Larimer County Offices, Courts, and Landfill are all closed on Monday, Sept. 5, 2016 for the Labor Day Holiday. Critical services at Larimer County are not interrupted by closures. Critical services at Larimer County are not disrupted by closures.
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Monday, APRIL 25, 2005
LAND USE HEARING
The Board of County Commissioners met at 3:00 p.m. with Rob Helmick, Principle Planner. Chair Rennels presided and Commissioners Wagner and Gibson were present. Also present were: Porter Ingrum, and Matt Lafferty, Planning Department; Roxann Hayes, and Rex Burns, Engineering Department; David Ayraud, and Bill Ressue, County Attorney's Office; and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk.
Chair Rennels opened the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance, and asked for public comment on the County Budget and Land Use Code. No one from the audience addressed the Board regarding these topics. Chair Rennels then explained that the following items are on consent and would not be discussed unless requested by the Board, staff, or members of the audience:
1. HUGHES RIGHT-OF-WAY/EASEMENT VACATION; 05-S2412: This is a request to vacate a portion of a 30-foot utility and access easement and a portion of the Right-of-Way (ROW) for N. Shore Drive to resolve an encroachment issue. This application was forwarded to the appropriate departments and agencies for comment. The responses from the majority of groups reveal that there are no other issues of concern. The Building Department has stated that a permit for a garage is on hold pending approval of this application. After approval of this application, final fees will need to be paid and final inspections must be conducted and approved. The Development Services Team recommendation is for approval of the Hughes Right-of-Way/Easement Vacation, File #05-S2412, a request to vacate a portion of a 30-foot utility and access easement and a portion of the ROW for North Shore Drive to resolve an illegal encroachment issue as outlined in the attached documentation and subject to the following condition: 1. Within 90 days of the approval for this easement and ROW vacation, the applicant must obtain a building permit and all required inspection approvals for an existing garage constructed without a building permit.
2. PINEY KNOLLS AT RED FEATHER LOT 6 EASEMENT VACATION; 05-S2411: This is a request to vacate a 15 foot side yard utility easement to resolve an encroachment issue. This application requests the vacation of a side yard utility easement to resolve an encroachment issue. This application was forwarded to the appropriate departments and agencies for comment. The responses from these groups reveal that there are no other issues of concern. The Development Services Team recommendation is for approval of the Piney Knolls @ Red Feather Lot 6 Easement Vacation File #05-S2411, a request to vacate a 15-foot side yard utility easement to resolve an illegal encroachment issue as outlined in the attached documentation.
3. VAUGHAN UTILITY EASEMENT VACATION; 05-S2414: This application requests the vacation of a portion of the side yard utility easement to resolve an encroachment issue. This application was forwarded to the appropriate departments and agencies for comment. The responses from these groups reveal that there are no other issues of concern. The Development Services Team recommendation is for approval of the Vaughan Utility Easement Vacation File #05-S2414, a request to vacate five feet of the ten foot side yard utility easement to resolve an illegal encroachment issue as outlined in the attached documentation.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Wagner moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the consent agenda as outlined above.
Motion carried 3-0.
4. TRAILS END PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNED LAND DIVISION; 00-S1654: There are two requests in conjunction with this application: 1. A Rezoning from C (Commercial) and R2 (Residential) to Planned Development (PD), and 2. Preliminary Plat approval for the Trails End Planned Land Division, which proposes to divide a 34.79 acre parcel into 3 single family residential lots. On January 19, 2005, the Development Services Team presented the Trails End PD (Planned Development) and PLD (Planned Land Division) application to the Planning Commission. The discussion following the Development Services Team presentation focused on easements for trails and drainage, as well as wetland buffers. With regards to the discussion regarding an easement for a bicycle trail along the southern side of County Road 52E, the Development Services Team clarified that the Parks and Open Lands Department was requesting a temporary easement across the northern reaches of the property for the construction of the trail this spring. The Development Services Team further explained that the easement would be situated within the future right-of-way to be dedicated by this development, but because of the uncertainty of the timing of the recordation of the final plat verses the anticipated spring construction of the trail an easement was requested prior to the completion of the final plat so that the construction of the trail would remain on schedule. The discussion regarding the trail easement concluded with comments by the Planning Commission that it would be desirable if the applicant could resolve the trail easement with the Parks and Open Lands Department, but did not propose any changes to the conditions. A significant discussion regarding a condition of approval that would require the dedication of a 60 foot wide drainage easement along the eastern boundary of the development site occurred between the applicant, Planning Commission and the Development Services Team. The applicant argued that he should not be required to provide such an easement because it was not necessary for his development. He further argued that the easement being requested was based upon a preliminary drainage study created as part of the LaPorte Area Plan long after he had submitted his application. Finally, the applicant indicated that placing a drainage feature along the eastern boundary of the property would affect existing ground water issues occurring in the area and might bifurcate existing water rights. In response to the applicant comments, the Development Services Team noted that adequate public facilities is a primary goal of the Land Use Code when considering new developments, and studies done as part of the LaPorte Area Plan indicates that in order to pass storm water drainage from an upper drainage basin through this property to the Poudre River a future drainage ditch/swale will be required along the eastern boundary of the project site. The Development Services Team also provided citations from the Land Use Code that require new development to provide necessary easements to ensure the passing of drainage to and through a property based upon identified future public, which citation are as follows:
Section 8.1.3.A.2.c – Each development must provide adequate conveyance facilities for the estimated peak rate of runoff coming to and passing through the development;
Section 8.1.3.A.2.d – An acceptable legal and physical path-of-flow for storm water passing through the development and downstream to an acceptable point of discharge must be identified for each development, consistent with the generalized basin master plan
To this end, the Planning Commission discussed the requirement for the 60 foot wide drainage easement along the eastern boundary of the development, which resulted in a recommendation by the Planning Commission to not require the easement but rather require a sixty foot wide setback along the eastern boundary of the development, which would leave opportunity for a drainage corridor in the area, but only if acquired by future development or the County at the time of construction/implementation of the drainage plan. The final point of discussion regarding the Trails End development application related to existing wetlands occurring on the property, which wetlands require buffers in accordance with the Larimer County Land Use Code, as well as mitigation should the buffer areas or wetlands be impacted by development of the lots. The applicant acknowledged the existence of the wetlands on the site, but argued that the wetlands were the result of broken drain tiles occurring on the property and that once repaired the wetlands would likely disappear. After much debate as to how the wetlands came into existence and what may occur to them at some time in the future, the Planning Commission agreed with the Development Services Team that the buffers are required and should be provided, further stating that if the wetlands disappear after the drain tiles are repaired then an amended plat to remove the identified buffers could be applied for. Aside from the issues raised above there were no other topics of discussion regarding this application. However, the Development Services Team has a recommendation that is different from the Planning Commission primarily as it relates to the drainage easement.
The Development Services Team recommends supporting the Planning Commission recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners for the approval of the request to rezone the property for the Trails End Planned Land Division from R2 (Residential) and C (Commercial) to PD (Planned Development) as represented in the Planning Department File #00-S1654 subject to the subject to the following conditions: 1. The Planned Development (PD) zoning for the property shall be as follows:
PD (Planned Development)
A. Principal uses:
Boarding stable (S)
Pet animal facility (MS/S)
Pet animal veterinary clinic/hospital (MS/S)
Livestock veterinary clinic/hospital (MS/S)
Single-family dwelling (R)
Group home for the developmentally disabled (R)
Group home for the elderly (R)
Group home (R)
Utility substation (L)
Water storage facility (L)
Treatment plant (L)
B. Lot, building and structure requirements:
1. Minimum lot size:
a. 10 Acres
2. Minimum setbacks:
a. Front yard—Refer to section 8.17 (supplementary regulations for setbacks from highways and county roads) of the Larimer County Land Use Code as amended. The setback from an interior subdivision road or established public or private road must be 25 feet from the property line or from the nearest edge of the road easement.
b. Side yards—25 feet.
c. Rear yards—25 feet.
d. Streams, creeks and rivers—100 feet from the centerline of the established watercourse.
3. Maximum structure height—40 feet.
4. No parcel can be used for more than one principal building; additional buildings on a parcel are allowed if they meet the accessory use criteria in subsection 4.3.10 of the Larimer County Land Use Code as amended.
The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Planning Commission recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners of the Preliminary Plat for the Trail End Planned Land Division (00-S1654) subject to the following conditions:
1. The Final Plat shall be consistent with the approved preliminary plat and with the information contained in the Trails End Planned Land Division (File #00-S1654), 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 Trails End Planned Land Division.
2. The following fees shall be collected at building permit issuance for new single family dwellings: Poudre R-1 school fee, Larimer County fees for County and Regional Transportation Capital Expansion, Larimer County Regional Park Fees (in lieu of dedication) and drainage fees. The fee amount that is current at the time of building permit application shall apply.
3. Passive radon mitigation measures shall be included in construction of residential structures on these lots. The results of a radon detection test conducted in new dwellings once the structure is enclosed but prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy shall be submitted to the Building Department. As an alternative, a builder may present a prepaid receipt from a radon tester which specifies that a test will be done within 30 days. A permanent certificate of occupancy can be issued when the prepaid receipt is submitted.
4. Prior to the recordation of the final plat the applicant shall illustrate on the final plat an easement for the purposes of a pedestrian and bicycle trail. The easement shall be situated adjacent to County Road 52E along the entire northern boundary and the width shall be as agreed upon between the Larimer County Parks and Open Lands Department and the applicant. Require a dedicated 50 half width right of way on County Road 52E.
5. The final plat shall provide building envelopes on each of the lots, with the eastern portion of the building envelope for Lot 3 being 60 feet in width and the provision that no buildings be constructed in the 60 foot setback. The building envelopes shall not encroach into the wetland buffers surrounding the existing wetlands on the property. Should the applicant mitigate and consolidate the wetlands to another location on the property, this area should be excluded from the building envelopes. If the wetlands are consolidated the buffer shall be 50 foot.
6. The applicant chooses to leave the wetlands as currently situated on the property a management plan for the maintenance and protection of the wetlands, consistent with Section 8.2 of the Land Use Code shall be provided and approved.
Mr. Lafferty displayed aerial photos of the property and explained that the applicant has been working on plans to develop this property in some shape or form for many years; he explained that the proposed density for this property has dropped from approximately 150 lots at one point, down to 12 lots, and is now being proposed as a three lot subdivision. Mr. Lafferty stated that there are two unresolved issues: 1. The displacement or buffering of the wetlands on the property; and 2. The requirement for a 60 foot drainage easement. Mr. Lafferty explained that the Planning Commission recommended establishing a building envelope on the east lot that would prohibit structures from being placed within 60 feet of the property line, rather than requiring an easement dedication from the property owner. Commissioner Gibson asked if the property was in the flood plain. Mr. Lafferty stated that portions of it are in the flood plain, but not in the floodway. Commissioner Wagner asked if the wetlands can be consolidated and become part of the easement. Mr. Lafferty replied in the affirmative. Mr. Helmick noted that the applicant is concerned that the drainage could adversely affect his sump system, and also claims that the wetlands were created only as a result of faulty drainage; therefore, he questions the obligation to maintain them.
At this time the applicant, Jay Moody, addressed the Board. Mr. Moody stated that he feels the 60 foot easement requirement is excessive, as is the two and three quarter acre additional ground required to maintain the wetlands. Chair Rennels asked if Mr. Moody would be agreeable to Planning Commission's suggestion of a building envelope with a setback requirement of 60 feet. Mr. Moody stated that at this point he was unsure of exactly what he would be agreeable to, as he has worked and re-worked this proposal to the point that it is now down to three lots. Chair Rennels asked if Mr. Moody had objections to any of the other conditions. Mr. Moody stated that he objected to the wetlands requirements as they are not natural wetlands and were created due to broken drainage tiles that caused the water to collect in these areas.
At this time Chair Rennels opened up the hearing for public comment. Connie Barnes, adjoining neighbor, addressed the Board with questions regarding the drainage and whether it would be swail or tile drainage. Ms. Barnes also stated her concerns with changing the terrain in any way, as this might cause water to siphon back up and flood her property to the west. Lee McConnell, adjoining neighbor, stated that he feels the three lot proposal is much better than any of the previous proposals. Mr. McConnell also stated concerns with the drainage in the area. Mary McConnell agreed with Mr. Moody and stated that the wetlands were created due to broken drainage tiles. Mrs. McConnell noted concerns with draining the water from the north down through their property; otherwise, she expressed approval of the plan. Doug Biggie, neighboring resident, noted for the record that the sewer line is at capacity and there needs to be some dialogue between the City and Mr. Moody to put these three lots on sanitary sewer. There being no further public comment, Chair Rennels closed this portion of the hearing.
Mr. Burns explained the need for drainage across Mr. Moody's property due to the sizable basins to the north, and the fact that three times in the past 30 years, water has overflowed County Road 54G east of Cotton Willow Estates. Mr. Burns stated that there is a drainage master plan for the LaPorte area, and the reason the water needs to go south through Mr. Moody's property is so it can follow the contours of the land and flow into the river. Mr. Burns noted that the drainage would be a 40 foot open channel, and that they would be careful not to tamper with the grade of the land, so it should not affect the Cotton Willow Estates. Commissioner Wagner asked Mr. Burns when this channel might be constructed. Mr. Burns stated that it could be a very long time indeed, and it would be triggered by new development and sewer lines as they are established in this area. Commissioner Gibson questioned the definition of wetlands. Mr. Ingrum stated that the property has received an official delineation as a wetlands environment. Mr. Ingrum noted that certain parameters are used to classify wetlands, which include the presence of hydric soils, vegetation, and hydrology, all of which are present on this site. Finally, Mr. Ingrum noted that the many of the wetlands in the County were agriculturally created.
Mr. Moody stated that he was denied the opportunity to put in a new drain and bury it, but now Mr. Burns is proposing an open drain and if that is the case, then he might as well be allowed to go back to his original plan. Mr. Lafferty stated that under the original plan, the Health Department was concerned with the septic systems being so close to the ground water. Ultimately the Health Department stated that they would support septic systems on lots 5 acres or greater in size. Some discussion ensued regarding the 60 foot easement verses a setback requirement, whether or not fencing and storage sheds could be placed within the setback, the total area and buffering requirements of the wetlands, and the possibility of creating an outlot for the wetlands so they are taxed at the minimal value.
At this time members of the audience requested the opportunity to re-address the Board.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board of County Commissioners re-open public comment.
Motion carried 3-0.
Mr. McConnell explained some history with the floodplain and expressed concern with the drainage coming through his property. Mr. McConnell stated his opinion that if more water comes from the north it will just complicate issues for them. Chair Rennels explained that if the setback option is chosen and approved, then it will allow Mr. McConnell and Mr. Moody the option to come back and have this conversation at a later date. Ms. Barnes stated that her property is 50 feet higher than the next house, but there is still 4 feet of water in her crawl space. Ms. Barnes reiterated her concern with the possibility of water siphoning back up to her property. Mrs. McConnell stated that in her opinion, if the wetlands are moved then they will no longer be effective. Chair Rennels closed public comment.
The Board then took the following action:
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the request to rezone the property for the Trails End Planned Land Division from R2 (Residential) and C (Commercial) to PD (Planned Development) subject to the conditions as recommended by the Development Services Team and outlined above.
Motion carried 3-0.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Wagner moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Preliminary Plat for the Trail End Planned Land Division (00-S1654) subject to the conditions as recommended by the Development Services Team and outlined above.
Motion carried 3-0.
The meeting recessed at 4:30 p.m.
ESTES PARK ESTATES PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT (PID) HEARING
The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 6:30 p.m., at the Pinewood Springs Fire Station, to consider a petition regarding the organization of the Estes Park Estates Public Improvement District. Chair Rennels presided and Commissioners Gibson and Wagner were present. Also present were: Rex Burns, and Linda Sanders, Engineering Department; and Gael Cookman, Deputy County Clerk.
Mr. Burns explained that the proposal tonight is for the Board to consider passing the resolution that will put this issue on the November ballot so the electors in this subdivision can vote on whether or not to create the PID. Mr. Burns stated that the amount set for this proposed district is $27,000 per year in revenue with a mill levy of 19.637. Mr. Burns explained that they will bring in gravel base and establish drainage, and build the roads into the subdivision over the years; he explained that this will not happen overnight. Mr. Burns also explained that a Road Board will be created and will operate under by-laws and will prioritize and determine where monies are spent, and which areas will be improved. Ms. Sanders explained that there are 82 lots in Estes Park Estates, 1/3 of which are undeveloped lots. Ms. Sanders noted that 64% of the residents signed the petition, and that the election will be held on November 1, 2005.
At this time Chair Rennels asked for public comment and Todd Balachowiak asked if the County has a say in how they construct the roads, and would they be forced to widen roads in certain areas for emergency vehicles. Mr. Burns stated that the Fire Department would provide the guidance for their requirements to ensure the road is built to accommodate fire equipment, otherwise, the County would not demand anything beyond the limits of safety, such as prohibiting the installation of adverse curves in the road. Gary Sheppard gave some history of the area noting that in 1983 the road fee was $35.00. Mr. Sheppard stated that the road fee is now $100 and they are having a hard time getting residents to pay; he noted that the PID will ensure that everyone pays their fair share. Mr. Sheppard also noted that they will probably only be asking for about half of the amount they are eligible for. Chair Rennels explained that the mill levy is set at the maximum level a PID might require for the projects, but they always have the ability to collect less than the maximum amount allowed. Mr. Sheppard stated that the cost to each homeowner would be approximately $165. Commissioner Gibson noted that those vacant lots owners will actually pay more of the burden as vacant land is taxed at a higher rate.
Chair Rennels closed public comment and the following action was taken:
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board of County Commissioners support the Resolution approving the petition for the Organization of Larimer County Estes Park Estates Public Improvement District No. 25.
Motion carried 3-0.
04252005R001 RESOLUTION APPROVING PETITION FOR THE ORGANIZATION OF LARIMER COUNTY ESTES PARK ESTATES PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 25.
The meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
TUESDAY, APRIL 26, 2005
The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 a.m. with Assistant County Manager Neil Gluckman, Chair Rennels presided and Commissioners Wagner and Gibson were present. Also present were: Donna Hart, Melinda Keen, and Deni LaRue, Commissioners’ Office; Russ Legg, Planning Department; Jim Drendel, Human Services; K-Lynn Cameron, Meegan Flenniken, Parks and Open Lands Department; Charlie Johnson, and Rusty McDaniel, Engineering Department; Tom Kent, AVI Engineering; Marc Engemoen, Public Works Director; and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT: Ken Ashley addressed the Board regarding a proposal for the Sunset Ridge Annexation, specifically as it relates to the possible change of zoning that would allow for more than one home on the five acre parcels in this area. Mr. Ashley noted his concern that if the owners are allowed to begin subdividing their properties, it will negatively impact the area. Mr. Ashley stated that he is not sure if it is illegal for the property owners to do so, but he feels that at the very least it is unethical. Chair Rennels explained that it will be up to the City to grant the higher density, and unless it comes through the County as a plan amendment the County will have no say in this matter. Mr. Ashley stated that he will take every opportunity to oppose this application.
Rosemary Van Gorder encouraged the Board to reconsider the structure of the citizen review panel for Child Protection Services. Ms. Van Gorder stated her opinion that the individuals serving on this panel are inclined to keep children in the foster care system rather than placing the emphasis on reuniting children with their families. Ms. Van Gorder also questioned why the last meting was cancelled, with the next one not being scheduled until August. Chair Rennels stated that they will be sure to keep the next scheduled meeting in place, but that to her knowledge, there were no agenda items to discuss; therefore, the meeting was cancelled.
Kristy Lahnert stated that the Columbine Campground, which is adjacent to her property in the Poudre Canyon, rents camp sites to patrons of the Mishawka concerts, and that during these events anywhere from 200 - 300 individuals will be camped out next to her property. Ms. Lahnert expressed frustration at this situation and questioned the legality of this practice. Ms. Lahnert stated that she intends to call the Sheriff's Department throughout the summer should the noise and rowdiness continue. Some discussion ensued as the whether or not the property is zoned for camping, and Chair Rennels explained that there is a new Special Events permit process in place for gatherings of 300 or more, and that maybe this would help alleviate the situation.
2. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE WEEK OF APRIL 18, 2005:
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the minutes for the week of April 18, 2005, as presented.
Motion carried 3-0.
3. REVIEW THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK OF MAY 2, 2005: Ms. Hart reviewed the upcoming schedule with the Board.
4. CONSENT AGENDA:
M O T I O N
Commissioner Wagner moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the following items as presented on the Consent Agenda for April 26, 2005:
PETITIONS FOR ABATEMENT: As recommended by the County Assessor, the following petitions for abatement are approved: Kensington Properties, Ltd.; Riverwood on Fall River, Inc.; Tony's Restaurant and Lounge.
04262005A001 AMENDMENT TO THE IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE HIDDEN VALLEY ESTATES II RURAL LAND USE PLAN; 02-S1948 BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND BACKBONE INVESTMENTS, LLC.
04262005A002 AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE STATE OF COLORADO FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BY AND THROUGH THE LARIMER COUNTY WORKFORCE CENTER
04262005A003 AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO TO THE LARIMER COUNTY CONTRIBUTORY RETIREMENT PLAN
04262005R001 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 5B AND 5C OF THE REPLAT OF LOT 5 AND LOT 6A OF THE AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 6, 7, 9, AND 18 OF SPRING CANYON HEIGHTS THIRD SUBDIVISION
04262005R002 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CHAPMAN-DUFFIELD APPEAL
04262005R003 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING COUNTY ROAD 5 AND 38 INTERSECTION FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL REVIEW
04262005R004 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 1-3 OF THE REPLAT OF ROYAL VIEW ESTATES
04262005R005 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDED PLAT OF LOT 1, AMENDED SLOTA EXEMPTION AND RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION
04262005R006 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDED PLAT AND VACATION OF UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN TERRY SHORES FIRST FILING LOTS 44 AND 45
MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS: Personnel Authorization Request for Building Maintenance Work II Part Time Employee; Personnel Authorization Request for Building Maintenance Work II Full Time Employee.
LIQUOR LICENSES: The following license was both issued and approved: Fort Namaqua Liquors - Retail Liquor Store Transfer of Ownership with Temporary Permit. The following license was issued: Bruno's Bar and Bistro - Hotel and Restaurant - Fort Collins.
Motion carried 3-0.
5. UPDATE ON COUNTY ROAD 38E UNDERPASS PROJECT: Ms. Flenniken noted that the Open Lands Program is working with the Engineering Department and a consultant (AVI Engineering) to design the County Road 38E trail underpass. Ms. Flenniken presented the Board with the drawings of the proposed design of the underpass and stated that the underpass will allow connectivity from the County's regional trail from the Devil's Backbone to Horsetooth Mountain Park. Commissioner Gibson questioned if any type of lighting will be provided in the tunnel. Ms. Cameron stated that they had not intended to provide lighting inside the tunnel as it is an engineering opinion that if the length of the tunnel is such that you can still see light at the end, then typically lights inside the tunnel are not installed. Chair Rennels agreed and noted that the tunnel is fairly lengthy and a dark tunnel might attract crime, vandalism, and safety issues. Some discussion ensued regarding whether or not to install sensor lights, low wattage lighting, and at a bare minimum, vandalism proof lights. Commissioner Gibson asked how much the project will cost. Ms. Flenniken stated that Colorado Department of Transportation will contribute $280,000 to this project, and the County's share will be $120,000.
6. IDENTIFY TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS FOR RURAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY: Mr. Engemoen stated that the County has been in discussions with some of the cities and towns in Larimer County about the possibility of creating a Rural Transportation Authority (RTA) that could help fund needed transportation improvements in the region. Mr. Engemoen noted that all entities involved were tasked with identifying projects that could potentially be funded by an RTA. Mr. Engemoen presented the Board with this list of proposed projects for the joint Rural Transportation Authority (RTA) meeting that will be taking place on April 28, 2005. Some discussion ensued regarding the list and associated costs. Mr. Engemoen explained that the County staff took at look at the more immediate needs of the region, and noted that the City of Fort Collins will most likely present long-term (20 year) needs for roadways. The Board asked Mr. Engemoen to also address the problem of inferior local transit systems within and between communities, particularly as it relates to transportation availability for children and senior citizens. Mr. Engemoen stated that RTA funds could also be used for transit systems in the area.
7. APPROVAL OF ESTES VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION PERIODIC REVIEW RECOMMENDATIONS: Ms. Keen explained that the periodic review for the Estes Valley Planning Commission was held on April 19, 2005, and at this worksession it was recommended that the Board of County Commissioners and the Estes Valley Planning Commission have at least one joint worksession per year. The Board agreed to this recommendation.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gibson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve of an annual joint worksession between the Estes Valley Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners.
Motion carried 3-0.
8. LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: Mr. Gluckman stated that SB 224, regarding the Urban Renewal Authority (URA), is moving along nicely, but that SB 63, pertaining to the definition of blight which is used to categorize a piece of land and place it in a URA, failed. Mr. Gluckman stated that there is a motion to bring back this bill for reconsideration. Commissioner Wagner requested a listing of how each senator voted, and Mr. Gluckman stated that he would obtain this information for the Board. Mr. Gluckman then stated that he will be setting a meeting with the legislators sometime in June so they can meet with the Board to discuss this session and outline steps to take for the future.
9. WORKSESSION: There were no worksession items to discuss.
10. COMMISSIONER ACTIVITY REPORTS: The Board noted their attendance at events during the past week.
11. LEGAL MATTERS: There were no legal matters to discuss.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 10:20 a.m.
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 27, 2005
TO AMEND 2004 BUDGET
The Board of County Commissioners met at 2:30 P.m. with County Manager Frank Lancaster, Chair Rennels presided and Commissioners Wagner and Gibson were present. Also present were: Neil Gluckman, Bob Keister, and Deni LaRue, Commissioners’ Office; Myrna Rodenberger, and Irene Josey, Treasurer's Office; Jim Alderden, and Darrell Frank, Sheriff's Department; and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk.
Mr. Lancaster explained that there were some payroll and computer glitches that caused reporting errors in the 2004 budget for both the Treasurer's Office and the Sheriff's Department. Mr. Lancaster stated that it would be misleading to show the affected line items as over-expenditures since it was due to a computer bug, and the errors were not caused by department staff. Mr. Keister stated that the overall budgets will not change, just that monies will be moved between line items to accurately reflect the expenditures that took place. Discussion ensued pertaining to safeguards that have been put in place to ensure this does not happen again. Mr. Keister stated that there have been procedural changes (and procedures will continue to be scrutinized and updated as needed), projections are being completed in a more timely manner, especially coming out of the Sheriff's Department where the 28 day pay cycle, the overtime payments, and budgeting for the end of year when weeks straddle on either side of a year, have proven to be issues needing greater attention. Commissioner Wagner questioned the recommendations presented in the handout that were geared towards preventing future unfavorable variances. Mr. Keister stated that they would look at these methods at a later date if forecasting becomes a problem. Sheriff Alderden noted some additional issues that have recently surfaced within the payroll system and asked that they be researched. Commissioner Gibson stated that he would like to have periodic updates every 2 months so that they can be kept abreast of these issues. Mr. Lancaster agreed to this. Chair Rennels encouraged all departments to look a closer at their budgets, given the computer errors that have surfaced.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Wagner moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the resolution to modify sums of money appropriated to the various funds and spending agencies for the County of Larimer, Colorado, for the calendar year commencing on the first day of January 2004, and ending on the last day of December, 2004.
Under discussion of the motion, Commissioner Gibson stated that the system needs to be fixed and periodic reviews need to be in place, so this problem does not surface again.
Motion carried 3-0.
04272005R001 RESOLUTION TO AMEND 2004 APPROPRIATED SUMS OF MONEY
The meeting adjourned at 3:15 p.m.
KATHAY RENNELS, CHAIR
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
CLERK AND RECORDER
Gael M. Cookman, Deputy Clerk