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
LAND USE HEARING
The Board of County Commissioners met at 3:00 p.m. with Matt Lafferty, Principal Planner. Chair Rennels presided and Commissioner Donnelly was present. Also present were: Sean Wheeler and Michael Whitley, Planning Department; Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney; and Melissa Lohry, Deputy Clerk.
Chair Rennels opened the hearing 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.
Mr. Lafferty explained that item #1, “Lost Antler Ranch Zoning Violation,” had been removed from today’s agenda at staff’s request.
Chair Rennels explained that the following item was on the consent agenda and would not be discussed unless requested by the Board, staff, or members of the audience:
2. BRYANT EXTENDED FAMILY DWELLING, FILE #09-SP0252: This is a request for approval to use a double-wide manufactured home as an Extended Family Dwelling (EFD) on a property with an existing single-family home. The subject property is 0.92-acres in size and is located on the northeast corner of County Road 23E and Louise Lane in Laporte.
Extended Family Dwellings on parcels 4-acres or larger can be approved administratively but Extended Family Dwellings on parcels smaller than 4-acres must be approved by the Board of County Commissioners. This request includes an appeal to have the EFD on a parcel with less than 4-acres without public sewer service.
The parents of one of the property owners reside in the single-family home on the property. The property owner’s father (John Robert Bryant) has a disabling medical condition documented by a doctor’s letter. The proposed Extended Family Dwelling would allow the property owners to reside on the property for the purpose of providing care and assistance to the father within the home.
A simplified site plan was included with the submittal.
Staff recommends approval of the Bryant Extended Family Dwelling and Appeal, file #09-SP0252, subject to the following conditions:
1. Applicable Transportation Capital Expansion and Building Permit fees shall be paid by the applicant at the time of building permit issuance for the manufactured home.
2. The location of the Extended Family Dwelling shall be consistent with the site plan and the information in file #09-SP0252.
3. The applicant is responsible for payment of all required fees and obtaining required building permits. A building permit for the manufactured home to be used as an Extended Family Dwelling must be applied for and issued, all required inspections must be completed, and the owner must request that a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy be issued within 90-days of this approval, otherwise this approval automatically expires.
4. Approval of the Extended Family Dwelling will be in effect for a maximum of 3- years from the date the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy is effective for the building permit, after which the Extended Family Dwelling must be removed within 3-months from the expiration date of the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy or upon application to the Planning Department, the Extended Family Dwelling approval may be extended for an additional 3-year period provided that the conditions noted in Land Use Code Section 4.3.10.G. continue to exist and the Board of County Commissioners grant an extension. Any application for additional time must be submitted prior to expiration of the approval in effect at that time.
5. The applicant shall abide by the requirements of the Department of Health and Environment in regards to connecting the Extended Family Dwelling to the existing septic system.
6. Within 3-months of either of the following occurrences, the applicant or owners must notify the County Planning Department of the occurrence, and remove the Extended Family Dwelling from the property: (a) upon sale of the property to someone other than the current owners (Michel & Donna Bryant); or (b) the death of John Robert Bryant.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the consent agenda for November 09, 2009, as it appears above.
Motion carried 3-0.
There being no further business, the Board recessed at 3:15 p.m.
LAND USE HEARING
The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 6:30 p.m. with Bob Joseph and Alison Chilcott, Estes Park Planning Department. Chair Rennels presided and Commissioners Donnelly and Johnson were present. Also present were: Russ Legg, Planning Department; Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney; and Melissa Lohry, Deputy Clerk.
1. AMENDMENTS TO THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE : This is a request to make several revisions to Section 7.8, “Wildlife Habitat Protection,” of the Estes Valley Development Code.
The proposed amendments are as follows (language to be removed has been crossed out and language to be added has been underlined):
§ 7.8 WILDLIFE HABITAT PROTECTION
and enhance the diversity of wildlife species and habitat
that occur in the Estes Valley, and to plan and design land uses to be
harmonious with wildlife habitat and the species that depend on this habitat
for the economic, recreational,
and environmental benefit of the residents of and visitors to the Estes Valley.
B. Applicability. This Section shall apply to all applications for review of development plans, subdivision plats, planned unit developments, special review uses and rezoning. This Section shall not apply to development on lots that were approved for single-family residential use prior to the effective date of this code.
C. Exemptions. The procedures and regulations contained in this section shall not apply to:
1. Agricultural activities such as soil preparation, irrigation, planting, harvesting, grazing and farm ponds;
2. Maintenance and repair of existing public roads, utilities and other public facilities within an existing right-of-way or easement;
3. Maintenance and repair of flood control structures and activities in response to a flood emergency;
4. Maintenance and repair of existing residential or nonresidential structures; or
habitat enhancement and restoration a Activities undertaken pursuant
to a wildlife conservation plan approved under this section.
D. Other Regulations. This section of the code does not repeal or supersede any existing federal, state or local laws, easements, covenants or deed restrictions pertaining to wildlife. When this section imposes a higher or more restrictive standard, this section shall apply.
E. Wildlife Habitat Data Base. The following sources shall be used to identify important wildlife habitat areas for purposes of review under this section:
1. Wildlife Habitat map (dated December 1996), as set forth in the Estes Valley comprehensive Plan, as amended from time to time.
2. Colorado Division of Wildlife habitat maps for Larimer County, as amended from time to time.
3. Colorado Natural Heritage Program Maps dated December 1996, or as amended from time to time.
4. Other information and maps as staff or the Estes Valley Planning Commission may from time to time identify in cooperation with the Colorado Division of Wildlife, such as wildlife maps produced specifically for the Estes Valley. Said maps shall be applicable only following adoption of an amendment to this code.
habitat information required by this section is intended for general planning
purposes. Obvious errors or omissions may be corrected by staff
consultation with the Division of Wildlife.
F. Review Procedures. The following procedures shall apply to all applications for development:
1. Application. The applicant shall submit a development plan, subdivision plat or sketch plan, as applicable, depicting the general location of the property, location of structures on the site, prominent natural areas such as streams and wetlands, and other features that staff may require for review pursuant to this section.
A Wildlife Conservation Plan shall be submitted for sites containing:
a. An endangered or threatened species,
b. Big Horn sheep or Big Horn sheep habitat, or
c. Riparian areas adjacent to rivers and streams, and wetlands identified on the maps set forth in Appendix A of this code.
Review. Staff shall refer the submitted plan or plat to the Colorado Division
of Wildlife for review.
Applicants are also advised to meet with the
Division of Wildlife and other agencies as determined appropriate by Staff to
ensure compliance with the requirements of this Section. Applicants are
advised to consult with the Colorado Division of Wildlife and other agencies
responsible for regulation of wildlife and habitat, such as the US Fish and
Wildlife Service, US Department of the Interior–Rocky Mountain National Park,
US Forest Service, and Colorado Natural Heritage Program. These agencies may
maintain maps and databases that can aid in the site-specific confirmation of
the presence or absence of wildlife and habitat on a specific site.
For applications referred to it, the Division of Wildlife will determine
whether the proposal will result in significant adverse impact on wildlife or
wildlife habitat only if the development adversely impacts the following:
a. An endangered
or threatened species,
b. A calving,
lambing or fawning area,
c. Big Horn
sheep or Big Horn sheep habitat, or
d. Raptor nest
areas and wetlands.
Determination. Based on recommendations from the Division of Wildlife, the
Staff will determine whether the Applicant must submit a wildlife conservation
plan prior to approval of any development application. The conservation plan
should be submitted to the Division of Wildlife for review and recommendation
as to whether the plan adequately addresses the adverse impacts identified by
the Division of
pursuant to subsection F.3 above. (See §7.8.H below.)
a. The Review and Decision-Making Bodies shall issue a finding as to whether the application, including the wildlife conservation plan, complies with the requirements of this section.
b. Wildlife studies and mitigation plans found to be adequate by the Decision-Making Body shall become binding upon the applicant.
c. Applications that do not comply with Section 7.8 of this code shall be denied.
4. Waivers. Staff may waive or approve minor modifications of any development standard or review criteria contained in this section upon a finding that such waiver or modification:
a. Is consistent with the stated purposes of this section;
b. Will have no significant adverse impacts on wildlife species or habitat;
c. Any potential adverse impacts will be mitigated or offset to the maximum extent
d. Practicable; and
e. Application of the standard or criteria is not warranted based on the location of the development, the absence of a particular species on the site or other relevant factors.
G. Review Standards. The following review standards shall apply to all development applications as specified, unless staff determines that a specific standard may be waived pursuant to subsection F.5., above. It is the intent of this section that these standards be applied in a flexible fashion to protect wildlife habitat and wildlife species in a cost-effective fashion.
1. Review Standards.
a. Buffers. All
development subject to a wildlife conservation plan shall provide a
setback from any identified important wildlife habitat area,
as specified by
the Division of Wildlife, to the maximum extent feasible in accordance
with any recommendations in the wildlife conservation plan.
b. Non-Native Vegetation. There shall be no introduction of plant species that are not on the approved landscaping list in Appendix C on any site containing any important wildlife habitat area. To the maximum extent feasible, existing herbaceous and woody cover on the site shall be maintained and removal of native vegetation shall be minimized.
c. Fencing. No
fencing on a site containing important wildlife habitat shall exceed forty (40)
inches in height, except to the extent that such fencing is approved by staff
to confine permitted domestic animals or to protect permitted ornamental
landscaping or gardens. (2) Fences higher than forty (40) inches may be allowed
if adequate openings are provided for the passage of deer, elk or other
identified wildlife. These openings shall be at least six (6) feet wide and
spaced a maximum of fifty (50) feet apart along continuous fence lines
exceeding this length. (3) No fencing using barbed wire shall be allowed. (4)
The type of fencing (materials, opacity, etc.) shall be determined by staff or
the Decision-Making Body as appropriate for the wildlife species on the site
on advice from the Colorado Division of Wildlife.
d. Exterior Lighting. Use of exterior lighting shall be minimized in areas of important wildlife habitat, and lighting shall be designed so that it does not spill over or onto such critical habitat. See also §7.9 below.
e. Refuse Disposal. Developments on sites containing important wildlife habitat, such as black bear, must use approved animal-proof refuse disposal containers. With Division of Wildlife approval, refuse disposal containers and enclosures may be electrified.
f. Domestic Animals. Development applications for property that includes important wildlife habitat must include a plan with specified enforcement measures for the control of domestic animals and household pets. The plan must include provisions to prevent the harassment, disturbance and killing of wildlife and to prevent the destruction of important wildlife habitat.
H. Wildlife Conservation Plans.
Preparation. A wildlife conservation plan required by this section shall be
prepared for the applicant, at the applicant's expense, under the responsible
direction of a qualified person who has demonstrated expertise in the field
is acceptable to the Staff.
2. Plan Content. Any wildlife conservation plan required to be prepared pursuant to this section shall include the following information at a minimum. Specific requirements may be waived by staff due to the location of the development, the previous use of the site, the size and potential impact of the development, the absence of particular species on a site, the prohibition of a reasonable use of the site and other relevant factors.
a. A description of the ownership, location, type, size and other attributes of the wildlife habitat on the site.
b. A description of the populations of wildlife species that inhabit or use the site, including a qualitative description of their spatial distribution and abundance.
c. An analysis of the potential adverse impacts of the proposed development on wildlife and wildlife habitat on or off site.
d. A list of proposed mitigation measures and an analysis of the probability of success of such measures.
e. A plan for implementation, maintenance and monitoring of mitigation measures.
f. A plan for any relevant enhancement or restoration measures.
g. A demonstration of fiscal, administrative and technical competence of the Applicant or other relevant entity to successfully execute the plan.
Chair Rennels opened the hearing to public comment and Robert Erast, Sandy Osterman, Dick Coe, Johanna Darden, Sandi Lindquist (on behalf of Fred Mares), and Ron Mares addressed the Board in opposition to the proposed revisions. All requested that Section 7.8.F.1. include provisions for raptor nest sites due to the sensitivity of these animals to habitat disturbance.
Larry Rockstead and Rick Spowered, from the Colorado Department of Wildlife, also addressed the Board and stated their concern about effects of construction on local raptor species. Mr. Rockstead stated that raptors are very sensitive to disruptions and would be severely affected by construction in the area.
Chair Rennels closed public comment and questioned Mr. Joseph about proposed Section 7.8.H, specifically, Chair Rennels asked if the Estes Valley Planning Commission would have any way to regulate the consultant other than requiring he/she be a “qualified person who has demonstrated expertise in the field.” Chair Rennels suggested allowing the applicant to choose a consultant but also requiring approval of that consultant by the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Johnson agreed. He stated that the code should require limited raptor habitat disruption and, when disruptions can not be avoided, such disruptions should be mitigated.
Commissioner Donnelly suggested the Board move to deny the code revisions until raptor habitat disruption is added as a trigger for review and that provisions be added to allow the Planning Commission to approve consultants hired by applicants.
Chair Rennels suggested the Board table the item until the Town Board of Estes Park has a chance to approve the changes. Mr. Joseph stated that, due to the upcoming holidays, the Town Board would not be able to approve the changes until February or March.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners table the Amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code, Section 7.8, “Habitat and Wildlife Protection,” until March 8, 2010, to allow for input from the Estes Park Town Board regarding the inclusion of raptor habitat and consultant approval.
Motion carried 3-0.
There being no further business, the hearing adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2009
The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 a.m. with Frank Lancaster, County Manager. Chair Rennels presided and Commissioners Donnelly and Johnson were present. Also present were: Neil Gluckman, Assistant County Manager; Donna Hart & Deni LaRue, Commissioners’ Office; Jeannine Haag and William Ressue, County Attorney’s Office; and Melissa Lohry, Deputy Clerk.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT: Terri Westover, Paul Westover, Linda Kuhlman, Shirley Preuit, Gary O’Quinn, Keith Burman, Lois Schwindt, Rocky Roediger, Herb Burkhalter, Lee Tucker, Jim Fry, Cheryl Hickerson, Jerry Hubka, and Larry Newman, all residents of the Boxelder Basin Stormwater Floodplain, addressed the Board with concerns about the Boxelder Basin Stormwater Authority. Many cited the lack of communication and progress from the authority.
Chair Rennels apologized for directing residents of the floodplain to the authority, as the Board was previously unaware of the problems brought forth. She assured residents that the Board will be in communication with the authority regarding its inadequate performance to date.
2. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE WEEK OF NOVEMBER 2, 2009:
M O T I O N
Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the minutes for the week of November 2, 2009.
Motion carried 3-0.
3. REVIEW OF THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK OF NOVEMBER 16, 2009: Ms Hart reviewed the upcoming schedule with the Board.
4. CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Johnson requested the Humane Society Agreement be removed from the consent agenda for discussion.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board approve the consent agenda for November 10, 2009, as follows:
11102009A002 FIRST ADDENDUM TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR MOSER FIRST SUBDIVISION 04-S2287 BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, NAN FISHER, AND MOSER HOMEOWNER’S ASSOCIATION
11102009A003 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT OF DISASTERS RELATED TO BROAD RANGING PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY INCIDENTS BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THE CITY OF LOVELAND, AND THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
11102009A004 GRANT OF RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENT BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THE CITY OF LOVELAND, AND THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS TO POUDRE VALLEY RURAL ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, INC.
11102009A005 AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND STANDARD RENEWABLE ENERGY FOR PHOTOVOLTAIC DESIGN AND INSTALLATION AT THE LARIMER COUNTY COURTHOUSE OFFICES LOCATED AT 200 W. OAK STREET
11102009R001 RESOLUTION DECLARING LARIMER COUNTY PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 ORGANIZED
11102009R002 RESOLUTION REGARDING EXTENSION OF APPROVAL OF THE AMENDED PLAT OF HILDERMAN MINOR LAND DIVISION LOTS 1 & 2
MISCELLANEOUS: Larimer County Public Trustee Third Quarter Report for 2009.
LIQUOR LICENSES: The following licenses were approved and issued: Ptarmigan Country Club – Hotel and Restaurant with Optional Premise – Fort Collins; Columbine Lodge – 3.2% – Bellvue; Poudre Spirits & Wine – Retail Liquor Store – Bellvue.
Motion carried 3-0.
5. COUNTY MANAGER WORKSESSION: Mr. Gluckman addressed the Board to discuss the changes made to the agreement with the Larimer Humane Society. Mr. Gluckman explained that due to budget cuts, the agreement was modified slightly from years past. According to the new agreement, the Larimer Humane Society will not remove deceased animals from roadways, nor will they respond more than once in a 24-hour period to a barking dog complaint.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Humane Society Agreement.
Motion carried 3-0.
11102009A001 HUMANE SOCIETY AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE LARIMER HUMANE SOCIETY
Chair Rennels also requested that a meeting be arranged between the Board of County Commissioners and the Boxelder Basin Stormwater Authority to discuss the complaints received at the start of today’s meeting.
6. COMMISSIONER ACTIVITY REPORT: The Board detailed their attendance at events during the previous week.
7. LEGAL MATTERS: Ms. Haag requested the Board go into executive session for conferences with an attorney.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners go into Executive Session to for conferences with an attorney, as outlined in 24-6-402(4)(b) C.R.S.
Motion carried 3-0.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:30 a.m.
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 2009
LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT HEARING
The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:30 a.m. with Ed Schemm, Assistant Director of the Environmental Health Department. Chair Rennels presided and Commissioner Johnson was present. Also present was Melissa Lohry, Deputy Clerk.
1. HIDDEN VIEW ESTATES LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT: Mr. Schemm explained that he just became aware of additional procedures that would need to be completed before the assessment of fees for the Hidden View Estates Local Improvement District (LID) could take place. Therefore, today’s hearing must be tabled until further notice.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Johnson moved that due to unforeseen circumstances that were brought to the Board’s attention just this morning and that such circumstances could impact the amount of individual assessments, the Board of County Commissioners table the assessment hearing for Local Improvement District 2008-1, Hidden View Estates, until further notice.
Motion carried 2-0.
There being no further business, the hearing adjourned at 10:00 a.m.
KATHAY RENNELS, CHAIR
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
CLERK AND RECORDER
Melissa E. Lohry, Deputy Clerk