issue environmental stewardship awards and to recognize really important achievements that citizens have devised come up with to protect our environment.

Mark DeGregario, a member of the Environmental Advisory Board, gave a brief synopsis of the three projects that the Advisory Board is recommending stewardship awards for and explained why they are being recommended; he noted that there were a number of very good nominations and this award recognizes projects which are innovative and pro-active. Mr. DeGregario read a summary regarding what each group has done, and then introduced the representative of each group. The first award was given to the POUDRE WILDERNESS VOLUNTEERS and presented to Chuck Bell; Mr. Bell spoke and thanked the 110 volunteers and the Commissioners and expressed appreciation to the EAB for this award. The second award was given to the POUDRE SCHOOL DISTRICT and presented to Don Unger, Superintendent of the Poudre R1 Schools; on behalf of the students and teachers, Mr. Unger expressed appreciation for the award and for the relationship which exists between the school district and County. The third award was presented to the POUDRE BIG THOMPSON RIVERS LEGACY COMMITTEE and presented to Tom Schumaker and K-Lynn Cameron; Mr. Schumaker thanked the Commissioners for playing a key role in this partnership and also thanked the citizens of Larimer and Weld Counties.

On behalf of all the Environmental Advisory Board, Mr. DeGregario congratulated all the groups recognized here today and he thanked the Commissioners for their support of the Environmental Advisory Board; Chair Clarke thanked Mr. DeGregario and the Environmental Advisory Board for their hard work and efforts.

2. REQUEST TO TABLE SUMMIT CREST HOMES: It was noted that the applicant for the Summit Crest Homes has requested this item to be tabled until March 17, 1997.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners table the Summit Crest Homes (#96-ZN0905) until March 17, 1997, as requested by the applicant.

Motion carried 3 - 0.

Chair Clarke noted that the following is a consent item and will not be discussed in detail unless requested by the Commissioners or members of the audience.

3. SIERRA PLAZA CONDOMINIUMS SUBDIVISION (#96-SU0985):

24-05-69 - ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 8TH STREET SE, WEST OF WASHINGTON STREET, SOUTH OF LOVELAND; 2.82 ACRES;

1 LOT; C-COMMERCIAL ZONING

This is a request to create 12 condominium units in an existing commercial building. Staff findings include: 1) Ballard Place Subdivision is an old subdivision on the south side of Loveland; many of the lots have been zoned C-Commercial and I-Industrial since 1963; 2) This request is to condominiumize an existing building so each commercial unit can be sold; approval of this request will not alter the use of this site; 3) Maintenance of the building parking lot and landscaping will be the responsibility of the owners association pursuant to the declaration of covenants. The staff recommendation is for approval of the plat for Sierra Plaza Condominiums.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the staff findings and staff recommendation and approve the Sierra Plaza Condominiums Subdivision (#96-SU0985).

Motion carried 3 - 0.

4. RESOLUTION SUPPORTING PLUS MASTER PLAN THEMES: Mr. Timm stated that at one of the steering committee meetings several weeks ago, the Commissioners and members of the steering committee suggested that it would be desirable to bring to the Commissioners some portion of the Partnership Land Use System (PLUS) project that could be accepted by the Commissioners. Mr. Timm presented a Resolution Supporting the Plus Master Plan Themes and requested Board approval; he noted that acceptance of the resolution would indicate the Commissioner's agreement of these themes which will be used during development of the PLUS Master Plan. The titles of the twelve Master Plan Themes were read aloud; Commissioner Duvall suggested a language change to the last sentence in Theme #10 to read "Amendments to the current Intergovernmental Agreements will need to be implemented, where feasible, concurrent with the Master Plan". Commissioner Disney acknowledged the many hours of staff time and work that have gone into developing these Master Plan Themes.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the Resolution Supporting PLUS Master Plan Themes, as revised, and authorize the Chair to sign same.

Motion carried 3 - 0.

R96-174g RESOLUTION SUPPORTING PLUS MASTER PLAN THEMES

The hearing recessed at 3:35 p.m.

PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE RURAL LAND USE PROCESS

(#125, #126, & #127)

The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 7:00 p.m. for a Public Hearing to consider and discuss the adoption of the Rural Land Use Process. Chair Clarke presided; Commissioners Disney and Duvall were present. Also present were: Larry Timm, Director of Planning; Rob Helmick, Senior Planner; Rex Burns, Project Engineer; Doug Ryan, Environmental Health Planner; and Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney. Recording Clerk, S. Graves.

Chair Clarke opened the hearing, introduced the Commissioners and staff, and stated that the request before the Commissioners tonight is to create and adopt the Rural Land Use Process (RLUP) and to amend the Comprehensive Zoning Resolution of Larimer County by adding Section 27.10 authorizing the Board of County Commissioners to vary minimum lot sizes and setbacks in an approved Rural Land Use Plan.

Mr. Timm addressed the Board and stated that the proposed Rural Land Use Process is presented as an alternative to the 35-acre type of land division which is exempt from the County's subdivision regulations; he continued that the Rural Land Use Process is a voluntary process that is intended to provide advantages to both the property owners and to the general public. Mr. Timm stated that the proposed Rural Land Use process was developed as an outcome of the 35-Acre Symposium, held in July of 1995; following the Symposium, the Commissioners appointed a 35-Acre Task Force, which has worked diligently since then on the development of this process, along with members of the planning staff and the County Attorney's Office.

Staff findings include: 1) Copies of the proposed resolution were sent for comment to the standard list of reviewing agencies, as well as to all those who staff thought might be interested from among those listed as being interested in the Partnership Land Use System (PLUS) and the Front Range Mountain Backdrop Study. Copies were also sent to those who have expressed interest in the 35-Acre Task Force work effort. This mailing list is available for review in the file. Additional copies were sent to those who asked for them as a result of the published notice of this public hearing; 2) Comments have been received from numerous sources regarding the proposed resolution. Staff proposed changes to the proposed resolution to the Planning Commission were based on many of these comments; 3) The County Planning Commission held its public hearing on October 16, 1996 and unanimously recommended approval of the Rural Land Use Process; 4) Some written comments were received after the Planning Commission's public hearing; 5) Some additional changes are recommended by the County Attorney and planning staff following the Planning Commission public hearing. These changes were developed with and reviewed by the 35-Acre Task Force; these changes are included in the staff recommendation, as outlined in the staff report. Mr. Timm noted that the most of the recommendations made by staff since the Planning Commission meeting are not major; he highlighted the changes which are substantive in nature.

Ed Zdenek, spokesman for the 35-Acre Task Force, addressed the Board and publicly recognized the ten remarkable individuals, who with their intelligence, diligence, and caring, have crafted what he considers to be a landmark in the public planning process; he identified those ten members: Facilitator of the group Maggie Carter; Wendall Amos, Brigitte Dempsey, Dr. Robert Graves, Kathay Rennels, Peter Salg, Tom Van Velson, Moby Wile, staff representative Rob Helmick, and himself. Mr. Zdenek provided a brief history of the 35-Acre Task Force, noting that they began meeting in August 1995 and have met for four hours every Monday evening since that time and also have attended countless additional meetings with experts in various fields in at attempt to create a document that would forge a new understanding and encourage good results through the incentive program, not through regulations. Mr. Zdenek stated that the document presented tonight represents a planning process that will fit effectively between the traditional approach of planning and the 35-acre division of land, and has the capability of creating an enormous amount of protected open space.

Tom Van Velson, member of the 35-Acre Task Force, provided a brief background and noted that the charge for the 35-Acre Task Force was to provide a draft document that defined the problem, to develop policy statements that express the objectives, and to develop implementation strategies. Mr. Van Velson stated that these three items are included in the document and the codification of that document, through the County Attorney's Office, is before the Board tonight for approval. Mr. Van Velson stated that at various times, the County Commissioners met directly with the Task Force and responded to specific questions, as well as reviewed the document, and endorsed the approach, the time frames, and the visions of the Task Force; he noted that the Task Force conducted open meetings with many constituencies to gain input, including citizens groups, business interests, the rural public, officials and staff of the small towns in the County, and heard from specialists and sought expertise when needed; he noted that the planning department was kept abreast of the work through the liaison member and, in addition, the PLUS groups were involved. Mr. Van Velson stated that as work continued, it became apparent that there needed to be enabling state legislation to achieve the kind of process that was developing; therefore, the Task Force and Commissioners found a sponsor to carry a bill in the Legislature to address the issues and provide the statutory base for the rural land use process. Mr. Van Velson continued that House Bill 1364 was carried by Representative Bill Jerke, and its provisions allow the State to recognize a rural land use process enacted and adopted by a County that has these features: 1) Reserves at least 2/3 of the total area of the tract for the preservation of contiguous open space; 2) Allows division of land to create partials containing less than 35 acres each; 3) May not exceed two residential units for each 35-acre increment; 4) Does not permit development of set aside land for at least 40 years from the date the plan is approved; 5) Provide for water augmentation when water usage would exceed an annual withdrawal rate of one acre foot for each 35-acre increment; etc. The Bill further allows use of other incentives-the transfer of development rights, preservation of open space, protection for wildlife and critical areas, enhance and maintain rural character and agriculture land suitable for long-range farming and ranching operations. Mr. Van Velson stated that the process is voluntary and non-regulatory in nature-voluntary in that the landowner participates willingly and may choose to withdraw from the process at any point; likewise, the Rural Land Use Center may withdraw if there is no common agreement and negotiations are not productive. In the final step, the plan is subjected to a public hearing and a decision from the Board of County Commissioners.

Wendell Amos, member of the Task Force and the County Planning Commission, stated that during the open meetings, all comments received were discussed and many were adopted; he noted that after the Planning Commission meeting, the changes reviewed and accepted by the Task Force were mainly for clarification of procedures and wordsmithing. With regard to the conflict of interest provision, Mr. Amos stated that legal staff recommended it be omitted. Mr. Amos discussed two main issues: 1) Residual lands in perpetuity or 40 years minimum - he noted that it was recognized that some landowners might balk at not having an option and might want a definite time limit option; he stated that staff and the Task Force recommend acceptance of the residual land section, as all PLUS documents are intended as living documents and can always be amended or modified in the future through the public hearing process; 2) Deletion of the development standards - he noted that these are the technical guidelines, and because of the voluntary nature of the rural land use process and the alternative of the 35 acre exemption, the Task Force wanted as few regulations as possible written into the process and it was recognized that many requirements with respect to public health, welfare and safety must be met in the rural land use process to the satisfaction of all parties involved. Mr. Amos stated that in the interest of completing this document, the Task Force, with the recommendations of the legal, planning, and engineering departments, and the Wildfire Mitigation Coordinator, removed the section on development guidelines in Appendix B and noted that in no way will this effect the end result of a preliminary rural land plan. Mr. Amos stated that the RLU process is new and innovative and it is designed to receive approval from the community and the County before the landowner undergoes considerable expense, and the process wants to reduce conflicts between the landowners, the communities, and the County to a minimum by working toward informed consent. Mr. Amos stated that since the process is new and innovative, it will require a period of testing to determine if it does provide the solutions that Larimer County residents expect. Mr. Amos continued that much has been learned from the first test cases and much is expected to be learned from those that follow; the code will be a living document that will be modified and amended, as necessary, as the experience is gained.

Kathay Rennels thanked the Board for choosing such a diverse group of people on the 35-Acre Task Force; she stated that they believe in consensus and that is why is has taken 17 months to develop the RLUP. Ms. Rennels stated that this process, if allowed, will help the County voluntarily, through no cost to the County, obtain more open space and more agriculture land than anything else and won't cost the taxpayers any money; with this process, the County benefits and so does the land owner. With regard to the new Rural Land Use Board, Ms. Rennels commented that 4 hours a week will be needed by anyone coming on the new Board and the time and commitment will be great.

At this time, the hearing was opened for public comment. Ron Harden of the Larimer Land Trust, described the Larimer Land Trust as a group seeking to serve individual landowners and work with other organizations to protect and preserve environmentally sensitive areas, critical wildlife habitat, agricultural lands, etc.; he noted that the Larimer Land Trust is a referral agency in the proposed codification document and they recognize and appreciate the time and creative efforts that have been put forth by the members of the 35-Acre Task Force and in general they agree with many of the concepts incorporated into the codification process. However, the Larimer Land Trust is concerned about several conceptual issues in the proposed code and he described those in detail, as contained in their letter to the Board of County Commissioners dated December 9, 1996. In conclusion, Mr. Harden stated that the Larimer Land Trust urges the Board of County Commissioners to establish a specific standardized public process for dealing with the fate of residual lands at the time of expiration of the period of nondevelopment, and to establish a funding mechanism from development rights on residual lands to assure that funds equivalent to the market value of residual lands, which are approved for development, be paid by the landowner to Larimer County for the purchase of other lands that would be managed as open space.

Larry Lechner, as representative of the Bellvue Citizens Coalition, offered a qualified endorsement of the RLUP proposal with the modifications as put forth by the Planning Commission and staff, and requested the Board adopt the changes as outlined in their memorandum to the Commissioners dated December 9, 1996; he reviewed those changes. Mr. Lechner stated that the Coalition is somewhat concerned about the makeup of the Rural Land Use Board and would like the composition to be structured in such a way that non-development community interests are guaranteed inclusion. Two specific suggestions were made that they feel would greatly enhance the citizen participation component of the Rural Land Use Process: 1) At least two Board members be required to attend community meetings; 2) At least one or more additional community meetings will be held, if the RLUC Director or recognized citizen group feels it is necessary, and this meeting should be held before the Plan returns to the Board. Mr. Lechner stated that they have reservations regarding the removal of the technical guidelines and they agree with the Planning Commission that this process should be reviewed after one year.

Roger Hoffman, member of the Loveland Environmental Committee, thanked the 35-Acre Task Force for their time and effort and stated that generally the Committee supports the RLUP and he noted that it is a definite improvement over what exists now and they agree with all of the stated principles, purposes and objectives. Mr. Hoffman stated that most of the Committee's concerns have to do with details of implementation and they hope that the make up of the RLUC Board will be representative of the public at large and not dominated by any one interest group, and they ask that a very high standard be set for the future Director of the Center so he will truly represent the public interests in negotiations with applicants for this process; he also stated that there is a need for getting community involvement prior to public hearing and he suggested that the Division of Wildlife be included in the required referral agency list.

Ramon O'Herrea, representing the Poudre Canyon group of the Sierra Club of which there are 1600 members, thanked the Board for this chance to comment and also thanked the 35-Acre Task Force and the volunteer citizen groups who reviewed and recommended the revisions of this document. Mr. O'Herrea stated that the Sierra Club endorses everything heard so far tonight; however, with regard to the composition of the new Rural Land Use Board, the Sierra Club would like the wording describing the composition changed so it ensures that representatives from the environmental community are adequately represented. Mr. O'Herrea continued that the Sierra Club is in favor of the perpetuity of conservation easements, and he suggested the concept of linking the density bonuses to perpetuity; he noted that the Sierra Club doesn't understand why the RLUC Director is not required to report to Planning, because this process is land-use planning, and he stressed the importance of a yearly review. Mr. O'Herrea stated that informality is good, but records need to be kept of meetings and who talks to whom. Chair Clarke asked Mr. Timm to respond to the concern about the RLUC Director not having to report to the Planning Director, Mr. Timm responded that initially the RLUC Director was to report to the Planning Director, but it was recommended that this requirement be taken out of the code because it is more of an administrative matter.

Tom Bender, representing the Farm Bureau (the largest agricultural and practicing environmental organization in Larimer County), stated that they endorse the RLUP and he thanked the 35-Acre Task Force for their work. Mr. Bender asked for a definition of regional preserves and felt that some of the purposes and objectives in Article 3 should be better defined, as well as agriculture land in Section 3E, community rights, perpetuity and controlled public access. Mr. Timm stated that, as he recalls, the term "regional preserves" was recommended by the Open Lands Board.

Michael Doten, member of the Planning Commission, applauded the efforts of the 35-Acre Task Force for their good work and he made a few brief comments basically reinforcing the unanimous vote of the Planning Commission; he expressed one concern about eliminating Appendix B (Technical guidelines) because, in his opinion, guidelines are needed for water, sewer, etc., and also needs to include the critical areas recommended by the Environmental Advisory Board. Mr. Doten also stated that perpetuity should be included, he liked the "conflict of interest" clause, and he thinks the RLUC Director should report to the Planning Director as community rights need to be protected, as well as the rights of the landowner.

Sandy Lemberg, adjacent landowner to the Graves property, stated that his viewpoint is opposite to that of the Bellvue Citizens Coalition because, if the Graves property is allowed cluster development, the larger portion, which is in the foothills, would remain undeveloped. Mr. Lemberg stated that he thinks that the composition of the Rural Land Use Board should reflect the demographics of the County, using criteria related to income and assets, and there needs to be a safeguard included so that the ag people on the Board are committed to agriculture and not planning to subdivide; he noted that there should be a maximum of only two representatives from the development community. With regard to perpetuity or the 40 year provision, House Bill 1364 allows for exemptions to the 35-acre rule based on a minimum of 40 years for a conservation easement, and he recommended that the law be changed to require perpetuity. Mr. Lemberg stated that he believes that the clustering numbers in a clustered development should not exceed 1/35th of the total number of acres in the entire tract; he stated he would like to see this document adopted tonight and these fine points refined.

Kathleen Kilkelly, member of the Northeast Coalition, stated that most of her concerns have been addressed here tonight; however, she noted that the reason this rural land use concept exists originated because of a conflict of development over community interest and if the perpetuity issue is not addressed, and they are left with a minimum of 40 years, an inevitable conflict of development and community interest is just being delayed - the problem will not be resolved. Ms. Kilkelly also noted that the interests of the non-development community representation on the RLUC Board is critical and she urged the use of volunteers, as Larimer County is rich in expertise. Mr. Kilkelly stated that one of her personal concerns is that any and all development should be assessed on its environmental impact and to be fair, there needs to be guidelines and standards to protect our soil, water, and air; and, the public process has to be carried on so there can input throughout the whole process and she favors the review of the process after one year.

Ken Ludwig, a farmer southeast of Loveland for 50 years, stated he is ready to retire and his farm is his retirement and he disagrees with the perpetuity issue and he thinks the statement that "may allow public access to open space" should be left out.

Moby Wile, Director of the Citizens Against Ridgeline Development and member of the 35-Acre Task Force, read a letter from Kathryn Stowe expressing her appreciation to the 35-Acre Task Force for encouraging preservation of the scenic quality of the ridgelines and foothills in Larimer County and requesting the Commissioners approve the Rural Land Use Process this evening. In her letter, Ms. Stowe made additional comments and suggestions for revisions to the "Steps in the Land Use Process".

Harry Sauer, citizen of Larimer County, stated that he likes the document as it is written and thinks it should be adopted and if the changes as proposed tonight are included, the result will be an unworkable document and landowners won't want to participate.

Len Lumons commented on the purposes and objectives of the RLUP and noted that the goals are to preserve and protect these lands and to encourage development; with regard to the makeup of the Board, he stated that it makes sense to split the Board with four people representing the development and farming community and four people representing the environmental community.

Angela Dazlich, member of the PLUS Advisory Council, stated that in her opinion, this is one of the finest documents that the Council has had to peruse; the 35-Acre Task Force did a splendid job and she recommended it be adopted.

At this time, the public comment portion of the hearing was closed and a 5-minute break was taken.

After the break, the hearing was reconvened and opened for Commissioner's comments. The Commissioners reviewed and discussed the twenty-nine pages of the document, dated December 13, 1996, containing the Planning Commission recommendations for the Rural Land Use Process and the additional recommendations for revisions made by staff, and either accepted the proposed revisions or made motions as follows:

Page 1 - No change.

Page 2 - Under Section III (Purposes and Objectives) - Item (B), regarding the definition of "Regional Preserves", Commissioner Disney suggested adding a glossary to this document defining many of the terms contained in this document, including the term "Regional Preserves"; the Board concurred and directed staff to prepare a glossary.

Page 3 - No change.

Page 4 - Under Section III (Purposes and Objectives) - Item "W", was changed as follows: "To recognize and respect both individual rights and community interests and values when development is proposed".

Page 5 - Under Section IV (Applicability) Commissioner Disney questioned item "B" in the shaded box at the top of the page that the RLUP may be used only for single family residential purposes because of the need for affordable housing in Larimer County; Mr. Timm stated that this phrase came from the State Enabling Legislation and Ms. Haag concurred it is written in statute and must remain in the text.

Page 6 - Under Section V (Process) - Item B - (a) #7, the composition of the Rural Land Use Board was discussed and the following motion made:

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the addition of language to an item in Section V (Process) - Item B (a) #7 that "Appointments to the RLUB by the Board of County Commissioners shall represent a cross section of the County and shall include at least two members who earn their primary living from agricultural production and at least two members who are established representatives of the environmental community"; this term to be defined by staff in the glossary.

Motion failed 1 - 2; Chair Clarke and Commissioner Disney dissenting.

Commissioner Disney suggested that the term "cross section of the County" also be defined in the glossary, as well as geographical diversion and gender diversity; further discussion followed and a second motion was made.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the addition of language to an item under Section V (Process) under Item B (a) #7 to read: "Appointments to the RLUB by the Board of County Commissioners shall represent a cross section of the County and shall include at least two members who earn their primary living from agricultural production and at least two members who earn their primary living as biologists".

Motion carried 2 - 1; Chair Clarke dissenting.

Page 6 - Under Section V (Process) (B) #7 (b) regarding that portion of the Planning Commission's recommendation that the RLUC Director ... "shall report to and be under the immediate supervision of the Director of Planning", the staff suggested that this be deleted; however, after discussion, the following motion was made:

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Planning Commission's recommendation and word #7 (b) as follows: "The RLUC Director may be an appointed official or a designated staff person in the Planning Division, and shall report to and be under the immediate supervision of the Director of Planning. Recruitment and selection of the RLUC Director shall be determined by the Board of County Commissioners. The RLUC Director shall be responsible for administration and enforcement of the provisions of the Rural Land Use Process."

Motion carried 2 - 1; Chair Clarke dissenting.

Page 7 - Under Section V (Process) Item #C (List of Volunteers), Commissioner Duvall stated that with regard to a conflict of interest clause, the Bellvue Coalition proposed adding a statement that "Neither the Director of the RLUC, nor any member of the Board, shall participate in discussions of or voting upon any matter in which he/she, or any member of his/her family or his/her business associates, has a financial interest, whether direct or indirect; and, with the amount of support mentioned tonight for this conflict of interest clause, she recommended it be included. Commissioner Disney asked Ms. Haag if the RLUC Board will be required to have a set of Bylaws; she responded that it is not required, but from an organizational and management function, Bylaws may help them run their meetings and take care of business and it is appropriate to ask them to have Bylaws. Therefore, Commissioner Disney suggested that the Rural Land Use Board be required to have a set of Bylaws, which will include a "conflict of interest" clause.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners require that the Rural Land Use Board have a Set of Bylaws which will include a "conflict of interest" clause, similar to that as suggested by the Bellvue Coalition.

Motion carried 3 - 0.

Page 7 - Under Section V (Process) Item C (#2), Commissioner Duvall noted that the Larimer Land Trust recommended that environmental impacts should be added to the list of aspects.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the revision of (#2) under Item C - Section V (Process) to read: "The landowner and the RLUC Director will meet and discuss all aspects of developing the land and/or alternative designs to determine the number, size and layout of sites, roads, access, utilities, water supply requirements, wastewater, proposed open space, protected areas or other areas intended to be excluded from development, possible environmental impacts, possible incentives..."

Motion carried 3 - 0.

Page 8 - At the top of the page Section V (Process) Item C - #2, Chair Clarke noted that it was suggested that the word "known" be taken out before neighborhood representatives; Commissioner Duvall suggested also that "and volunteers" be added after neighborhood representatives.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve amending the recommendation made by the Planning Commission, as listed in Section V (Process) Item C - #2 to read: "The RLUC Director may involve appropriate personnel of review agencies and neighborhood representatives and volunteers to obtain input at the early design phase of a project".

Motion carried 3 - 0.

Page 9 - In Section V (Process) under C - (#9), Commissioner Duvall noted that the Bellvue Coalition suggested that at least two RLUC members be requested to attend the neighborhood and community meetings for discussion.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board of County Commissioners amend Section V (Process) Item C - #9 to read: "The RLUC Director and the landowner will arrange for and meet with the neighborhood and community members to review the plan in detail, with at least two Rural Land Use Board members attending each community meeting".

Motion carried 3 - 0.

As a point of clarification, at this time Larry Timm asked the Board if they are accepting both the Planning Commission and additional staff recommendations as they are going through the Rural Land Use Process document page by page, if those recommendations are not discussed and changes made accordingly; they responded in the affirmative.

Page 10 - At the top of the page, Commissioner Duvall noted that the Bellvue Coalition also recommended that an addition be made to the sentence added by the Planning Commission in Section V (Process) Item C (d) under #9.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the addition of a statement to the Planning Commission recommendation in Section V (Process) Item C (d) under #9 to read: "Community Meetings will be recorded and tapes made available to the RLUB and interested parties upon request. If deemed necessary by the RLUC Director or the RLUC Board, one or more additional community meetings will be scheduled to discuss the proposed development plan before the plan receives further review by the Rural Land Use Board".

Motion carried 3 - 0.

Commissioner Disney asked for a definition of "recognized citizen group"; Commissioner Duvall stated that this term should be defined and included in the glossary.

Page 11 - At the top of page 11, Section V (Process) Item C (b) under #13, it was suggested by Kathryn Stowe that a Notice of hearing shall be sent by first class mail at least 14 days instead of seven.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the change in Section V (Process) Item C #13 (b) to read: "Notice of the hearing shall be sent by first class mail at least 14 days prior to the hearing date to those agencies and persons listed in Appendix "A"...", and change #13 (c) to read: "Notice shall also be given by posting a bright colored sign with letters visible from a public roadway on the subject property at least 14 days prior to the hearing."

Motion carried 3 - 0.

Pages 12, 13 & 14: No changes.

Page 15: The issue of residual lands was discussed at length; Commissioner Duvall stated that from the beginning in all the discussions with the 35-Acre Task Force, they have always talked about perpetuity and it was supported by them when a density bonus was allowed; she continued that in some of those discussions, some of the members said they kept adding the word perpetuity, but the lawyers kept taking it out. Commissioner Duvall stated that when she talked to Ms. Haag about this, she felt that if they required perpetuity, they would not be able to allow the tax benefit of a conservation easement. Commissioner Duvall stated that she feels very strongly that perpetuity needs to be included and tied to the incentive of a density bonus and this will increase the value; much discussion followed.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the addition to Section VI (Principles) - Item C (Residual Land) - #2 that reads: Residual Land will be precluded from additional development by an appropriate legal process, e.g., deed restrictions, covenants, etc.; and "Where density bonus is rewarded, preservation and perpetuity shall be required."

Motion failed 1 - 2; Chair Clarke and Commissioner Disney dissenting.

Page 16: Commissioner Disney suggested an addition to Section VI (Principles) Item C - #7 (d) #3 of the phrase "at fair market value" as follows:

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the addition of the phrase "at fair market value" to Section VI (Principles) Item C - #7 (d) #3 to read: "If further development is approved for the residual land, the additional development rights for the development must be purchased by the owner from the county, community, or land trust at fair market value..."

Motion carried 3 - 0.

Page 16: Commissioner Duvall noted that in Section VI (Principles) Item C - #7 (b), the Larimer Land Trust suggested new wording to this item.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the addition of wording to Section VI (Principles) Item C - #7 (b) to read: "A public process shall be required. The procedures involving public notice, public hearing, participation, etc. shall be in accordance with standard Larimer County planning and public hearing processes in place at that time".

Motion carried 3 - 0.

Page 17: Section VI (Principles) Item D entitled Technical Guidelines (outlined in Appendix "B") will be deleted and now titled Development Standards. Mr. Timm submitted a copy of a section regarding Public Lands which was to be a part of Appendix "B"; however, since Appendix "B" is to deleted, the section on Public Lands will be included in Section VI (Principles) Item B #4 (r).

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the deletion of both Section D (Technical Guidelines) and Appendix B and the addition of a new Section D (Development Standards) to read as follows: "Land divisions into parcels of 35 acres or more are currently exempt from many of the development standards that are applied to subdivisions containing smaller parcels. In recognition of this fact and the voluntary nature of the Rural Land Use Process, the standards that are applied to development under this process shall be those necessary for public health, safety and welfare".

Motion carried 3 - 0.

Pages 18, 19, 20 & 21: No changes.

Appendix "A": Commissioner Disney noted that (c) under item #2 in Appendix "A", the State Highway Department is now the Colorado Department of Transportation and should be changed accordingly. Ms. Haag noted also that in Appendix "A" under #1, the agencies listed as mandated to receive a Notice of the Preliminary Rural Land Plan, several of those agencies are duplicated under #2 for "referrals which must be made only when either the landowner, the RLUC Director or the RLUB believe it necessary".

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the elimination of the State Highway Department from the list of referral agencies and to substitute the Colorado Department of Transportation, move the Colorado Division of Wildlife from the #2 list to the mandated #1 list, and instruct staff to work on the other agency duplications as indicated.

Motion carried 3 - 0.

With regard to the concern about monitoring and evaluation of the success of the RLUP, Commissioner Disney suggested that the Board of County Commissioners develop a policy concerning review, success and failure of this process, independent of this codification document, during a standing Policy Worksession. Commissioner Duvall also suggested that under implementation strategies for the RLUP Code, that an augmentation plan, critical lands identification, record keeping and measuring of success also be addressed during a Policy Worksession.

Chair Clarke thanked everyone for their comments and input received tonight and expressed appreciation especially to the 35-Acre Task Force for all their effort and hard work in crafting this document.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the Rural Land Use Process, as submitted and amended.

Motion carried 3 - 0.

The hearing adjourned at 11:00 p.m.

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1996

PUBLIC HEARING FOR ADOPTION OF THE 1997 BUDGET

The Board of County Commissioners met at 1:30 p.m. for a Public Hearing for adoption of the 1997 Budget for Larimer County. Chair Clarke presided and Commissioner Disney was present. Also present were Bob Keister, Budget Manager, and Frank Lancaster, County Manager. Recording Clerk, S. Graves.

Mr. Keister requested Board approval and the Chair's signature on a number of budget resolutions to amend the 1996 budget, to adopt the 1997 budget, and to certify the mill levy; he noted that the 1997 budget is for a total of $124,471.857, which has been revised downward by $305,038 since the public hearings were held to discuss the budget.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the Notice and Resolution to Transfer Funds and Amend the Budget for 1996, and authorize the Chair to sign same.

Motion carried 2 - 0

R96-175g NOTICE AND RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER FUNDS AND

AMEND THE BUDGET FOR 1996

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the Resolution to Adopt the 1997 Budget, Set Levies and Certify a Temporary Tax Credit, and authorize the Chair to sign same.

Motion carried 2 - 0.

R96-176g LARIMER COUNTY RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 1997

BUDGET, SET LEVIES AND CERTIFY A TEMPORARY

TAX CREDIT

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Resolutions to Adopt 1997 Budgets and Set Levies for the following Larimer County Entities for the Calendar Year Commencing the First Day of January 1997 and Ending the Last Day of December 1997, and authorize the Chair to sign same: Pest District (Weed District); Emergency Telephone Authority - E911 Authority; Public Trustee; GID #1 - Imperial Estates; GID #2 - Pinewood Springs; GID #4 - Carriage Hills; GID #8 - Namaqua Hills Maintenance; GID #10 - Homestead - GID #12 - Club Estates; GID #13A - Red Feather; GID #14 - Little Valley; and GID #1991-1 - Arapahoe Pines.

Motion carried 2 - 0.

R96-177g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1997 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES

FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY PEST DISTRICT

R96-178g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1997 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES

FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY EMERGENCY TELEPHONE

AUTHORITY

R96-179g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1997 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES

FOR THE LARIMER COUNTY PUBLIC TRUSTEE

R96-180g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1997 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES

FOR LARIMER COUNTY GID #1 - IMPERIAL ESTATES

R96-181g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1997 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES

FOR LARIMER COUNTY GID #2 - PINEWOOD SPRINGS

R96-182g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1997 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES

FOR LARIMER COUNTY GID #4 - CARRIAGE HILLS

R96-183g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1997 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES

FOR LARIMER COUNTY GID #8 - NAMAQUA HILLS

MAINTENANCE

R96-184g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1997 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES

FOR LARIMER COUNTY GID #10 - HOMESTEAD ESTATES

R96-185g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1997 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES

FOR LARIMER COUNTY GID #11 - MEADOWDALE HILLS

R96-186g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1997 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES

FOR LARIMER COUNTY GID #12 - CLUB ESTATES

R96-187g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1997 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES

FOR LARIMER COUNTY GID #13A - RED FEATHER

R96-188g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1997 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES

FOR LARIMER COUNTY GID #14 - LITTLE VALLEY

R96-189g RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 1997 BUDGET AND SET LEVIES

FOR LARIMER COUNTY GID #1991-1 - ARAPAHOE PINES

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the Resolution to Appropriate Sums of Money for 1997, and authorize the Chair to sign same.

Motion carried 2 - 0.

R96-190g RESOLUTION TO APPROPRIATE SUMS OF MONEY FOR 1997

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the Resolution to Designate Ending 1997 Fund Balances, and authorize the Chair to sign same.

Motion carried 2 - 0.

R96-191g RESOLUTION TO DESIGNATE ENDING 1997 FUND BALANCES

M O T I O N

Commissioner Disney moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the 1996 Certification of Levies and Revenue by the Larimer County Commissioners for Larimer County, Colorado, and authorize the Chair to sign same.

Motion carried 2 - 0.

Reporters Steve Porter and Janet Thayer queried the Board about the 1997 budget; discussion followed.

The hearing adjourned at 2:00 p.m.

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1996

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

(#128)

The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 a.m. in regular session with Frank Lancaster, County Manager. Chair Clarke presided; Commissioners Disney and Duvall were present. Also present were: Marla Hehn, Assistant County Attorney; Jerry White, Right-Of-Way Agent; George Hass, County Attorney; Rob Helmick, Senior Planner; Sam Szymanski, Grants Manager Human Development; Dick Anderson, Facilities Manager; Rex Smith, Director of Public Works; Debra Passariello, City of Fort Collins Facility Services Manager; Larry Timm, Director of Planning; and Donna Hart, Community Information Manager. Recording Clerk, S. Graves.

1. OPEN SESSION FOR PUBLIC COMMENT: No one came today to address the Board during the Open Session for Public Comment.

  • 2. CONSENT AGENDA:
  • M O T I O N

    Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the following items, as listed on the Consent Agenda for Administrative Matters on December 18, 1996:

    -- Request for Chair's Signature on Three Documents Concerning Purchase of the Franz Property: Ms. Hehn submitted the following final closing documents for the purchase of the Franz Property, as discussed and approved during an Open Lands Projects meeting on December 9, 1996: Option Agreement, Lease, and Resolution; she requested the Chair's signature on same.

    A96-158 OPTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY

    COMMISSIONERS AND JEROME CORNELL, AS TRUSTEE OF

    THE PAULINE L. FRANZ TRUST

    R96-192g RESOLUTION FOR PURCHASE OF FRANZ PROPERTY

    (For Open Lands Project)

    -- Appointments to the Larimer Emergency Telephone Authority (LETA) Board: The following persons were appointed to the Larimer County Emergency Telephone Authority Board: City of Fort Collins Deputy Chief Deryle O'Dell, as recommended by the City of Fort Collins; and Steve Charles of the Berthoud Fire Protection District, as recommended by the Towns of Berthoud, Estes Park, Timnath, and Wellington; each for two-year terms beginning January 1, 1997.

    -- First Reading of the Model Traffic Code: Mr. Hass read aloud the First Reading of the Model Traffic Code; he noted that copies of the Ordinance, Model Traffic Code, Existing Fine Schedule and Addition to Fine Schedule are on file at the office of the Larimer County Commissioners and may be inspected during regular business hours. Mr. Hass noted that the Model Traffic Code was adopted last spring, and technical corrections have been made.

    -- Final Plat for Morning Star Church Minor Residential Development:

    -- Minutes for the Week of December 9, 1996, as submitted.

    -- Schedule for the Week of December 23, 1996, as submitted.

    -- MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS: Letter to Laura Belsten, Waste Tire Grant Program Coordinator, to be included with the Grant Application for Tire Removal from Roberts Ranch; Glacier View Meadows 4th Filing Amended Plat of Lots 36 and 48; Sierra Plaza Condominium Plat; and the Lynn Acre Amended Plat. LIQUOR LICENSES: County approval was granted to Red Feathers Carry Out - 6% - Red Feather, CO.; and the Cloverleaf Race Track - 6% - Loveland, CO.

    A96-159 AGREEMENT CONCERNING RODEO ACT (S) BETWEEN

    THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND BEUTLER

    AND GAYLORD RODEO CO., INC. (Provision for Rodeo Acts

    for the Larimer County Fair)

    A96-160 HUMANE SOCIETY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD

    OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE HUMANE SOCIETY

    FOR LARIMER COUNTY (Provision of Economical, Safe, and

    Human Animal Treatment and Control within the Unincorporated

    Areas of Larimer County)

    R96-193s RESOLUTION REGARDING PARTIAL RELEASE OF

    COLLATERAL FOR EAGLE CREST SUBDIVISION

    R96-194z SPECIAL REVIEW FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING

    THE PETITION OF WESTERN PCS RADIO FACILITIES

    R96-195s FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE IHNEN

    MINOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT APPEAL

    Motion carried 3 - 0.

    3. NORTH FRONT RANGE TDP PRESENTATION: Ms. Szymanski introduced Rick Evans, the consultant who has assisted with the development of the joint Transit Development Plan (TDP). Mr. Evans provided a brief update of the study and noted that his firm did a 5-year transit plan for Larimer County with Fort Collins and Loveland a year ago and the previous year, his firm did a 5-year plan with Greeley and Weld County; he stated that their purpose now is to pull those two plans together to develop a regional plan to summarize what is going on in the region in terms of transit planning and to look at connections between communities. Mr. Evans stated that they updated all the plans so they are on the same timeframe and they also did an institutional and financial study to look at who would manage and make decisions on levels of service and funding mechanism; he continued that the Advisory Committees of the previous plans provided their input and through the public process they received public input and major corridors were identified. Mr. Evans noted that they did an analysis using traffic volumes, census data, journey to work trips, etc. to get an idea of the number of passenger trips; then, in order to meet the estimated demand, they determined how many buses would be needed and the cost. Mr. Evans submitted a summary sheet projecting the number of trips per weekday, number of vehicles required, fare, annual service hours, annual ridership, annual operation costs, equipment costs, etc.; the summary sheet was reviewed and discussed in detail. Mr. Evans also submitted and reviewed a summary sheet outlining the rate required to cover the unfunded annual cost of the preferred plan, by jurisdiction, assuming that the current level of Federal funding continues; questions from the Board and discussion followed. Commissioner Duvall stated she would like to see the costs for operating a single occupancy vehicle and what savings will be achieved in terms of road construction and maintenance, as well as air quality, with this plan; she recommended to Ms. Szymanski and Mr. Evans that they try and make riding the bus something that people want to do and to charge enough so it will pay for itself.

    4. COURTHOUSE FACILITIES NEEDS: Discussion ensued regarding the security issue and the overcrowding situation in the Courthouse and the options being considered to alleviate the situation on a short-term basis. Mr. Lancaster informed the Board of situations which are going to occur which will increase the need for several more court rooms and possibly some 1997 staff increases, mainly in the Building Department. Mr. Anderson stated that an immediate solution is to move the law library into the space currently occupied by part of the cafeteria and Mr. Slavic's storage area, and to move Courtroom 7 to the 3rd floor--these changes will put all the District and County courts in a secure area. Mr. Lancaster noted that the other issue is the municipal court space, which is still in an unsecured area, and the recommendation of the Security Committee is to formally notify the City of Fort Collins that we will be asking them to leave the Courthouse sometime in 1997. Another option being considered, after these changes are made, is to move one the major offices out of the Courthouse, such as the Motor Vehicle Department, and possibly Human Resources. Commissioner Duvall noted that the public needs to be made aware of the space problems and some inconvenience might point out the problem to them. After further discussion, the Board concurred with the suggestions, as presented. Mr. Lancaster informed the Board that they still need to consider providing another modular to address planning needs.

    5. WORKSESSION:

    Invitations: Ms. Hart reviewed the pending invitations with the Board and they indicated to her which events they could attend.

    -- Date to Schedule Public Hearing on Model Traffic Code: Mr. Lancaster stated that he sent an E-Mail to the Board asking when they would like the public hearing to consider adoption of an Ordinance on the Model Traffic Code to be scheduled; after discussion, it was decided to schedule the hearing before the land use meeting on January 6, 1996.

    6. COMMISSIONER REPORTS:

    -- Chair Clarke reported that after the Board's discussion on December 12, 1996 regarding the Resolution of the Council of the City of Fort Collins, and the subsequent direction from the Board for Mr. Timm to draft a letter to the City Council outlining the Board's suggestions and revisions to the resolution, he met with Mayor Ann Azari to discuss the letter with her. Ms. Azari suggested that the Commissioners send that letter to the City staff so they can use it as a basis for discussions with County staff to work on the revisions, and to just briefly inform City Council of the Board's intentions; therefore, Chair Clarke drafted a very brief letter to send to Council and he asked for the Board's concurrence. After discussion, Commissioners Disney and Duvall both agreed with the brief letter being sent to City Council, as written by Chair Clarke.

    The meeting adjourned at 11:05 a.m.

    ______________________________________

    JOHN CLARKE, CHAIR

    BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

    ( S E A L )

    ATTEST:

    _______________________________________

    Sherry E. Graves, Deputy County Clerk