Loveland Bike Trail
 
> Meetings & Minutes > Commissioners' Minutes > BCC Minutes for 01/28/08  

MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

 

Monday, JANUARY 28, 2008

 

LAND USE HEARING

(#161)

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 3:00 p.m. with Matt Lafferty, Principal Planner.  Chair Gibson presided and Commissioners Rennels and Eubanks were present.  Also present were:  Sean Wheeler, Karin Madson, and Toby Stauffer, Planning Department; Traci Downs, Engineering Department; Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney; and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk.

 

Chair Gibson 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. 

 

The Commissioners then presented the 2007 Outstanding Professionalism Awards to three Larimer County building contractors.  The awardees were nominated by the County’s Building Department and are as follows: 

 

·     Al Hauser, Hauser Architects, PC – Loveland

Al Hauser was nominated for his willingness to communicate on code issues on various projects. The plan review phase of the projects went more smoothly because of this. Al’s attention to building code technical details is very much appreciated by the County’s Building department.

 

·     Walt Steige, Steige and Associates – Estes Park

Walt Steige was nominated for his outstanding consistency and detailed approach to his work in the nearly 20 years he has been working with the County’s Building department.

 

·     Karl Weits, Weits Construction, LLC – Windsor

First as a superintendent with a high-end custom home builder and now as an independent builder and remodeler, Karl Weits has consistently demonstrated integrity, honesty, competence and cooperation with the County’s Building department.  Karl understands that the county building staff and he are on the same team when it comes to ensuring a quality finished product that meets all code requirements.

 

Chair Gibson then asked if anybody was present so discuss Item 3, regarding the Land Use Code Amendments.  No one wished to discuss Item 3, so it was moved to the Consent Agenda.  A member of the audience asked to discuss Item 2, regarding the Binder Minor Residential Development Easement Vacation, so this item was removed from the Consent Agenda. 

 

The following items remained on consent and were not discussed:

 

1.  BENGLEN SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT, FILE # 06-S2608:    This is a request for a Preliminary Plat for a Subdivision of a 5.96-acre parcel into two lots for single-family residential use.  This item was on the Planning Commission consent agenda for December 19, 2007.  There were no questions or concerns raised about the request.  The Planning Commission voted 7-0 in favor of the request and the appeals, subject to the conditions recommended by Staff.

 

The Development Services Team and Planning Commission recommend approval of the Benglen Subdivision, File #06-S2608, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.   The Final Plat of the Benglen Subdivision shall be consistent with the information contained in the file, #06-S2608 or as modified by conditions of approval.

2.   The following fees shall be collected at the time of building permit for new single-family dwellings: the Thompson School District fees in lieu of dedication, the Larimer County Capital Transportation Expansion fee, the Larimer County Park Fee in lieu of dedication and the Fossil Creek Drainage Basin Fee.

      The fee amount that is current at the time building permit application shall apply.  Before construction, the applicant must also contact the County Engineering Department to obtain a Development Construction Permit, and a permit for work on the access and in the right-of-way.

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

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

5.   The existing older mobile home on Lot 2 shall be removed prior application for a building permit on Lot 2.

6.   Lot 2 shall include a building envelope on the final plat defined by the property line, road and 100-foot setbacks from the Louden Ditch.

 

 

3.  LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS, FILE #09-CA0079:  This is a request to make changes to the adopted Land Use Code.   These proposed code amendments were heard by the Planning Commission on December 19, 2007.  There was no public testimony.  The Planning Commission voted unanimously to forward the amendments to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation for approval.   

 

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND USE CODE:

1.   Amend the Land Use Code, Section 4.3.1.A, as follows:

 

Farm.  Any parcel of land containing at least three acres used primarily for the commercial, soil-dependent cultivation of an agricultural crop, the facilities and storage necessary for the management of a commercial custom farming operation or the hauling of farm products, the raising of fish, bees, plants or animals or the raising of livestock.  This does not include but not including feedyards, poultry farms, exotic animal farms or fur farms. 

2.   Amend the Land Use Code, Section 0.1 definition of “Farm”, as follows:

 

Farm.  Any parcel of land containing at least three acres used primarily for the commercial, soil-dependent cultivation of an agricultural crop, the facilities and storage necessary for the management of a commercial custom farming operation or the hauling of farm products, ; the raising of fish, bees, aquatic plants or animals ; or the raising of livestock . This does not include feed lots, dairies, feedyards, poultry farms, exotic animal farms or fur farms. 

3.   Amend the Land Use Code by deleting Section 4.3.1.H as follows and renumbering the remainder of the section:

 

H.  Pet animal veterinary clinic/hospital.  A facility for the diagnosis, treatment and/or hospitalization of pet animals. 

1. Any pet animal veterinary clinic/hospital that includes outdoor activities, other than the parking of clients' cars, requires approval through the special review process.

2. Pet animal veterinary clinics/hospitals located in the FA-Farming, FA-1 Farming, FO-Forestry, FO-1 Forestry, O-Open and RE-Rural Estate Zoning Districts that generate 20 or fewer vehicle trips on any day require approval through the minor special review process. Pet animal clinics/hospitals in these zoning districts that generate more than 20 vehicle trips on any day require approval through the special review process. Any pet animal clinic/hospital located in the AP-Airport Zoning district requires approval through the special review process.

 

4.   Amend the Land Use Code, Section 4.6.7.B, as follows:

 

4.6.7. Administrative variance.

B. The planning director is hereby authorized to approve administrative variances from the county road setback requirements listed in section 4.9.1.B. for additions to existing buildings which are nonconforming with respect to county road setbacks, subject to the following criteria:

1. The proposed addition must meet the following minimum setbacks:

a. Arterial roads-90 feet from ROW centerline;

b. Major collector roads-80 feet from ROW centerline;

c. Minor collector roads-60 feet from ROW centerline;

d. Local roads-55 feet from ROW centerline.

2. A notice of the proposed administrative variance was mailed to all property owners within 250 feet on each side and across the road from of the subject property or as determined by the Planning Director, and no objections were stated;

3. No portion of the original building or the proposed addition is within the future right-of-way identified by the Larimer County Functional Road Classification.

4. The review criteria in section 4.6.3 are met or determined to be inapplicable. The decision of the planning director can be appealed to the board of adjustment. See section 22, Appeals.

 

5.   Amend the Land Use Code by deleting Section 4.9.3 as follows and renumbering the following sections:

 

4.9.3. Minor setback variances.

The planning director may grant minor variances from setback requirements up to ten percent of the required setback after finding the proposed setback is consistent with the intent and purpose of this code. The planning director's decision must be in writing and may be appealed to the board of adjustment. See Section 22, Appeals. Also see Section 4.6.7, Administrative Variances.

 

6.   Amend the Land Use Code by adding a Section 4.6.7.C as follows:

 

4.6.7.C  The planning director is hereby authorized to approve administrative variances from setback requirements up to ten percent of the required setback after finding the proposed setback is consistent with the intent and purpose of this code. The planning director's decision must be in writing and may be appealed to the board of adjustment. See Section 22, Appeals.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve Items 1 and 3, as listed on the Consent Agenda and outlined above.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

2.  BINDER MINOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT EASEMENT VACATION, FILE #07-S2765:  This is a request to vacate a 30 foot utility and roadway easement on the north and east boundaries of 3 properties in the Binder MRD. The easement was originally recorded in 1971 and is shown on the final plat of the Binder MRD. The applicant indicates that the easement has never been used as a roadway.

 

This application was forwarded to the appropriate departments and agencies for comment.  The responses from these groups indicate that there are no other issues of concern. 

The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Binder MRD, Lots 1, 2, & 3 Utility and Roadway Easement Vacation, a request to vacate a 30 foot utility and roadway easement along the north and east property boundaries of Lots 1, 2 and 3 in the Binder MRD.

Ms. Stauffer briefly explained the proposal, as outlined above.  Chair Gibson then opened up the hearing for public comment.

 

Alan Kniese, adjoining neighbor, explained that to his knowledge the easement was dedicated with 30 feet on the Binder property and 30 feet on his own property.  He stated that if the easement was vacated then there will be no access to the back side of his property.  Ms. Stauffer stated that, as she understood, the lots adjoining the Binder MRD would retain access off of County Road 16 or Wildbird Road. 

 

Rob Persichitte, representative from Intermill Land Surveying, explained that the easement was part of an old deed, and it has never been opened up for utility or road use.  He agreed that the access for the adjacent properties is from the north.

 

Mr. Kniese explained that there is a major ditch on the Wildbird Road entrance that would inhibit egress into his property.  He noted that he does not see any reason to vacate the easement and further stated that it will affect the value of his property for future access.

 

Art Rodriguez, adjoining neighbor, also stated that there are more properties that would be affected by this, and questioned if vacating the easement would also vacate the easements along the adjoining properties. 

 

There was no further public comment.  

 

Commissioner Eubanks asked staff if they had visited the site to confirm the ditch and access to the north.  Ms. Stauffer replied that staff had not performed a site visit. 

 

Based on the public testimony and the lack of knowledge as to how vacating this easement might affect adjacent properties, the Board did not feel comfortable approving the request, and tabled the item in order to give staff and the applicant more time to conduct further research.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners table Items 2, regarding the  Binder Minor Residential Development Easement Vacation, File #07-S2765, to March 17, 2008, at 3:00 p.m.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

The hearing adjourned at 3:40 p.m.

 

 

TUESDAY, JANUARY 29, 2008

 

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

(#162)

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 a.m. with Assistant County Manager Neil Gluckman.  Chair Gibson presided and Commissioners Eubanks and Rennels were present.  Also present were:  Donna Hart, and Deni LaRue, Commissioners’ Office; Gary Buffington, Natural Resources Department; Andy Paratore, Facilities and Information Technology Division; Bill Ressue, Assistant County Attorney;  and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk.

 

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

                  

2.  RE-APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE WEEK OF JANUARY 14, 2008 AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE WEEK OF JANUARY 21, 2008:

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners re-approve the minutes for the week of January 14, 2008.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the minutes for the week of January 21, 2008.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

3.  REVIEW THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK OF FEBRUARY 4, 2008:  Ms. Hart reviewed the upcoming schedule with the Board.

 

4.  CONSENT AGENDA:

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the following items as presented on the Consent Agenda for January 29, 2008:

 

PETITIONS FOR ABATEMENT:  As recommended by the County Assessor, the following Petitions for Abatement are approved:  Steven and Betty Nickel; James McMurry; and Alan Evans.

 

01292008A001           WATER SUPPLY AND ASSIGNMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND EAST LARIMER COUNTY WATER DISTRICT

01292008A002           FEDERAL ANNUAL CERTIFICATION REPORT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THE LARIMER COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND THE U.S. TREASURY DEPARTMENT 

01292008A003           DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR BISON BLUFF ACRES SUBDIVISION BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND ROBERT AND CAROL DOAK 

01292008R001           RESOLUTION RELATING TO LARIMER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AREAS AND FACILITIES

 

01292008R002           RESOLUTION CANCELING 2005 TAXES DETERMINED TO BE UNCOLLECTIBLE

 

01292008R003           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE LARIMER COUNTY LAND USE CODE

 

01292008R004           RESOLUTION FOR STATUTORY VESTED RIGHTS FOR BISON BLUFF ACRES SUBDIVISION

 

01292008R005           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE KDR DEVELOPMENT FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL REVIEW

 

01292008R006           RESOLUTION REGARDING EXTENSION OF APPROVAL SMALL MALL CONDOMINIUMS

 

01292008R007           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE HAINES APPEAL

 

01292008R008           RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COMPENSATION FOR LARIMER APPOINTED OFFICIALS

 

MISCELLANEOUS:  Larimer County Prairie Trails Public Improvement District No. 33 Advisory Board Bylaws; Larimer County Mountain Range Shadows Public Improvement District No. 34 Advisory Board Bylaws; Larimer County Centro Business Park Public Improvement District No 38 Advisory Board Bylaws; Larimer County Paragon Estates Public Improvement District No. 40 Advisory Board Bylaws; Amended Plat of Lots 5 & 6 Division 7 High Drive Heights; Final Plat of Bison Bluff Acres Subdivision.

 

LIQUOR LICENSES:  The following liquor license was approved and issued:  A Hunt Club - Tavern - Fort Collins.

Motion carried 3-0.

 

5.  FUNDING OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FROM FUND 512 AND COURTHOUSE SALES TAX:  Mr. Paratore outlined the improvements that need to be performed at the Emergency Services building, the Loveland Administration building, and the Fleet Services building.  These improvements range from component replacements for outdated and ineffective mechanical heating and cooling systems, insulation, and health and safety issues pertaining to the air flow, and upgrading air quality at Fleet Services by installing air filtering units and CO2 monitoring, etc.   Mr. Paratore requested the approval to expend $145,000 from fund 512 to be used for improvements at the Emergency Services building and Fleet Services, and to expend $375,000 of Courthouse Sales Tax Revenues to improve the Loveland Administration building at East 6th Street in Loveland.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the use of $145,000 from fund 512 to be used for facilities improvements at the Emergency Services Building ($60,000) and Fleet Services ($85,000).

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the use of $375,000 of Courthouse Sales Tax Revenues to be used for facilities improvements to the Loveland Administration building on East 6th Street.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

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

 

7.  COMMISSIONER REPORTS:  The Board reviewed their activities at events during the past week.

 

8.  LEGAL MATTERS:  (Affidavit Provided)

 

M O T I O N

 

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

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

The meeting recessed at 10:30 a.m., with no further action taken.

 

 

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 30, 2008

 

 

LAND USE HEARING

(#163 & 164)

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 6:30 p.m. with Larry Timm, Planning Director.  Chair Gibson presided and Commissioners Rennels and Eubanks were present.  Also present were:  Frank Lancaster, Deni LaRue, and Donna Hart, Commissioners' Office; Doug Ryan, Environmental Health Department; Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney; and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk.

 

1.  TIMNATH INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT, FILE #08-CA0081:  The Town of Timnath and Larimer County have developed an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) pertaining to growth management.  If this IGA is approved, Town and County staff will work to develop a set of “supplementary regulations” (supplementary to the County Land Use Code) that are mutually acceptable.  At a minimum, these will require new development (re: zoning, special review, planned land divisions, rural land plans) in the GMA to be of the land use type, density and intensity described in the Town’s adopted comprehensive plan for the GMA.  Supplementary regulations may also include some development standards that are different from the County’s current development standards.  Once the supplementary regulations are developed, they will be considered for adoption by the County concurrent with the placement or addition of the Timnath GMA overlay zone district to all properties in the GMA boundary.  Once these two items are accomplished, the IGA will be fully operational.

 

A summary of the major features of the text of the IGA is as follows:

 

·  The Timnath Growth Management Area (GMA) boundary is as shown on Exhibit 1.

·  At the request of the Town, there will not be a Cooperative Planning Area (CPA) or Community Influence Area (CIA).

·  The County would (through a zoning process) apply its GMA Overlay Zone to the Timnath GMA boundary; the final Timnath GMA boundary is the area the County zones as Timnath GMA overlay zone district.

·  The County regulates development in the GMA (GMA Overlay Zone) per the County Land Use Code and Supplementary Regulations.  These Supplementary Regulations shall apply to re zonings, special reviews, planned land divisions and rural land plans in the Timnath GMA.  The County shall make the final determination of whether the proposed development complies with the Supplementary Regulations.

·  Supplementary Regulations are to support and generally mimic the Town’s comprehensive plan for the GMA and are to include those “higher” or additional development standards that the Town and County mutually agree on.  If the Town amends its comprehensive plan, County will promptly consider amending the Supplementary Regulations accordingly.

·  It is the Town’s intent to annex all property within the GMA that is eligible for annexation.  “Eligible for annexation” shall mean any land that is eligible for annexation per State Statutes.  Timnath shall make a determination of eligibility for annexation within 30 days of an annexation petition or referral from the County and shall notify the property owner and the County within 35 days after receiving the annexation petition.

·  The County shall refer to the Town all applications for the following in the Timnath GMA:

·  Re zoning

·  Special reviews (excluding gravel extraction)

·  Planned land division

·  Rural land plan

·  If the property is eligible for annexation, the Town shall have two (2) years, or such longer time as the County and Town agree upon, to approve or deny the annexation.  The County shall not act upon any of the above types of development applications for that time period.

·  If the Town determines the property to be ineligible for annexation or if the Town does not annex the property (that is eligible for annexation) within 2 years, the County may process the development application (for re zoning, special review excluding gravel extraction, planned land divisions and rural land plans) according to the County Land Use Code, Supplementary Regulations and the Timnath GMA overlay zone district.

·  Per the County’s GMA overlay zone district, the County will require a binding annexation agreement of the following types of development in the GMA: rezoning, special review, planned land division, site plan, minor land division, rural land plan. Owners of lands developed prior to annexation will be required to sign a binding agreement to annex as a condition of approval. 

·  When annexing land in the GMA, Timnath shall annex the entire width of public roadways located within and immediately adjacent to such lands.

·  The Town will not annex into the GMA or CPA of any other municipality with which the County has an officially recognized intergovernmental agreement.

·  It is the Town’s policy to annex all enclaves (unincorporated areas surrounded by lands annexed to the Town) as expeditiously as possible.

·  The County shall not accept applications for rezoning, special review (excluding gravel extraction); planned land division and rural land plan if the property is eligible for annexation.

·  The agreement is for 10 years, and is automatically renewed for successive 5-year terms unless 1 year prior notice to allow to expire.  Either party may terminate the IGA with 1 year notice to the other party.

 

According to the Town of Timnath, property owners in the proposed Timnath GMA boundary have been informed of the proposal (and of the Town’s updated comprehensive plan) via public meetings.  Town and County staff held an informational meeting regarding the proposed IGA on January 23, 2008.

The municipalities of Fort Collins, Windsor and Wellington have been notified of the proposed IGA and GMA boundary.  The City of Fort Collins has raised concerns regarding the proposed GMA boundary at recent County Commissioner work sessions on this topic. 

Mr. Timm briefly outlined the IGA, as noted above, noting that he has received concerns from both individuals and the City of Fort Collins regarding the proposed boundary of the Timnath GMA. 

Becky Davidson, Timnath City Manager, gave a 20 minute presentation regarding the IGA and GMA.  She explained that the IGA is written as a planning tool for the next 20 years, and that individuals would have to request to be annexed, unless they ended up as part of an enclave, in which case state statutes would dictate the annexation.  Ms. Davidson also explained the proposed land uses within the GMA, as employment areas, county density residential, mixed use, and low density residential.   She noted that impacts to adjacent infrastructure are addressed in the IGA, as well as the need for increased police, fire, stormwater, and adequate public facilities.

At this time, Deputy City Manager Diane Jones addressed the Board.  Ms. Jones stated that the proposed IGA differs significantly from the original idea that was introduced  a few years ago, which included community separators, and did not include the idea of commercial employment within the GMA.  Ms. Jones requested that the Board delay approval of the IGA, or at least suspend the inclusion of the area north of Highway 14, in order to provide additional time to work with the Timnath officials, in planning and agreeing to the boundaries of the GMA.  She assured the Board that the City of Fort Collins would provide resources to assist accomplishing this in a reasonable time frame.

At this time, Chair Gibson opened up the hearing for public comment. 

The following individuals addressed the Board in opposition to the proposed Timnath IGA and GMA:  Lyn Stevens, Ed Boldt, Inge Diodanti, Larry Hansen, Gary and Carolyn Mason, Steve Benjamin, John Morrill, Allison Albers, Barbara Wolfe, Cheryl Matsumoto, Kerri Diamant, and Bob Streeter.  Their reasons for opposing the IGA/GMA included:  They were not properly informed of the meetings, and want/need more information; the details are inaccurate and not well thought out; they are concerned with destruction of their rural way of life; they want more time to discuss details and provide input; they believe that industrial and commercial businesses should not be placed right across the street from 5 acre, lake front properties; they believe that their quality of life and property values would be threatened; there is the possibility of negative environmental impacts; and most simply did not want to be annexed, which is why they moved to the county in the first place.

The following individuals addressed the Board in favor of the proposal:  Raymond Wright, Terry Dye, David Shands, and Ruth Herickhoff.  Their reasons included:  They did receive notice and attended the meetings; therefore, are more comfortable with the proposal; they have worked with the Timnath staff and Planning Commission and like the proposal; if annexation has to occur, then they would rather be associated with the Town of Timnath; and being annexed into the City of Fort Collins would be much worse that what is being proposed tonight. 

John Knezovich remained neutral on the proposal; however, as the treasurer of the newly formed Fort Collins Regional Library District, he wanted it understood that Timnath would still be part of the library district, even if the IGA was approved.  Mr. Knezovich also noted that for any community to remain viable, they must have a tax base to support it; therefore, the commercial and employment areas would be necessary within Timnath’s GMA boundaries.

Chair Gibson closed public comment and Ms. Davidson addressed the concerns brought up by the citizens.  She agreed that they are still within the library district and would continue to participate in that.  Ms. Davidson stressed that the adequate public facilities and safety are addressed in the IGA, and explained how the street maintenance and fire and police/sheriff coverage would occur.  She reiterated that annexation would not happen over night, and that this is a 20 year plan for the future.  Ms. Davidson stated that the area north of Highway 14 is necessary as part of Timnath’s GMA so that in can provide the economic balance and tax base needed for the town to flourish.

During the Board’s discussion, Commissioner Eubanks stated that the area south of Highway 14 was not properly noticed or involved.  He stated that in past worksessions he was lead to believe that there was little to no opposition, which clearly is not the case.  He stated that is was difficult to understand how the work that was done less than five years ago in cooperation with the City of Fort Collins, is now obsolete.  Commissioner Eubanks stated that in his opinion, the City of Fort Collins has done a good job in planning and developing the community and could be used as a better resource for the creation of this IGA.  And finally, Commissioner Eubanks noted concern with the size of the GMA, and for these reasons, he could not support approval at this time.

Commissioner Rennels explained some of the history regarding the I-25 corridor planning, as an effort in joint planning and a desire to create consistent standards.  However, it did become a “Race to the Interstate” by the communities because that is where the tax dollars are, and municipalities need that to survive.  Commissioner Rennels agreed that the area north of Highway 14 would be necessary for the Town of Timnath to include because of the revenue that is generated there.  She stated that a town consisting of only houses could not support itself.  Although Commissioner Rennels believed that the IGA and GMA are appropriate, she stated that she would be in favor of tabling this item in order to give the citizens more opportunity to discuss the proposal.

Chair Gibson agreed and stated that it would be good for the cities to work together to create a future and direction for the community/region. 

 

M O T I O N

Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners consider this proposal again within six months, and then schedule a public hearing at that time if necessary. 

Motion carried 3-0

 

The hearing adjourned at 8:55 p.m.

 

 

 

__________________________________________

                        GLENN W. GIBSON, CHAIR

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

SCOTT DOYLE

CLERK AND RECORDER

 

ATTEST:

 

­­­______________________________________

Gael M. Cookman, Deputy Clerk

 

 

Background Image: Loveland Bike Trail by Sharon Veit. All rights reserved.