> Meetings & Minutes > Commissioners' Minutes > BCC Minutes for 05/10/10  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

 

MONDAY, MAY 10, 2010

 

LAND USE HEARING

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 3:00 p.m. with Matt Lafferty, Principal Planner. Chair Johnson presided and Commissioner Gaiter was present. Also present were:  Jeff Goodell, Engineering Department; Doug Ryan, Environmental Health Department; Karlin Goggin, Building Department; Chad Gray and Toby Stauffer, Planning Department; Jeannine Haag, County Attorney’s Office; and Melissa Lohry, Deputy Clerk.

 

Chair Johnson opened the hearing with the Pledge of Allegiance and asked for public comment on the Land Use Code and County Budget. No one from the audience addressed the Board regarding these topics.

 

Chair Johnson 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:

 

1.         PLEASANT ACRES 2 ND FILING LOTS 10 AND 11, BLOCK 3, AMENDED PLAT, FILE #10-S2952:   This is a request to amend the Pleasant Acres Replat to formalize the lot lines of lots 10 and 11. At the time of recording, the Pleasant Acres Replat shifted platted lot lines into new lots; however, the new lots were recorded by deed only, and no formal plat was ever recorded.

 

Staff has found the proposed amendment to the Pleasant Acres Replat will not adversely affect any neighboring properties or county agency, nor will it result in any additional lots. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the Amended Plat of a portion of Lots 10 & 11, Block 3, of the Replat of a portion of Pleasant Acres Second Filing Subdivision, file #10-S2952, subject to the following conditions (and authorization for the chair to sign the plat when the conditions are met and the plat is presented for signature):

 

1.    The final plat shall be recorded by November 10, 2010, or this approval shall be null and void.

 

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

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the consent agenda as outlined above.

 

Motion carried 2-0.

 

2.         WALKER COMBINED VIOLATION:   The property owner is in violation of Section 4.1.19.B.4 and Section 6.1 of the Larimer County Land Use Code by virtue of having more than one principal building on a single lot and not obtaining site plan review approval before developing an industrially zoned property. The property owner is also in violation of Section 105 of the 2006 International Building Code, by virtue of changing the occupancy of a nonconforming residence without first obtaining a building permit. 

 

The property was rezoned from O-Open to I-Industrial in 1982. The current owner, Mr. Walker, bought the property in 1993 and that same year, he was approved to construct a pole barn to house tools for his tree cutting business. In 2005 a zoning violation file was opened for a dog kennel being operated from the residence. Mr. Grey spoke to Mr. Walker in 2007 to explain the violations and Mr. Walker stated he would return the house to residential use. The dog kennel business was removed from the property in May of 2007 and the file was closed.

 

In 2008, Mr. Grey noticed a new business, ABC Concrete, had moved into the residence and an addition was constructed without a permit. According to Mr. Walker, the addition was for the residential area. At that time, Mr. Walker was given three options to accomplish compliance with the Larimer County Land Use Code: 

 

1.         Vacate ABC Concrete from the residence and property.

 

2.         If ABC Concrete remains on the property, a site plan review is required.

 

A.        If the house remains residential, then the pole barn would become the principal building with 2 uses.

 

B.        If the house does not remain residential, the owner must obtain a change of occupancy permit to change the residential use to a commercial use and both businesses may be run from it; however, the pole barn must become an accessory building. 

 

3.         Annex the property to the City of Fort Collins. 

 

After discussing the options listed above with Mr. Walker, he didn’t think he needed a building permit. He stated he had a letter from Al Kadera, of the Planning Department, from 1993, which  stated a business could occupy the residence. Mr. Grey informed Mr. Walker that the Planning Department did not have the authority to make such a decision and a copy of the letter. To date, the letter has not been submitted.

 

Commissioner Gaiter asked if staff had conducted a search of county records for the letter referenced by Mr. Walker. Mr. Grey stated he had searched all of the records relating to Mr. Walker’s property and he was unable to locate any such letter from Mr. Kadera.

 

Chair Johnson opened the hearing to the property owner and Kevin Walker addressed the Board. Mr. Walker stated that he had received approval for the industrial use of his property by Mr. Kadera and he is utilizing the property in the same manner as adjacent landowners. Mr. Walker stated that he thought he became compliant with the land use code when he removed the addition from the residential use; however, the county has always managed to find something wrong with the property or the business operations. Lastly, Mr. Walker stated that he was not interested in applying for a change of occupancy permit because of the cost associated with bringing the current structure into compliance with the commercial code.

 

Chair Johnson closed the hearing to the applicant and noted there was no one present for public comment on this item.

 

Chair Johnson stated that Mr. Walker had clearly been operating two commercial uses on the subject property and he has chosen not to obtain the required building permits to house a commercial use within the residential structure; therefore, he is noncompliant with the county land use codes. Chair Johnson stated that the land use code was enacted to protect the citizens and visitors of Larimer County and Mr. Walker’s disregard for the codes causes multiple safety hazards. Lastly, Chair Johnson stated that he was not in favor of requiring Mr. Walker to dedicate an additional 40.5-foot right-of-way to the county.

 

Commissioner Gaiter stated that while he was sympathetic to the cost of converting the residence into a commercial building, he agreed that Mr. Walker must become compliant with the county’s land use code; however, he would not support the requirement for right-of-way dedication.

 

 M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners find violations of the Larimer County Land Use Code and the International Building Code exist, require compliance within 60-days, and authorize legal action if the deadline is not met. To reach compliance with both codes, Mr. Walker must apply for a change of occupancy permit to change the primary structure from residential occupancy to commercial occupancy within 60-days and illustrate (on the change of occupancy permit) both businesses operating from the primary structure.

 

Motion carried 2-0.

 

3.         LEWIS TEICH REQUEST TO NAME AN UNNAMED ACCESS ROAD:   This is a request from a private citizen to name an access road off of North County Road 25G, which services three properties. Mr. Teich, property owner and resident of 1332 North County Road 25G, approached county staff with concerns regarding a recent address change.

 

During the Rural Addressing Project for the Bellvue area in 2009, the three subject properties were addressed from Santanka Trail; however, Santanka Traill is not a continuous road. Thus, the access point to these properties is currently addressed from North County Road 25G. Since the access is less than ¼ mile in length, the county code did not require the access to be named and the three properties (1332, 1354, and 1390 North County Road 25G) were addressed from North County Road 25G.

 

In discussions with Mr. Teich, he expressed concern regarding the blind access and non-visibility of the homes from North County Road 25; therefore, he believed naming the access would provide more visibility and ease when guests and emergency services attempt to locate the residences.

 

On his own accord, Mr. Teich received letters of support from Poudre Fire Authority and Emergency Services Dispatch to name the access. Both agencies support a unique road name for the access. In a letter from Diane Webber, Communications Manager for the Larimer County Sheriff’s Office, Ms. Webber stated, “as it stands now, emergency personnel could easily pass your access road while searching for a house in that area.” After receiving the letters, staff performed a site visit and confirmed the access road is not easily visible.

 

Currently, there are three properties served by the access, the first property is unoccupied, the second is owned by Mr. Teich, and the third property is owned by Elizabeth Ashbach. In an email from Ms. Ashbach, she stated opposition to naming the access anything that might indicate the access is a through road. To address this concern, staff recommends an additional sign be placed on the county post similar to that posted on Santanka Trail, which reads, “Private Drive, No Reservoir Access.”

 

Since there is not a 51% majority vote in favor of naming the access, the appeal must be considered by the Board of County Commissioners. The appellant has submitted road names for consideration and Red Mesa Lane, Mr. Teich’s first preference meets the road naming requirements set forth by Larimer County. 

 

Chair Johnson opened the hearing to the appellant and Lewis Teich explained that because he had a stroke and heart surgery just last year, he is very concerned with the ability of emergency services to locate his property.

 

Chair Johnson closed the hearing to the appellant and noted there was no public present to comment on this item.

 

Commissioner Gaiter stated that he found Mr. Teich’s request very reasonable and Chair Johnson agreed.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the request to name the unnamed access to the properties know as 1332, 1354, and 1390 North County Road 25G, Red Mesa Lane subject to the following condition (and approve the allocation of funds for sign installation from the remaining project funds):

 

1.         In addition to the county standard road name sign, a sign panel of “Private Drive, No Reservoir Access” shall be installed.

 

Motion carried 2-0.

 

4.         NORTH COUNTY ROAD 25G ROAD NAME APPEAL:   This is an appeal to Section 10-175(b)(1)(q) if the Larimer County Land Use Code to officially use the alias name Lodgepole Drive instead of North County Road 25G. There are five site location addresses on this road, including 820, 724, 708, 569, and 501 North County Road 25G. 

 

The appellant has stated that existing county records differ with respect to the site address listed. This comment highlights the need the county identified for consistency of addressing that launched the rural addressing project. The project utilized a road centerline file for 911 purposes which indicated the road to be named North County Road 25G. This was confirmed using the county maintained road file from Public Works. In the case of these five addresses, the numbers were sequential and did not require to be amended per project standards. 

 

The appeal does not specifically request an appeal on historical significance, yet one of preference, and allowances made to other county roads. The road name of Lodgepole Drive is not considered historical to the county like that of Bingham Hill Road, Overland Trail, Buckhorn Road, or Rist Canyon Road. 

 

With five properties addressed off of this portion of North County Road 25G, staff has no objection to the official road name use of Lodgepole Drive in place of the county road number if the Board should elect to approve this appeal. As has been done with other road name exceptions, the road signs will depict both names, Lodgepole Drive and North County Road 25G. Lodgepole Drive would become the official road name used for addressing of all five properties and North County Road 25G signage will be retained to denote the public status of the road and maintenance.

 

In their review of the appeal, staff has found the request does not meet the requirements for historical significance as presented in past appeals, nor does the request meet the standards of the road naming hierarchy as set forth in the county code. If the appeal is upheld, dual signage would be installed, however, dual use of road names is not permitted and site location addresses shall use one consistent road name not a combination.

 

Staff is concerned that approval of this appeal may increase appeals for renaming county roads, as there are many county roads that have alias road names that were standardized by the Rural Addressing Project. Approval of this appeal may set a precedence for further requests of this nature. If the appeal is upheld, allocation of funds for dual signage will be required, although the official site location addresses would be from Lodgepole Drive, as this will remain a county numbered road.

 

Chair Johnson opened the hearing to the appellant and Billie Arceneaux presented the Board with plats from 1965 and 1969, which designate the road in question as Lodgepole Drive. Ms. Arceneaux explained that North County Road 25G is often confused with other county roads in the same area.

 

Chair Johnson opened the hearing to public comment and Katherine Watts explained that there is no standardized way for the addressing of mailing to roads named with numbers and presented a jury summons to illustrate her point.

 

Chair Johnson closed the hearing to public comment and asked if any resident of the North County Road 25G had an objection to the name Lodgepole Drive. Ms. Goggin stated she was not aware of any objections.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the use of Lodgepole Drive for site location addresses in place of North County Road 25G and install standard county reflective road signs indicating the name Lodgepole Drive.

 

Motion carried 2-0.

 

There being no further business, the Board recessed at 4:45 p.m.

 

LAND USE HEARING

 

The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 6:30 p.m. with Matt Lafferty, Principal Planner. Chair Johnson presided and Commissioners Donnelly and Gaiter were present. Also present were:  Eric Tracy and Martina Wilkinson, Engineering Department; Doug Ryan, Environmental Health Department; Jeannine Haag, County Attorney’s Office; and Melissa Lohry, Deputy Clerk.

 

1.         POPE SPECIAL REVIEW AND APPEAL, FILE #10-Z1777:   This is a request for special review approval to allow a Community Hall and Seasonal Camp, as well as, an appeal to Section 8.6.3.C of the Larimer County Land Use Code, to allow the paving of the parking lot and access drive within one year of the approval. A similar special review application was presented by the Popes to the Board of County Commissioners on February 1, 2010, and was denied. Staff and the Planning Director ruled that the current application differed significantly enough to be deemed a new application based on the reduction in intensity of proposed use quantified by the size and frequency of events to be held on the property. The Board of County Commissioners upheld the Planning Director’s ruling on March 22, 2010. 

 

The subject property is situated on the north side of Bingham Hill Road, approximately ½ mile west of Overland Trail. This 10-acre property is currently occupied by a single-family residence and a wholesale tree farm. The existing residence has an attached indoor gym (half size basketball court), which is currently being expanded to be a full size basketball court with showers and a kitchen.  This expansion is proceeding with the understanding that such facilities are for the private use of the residence and cannot be used for activities of a non-residential purposes unless otherwise approved by the Board of County Commissioners through and appropriate application process.

 

The subject application for the Pope Special Review proposes the following two new uses:

 

            Community Hall.  A facility used for recreational, social and cultural activities. 

 

Seasonal Camp.  A parcel of land under single ownership and management having tents, buildings, or other shelters but cannot include recreational vehicles or mobile homes. A seasonal camp is for recreational or educational purposes and the accommodation of four or more people for two or more days, or portions thereof. 

 

The purpose for two uses in this instance is that the community hall will accommodate activities that occur on a single day, while the seasonal camp will offer activities that are two or more days in duration. While the two uses are separate, they will utilize the same facilities (parking, outdoor area, kitchen, and gymnasium) thus the physical impacts on the property will be the same for both uses, unless only the Seasonal Camp is approved, in which case, the parking area can be reduced from 50-spaces to 7-spaces. Based upon the application materials the applicant proposes the following operational characteristics:

 

  Community Hall (1 day events)

 

  Seasonal Camp (2-7 day camps)

20 events with 130 guests

20 events with 90 guests

20 events with 50 guests

  Camps limited to 20 participants

  Weddings

18 in 2010

12 annually in subsequent years

Camp season from March 1 to September 30,  of each year

Total number of events per year

60 maximum

Each camp session reduces total number of   Community Hall events by 1

 

The property is accessible from Bingham Hill Road via a private access that also serves two other parcels in the area. The private access road bi-sects the property from southwest to northeast to one of the adjacent properties. The property slopes from southwest to northeast.

 

As proposed a 50-stall parking lot will be added to the site near the southeastern side of the residence and the existing gymnasium will be enlarged to house a full court basketball court with showers and a kitchen. The applicants’ proposal indicates that the access road and parking will be paved.

 

With regards to the surrounding area, there are numerous large rural residential properties many with small agricultural features and some that produce agricultural products. The property immediately to the west of the subject site is currently undeveloped.

 

The property is in the LaPorte Plan Area and receives water service from the City of Fort Collins. Sewer is accommodated by on-lot septic and Poudre Fire Authority provides fire protection

 

On February 16, 2010, staff presented the Pope Special Review application for a Community Hall and Seasonal Camp to the LaPorte Area Planning Advisory Committee (LAPAC). At that meeting, the Committee also heard testimony from the applicant and surrounding property owners, which focused primarily on compatibility issues. Based upon information provided as part of the staff report, and the testimony provided at the meeting, the LAPAC made a recommendation (4 yes – 3 no) that the Commissioners deny the application as proposed, stating that they did not find the use to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.

 

On April 21, 2010, staff presented the Pope Special Review application for a Community Hall and Seasonal Camp to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission listened to testimony from the applicant and public regarding the application. After taking testimony the Planning Commission recommended denial of the Community Hall Special Review, approval of the Seasonal Camp Special Review (with limit of 30-camps annually), and approval of the appeal to Section 8.6.3.C of the land use code.

 

Staff recommends approval of the Pope Special Review application for a Community Hall, file #10-Z1777, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.    This special review approval shall automatically expire without a public hearing if the use is not commenced within three years of the date of approval.

 

2.    The site shall be developed consistent with the approved plan and with the information contained in the Bingham Hill Farms Special Review, file #10-Z1777, except as modified by the conditions of approval or agreement of the county and the  applicant. The applicant shall be subject to all other verbal or written representations and commitments of record for the Pope Special Review.

 

3.    Failure to comply with any conditions of the special review approval may result in reconsideration of the use and possible revocation of the approval by the Board of Commissioners.

 

4.    This application is approved without the requirement for a development agreement.

 

5.    In the event the applicant fails to comply with any conditions of approval or otherwise fails to use the property consistent with the approved special review, applicant agrees that in addition to all other remedies available to the county, the county may withhold building permits, issue a written notice to applicant to appear and show cause why the special review approval should not be revoked, and/or bring a court action for enforcement of the terms of the special review. All remedies are cumulative and the county’s election to use one shall not preclude use of another.  In the event the county must retain legal counsel and/or pursue a court action to enforce the terms of this special review approval, applicant agrees to pay all expenses incurred by the county including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney’s fees.

 

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

 

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

 

8.    Prior to the commencement of the use, the applicant shall provide a commitment letter from the City of Fort Collins Water District for expanded water service for the use.

 

9.    Prior to the commencement of the use, the applicant shall obtain a Change of Use Permit from the Larimer County Building Department for the occupancy of the gymnasium for the uses proposed. This permit shall include approval by the Poudre Fire Authority with regards to fire protection.

 

10.   The allowed number and occupancy of Community Hall events allowed shall be as follows:

Community Hall (1 day events)

 

20 events @ 130 guests

20 events @ 90 guests

20 events @ 50 guests

Number of weddings

     18 in 2010

     12 annually in subsequent years

Total number of events per year

     60 maximum

 

11.   If approval of the Pope Special Review for a Seasonal Camp is approved, then each seasonal camp activity will cause a reduction of the total number of Community Hall events in condition #10 (above) by 1.

 

12.   Prior to the commencement of the use, the applicant shall to coordinate with Larimer County Engineering Department to install signage at the site access and Bingham Hill Road to warn drivers to use caution due to high levels of bicycle traffic along Bingham Hill Road.

 

13.   Prior to the commencement of the use, the applicant shall provide a maintenance agreement for the shared access road serving the site.

 

Staff also recommends approval of the Pope Special Review application for a Seasonal Camp, file #10-Z1777, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.    This special review approval shall automatically expire without a public hearing if the use is not commenced within three years of the date of approval.

 

2.    The site shall be developed consistent with the approved plan and with the information contained in the Bingham Hill Farms Special Review, file #10-Z1777, 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 Pope Special Review.

 

3.    Failure to comply with any conditions of the special review approval may result in reconsideration of the use and possible revocation of the approval by the Board of Commissioners.

 

4.    If the Pope Special Review for the Community Hall is not approved, the applicant shall provide a revised site design illustrating a 7-10 stall parking instead of the 50-stall parking lot proposed with the initial application. 

 

5.    This application is approved without the requirement for a Development Agreement.

 

6.    In the event the applicant fails to comply with any conditions of approval or otherwise fails to use the property consistent with the approved special review, applicant agrees that in addition to all other remedies available to the county, the county may withhold building permits, issue a written notice to applicant to appear and show cause why the special review approval should not be revoked, and/or bring a court action for enforcement of the terms of the special review. All remedies are cumulative and the county’s election to use one shall not preclude use of another.  In the event the county must retain legal counsel and/or pursue a court action to enforce the terms of this special review approval, applicant agrees to pay all expenses incurred by the county including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney’s fees.

 

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

 

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

 

9.    Prior to the commencement of the use, the applicant shall provide a commitment letter from the City of Fort Collins Water District for expanded water service for the use.

 

10.   Prior to the commencement of the use, the applicant shall obtain a Change of Use Permit from the Larimer County Building Department for the occupancy of the gymnasium for the uses proposed. This permit shall include approval by the Poudre Fire Authority with regards to fire protection.

 

11.   Prior to the commencement of the use the applicant shall obtain approval a septic permit, the septic system shall also be completed.

 

12.   The allowed number and occupancy of Seasonal Camp activities allowed shall be as follows:

Seasonal Camp (2-7 day camps)

 

Camps limited to 20 participants

Camp season from March 1 to September 30 annually

Each camp session reduces total number of Community Hall events by 1

 

13.   Prior to the commencement of the use, the applicant shall to coordinate with Larimer County Engineering Department to install signage at the site access and Bingham Hill Road to warn drivers to use caution due to high levels of bicycle traffic along Bingham Hill Road.

 

14.   Prior to the commencement of the use, the applicant shall provide a maintenance agreement for the shared access road serving the site.

 

Lastly, staff recommends approval of the Pope Special Review Appeal to Section 8.6.3.C of the Larimer County Land Use Code, file #10-Z1777, subject to the following condition:

 

1.         The applicant/owner shall pave the access drive and parking area within 1-year of the date of this approval.

 

Chair Johnson opened the hearing to the applicant and Randy Pope addressed the Board. Mr. Pope stated that since the last hearing, he has willingly attempted to accommodate and alleviate the fears and concerns of his neighbors to no avail. To date, he and his family continue to suffer personal attacks from neighbors. He stated the proposed use will be compatible with the surrounding area because he will abide by all of the noise, traffic, and light restrictions set forth in the land use code with all events and music ceasing no later than 10:00 p.m. Mr. Pope explained that during an event with 130-guests arriving within an hour of each other, traffic on Bingham Hill Road would only be increased seven percent from normal and will not exceed maximum capacity. Mr. Pope stated that the proposed use is harmonious with the surrounding area because there are four additional event centers located within a mile of his property. Lastly, to ensure compliance with all of the restrictions set forth in his application, and in an attempt to provide transparency, Mr. Pope volunteered to post a calendar listing of every event and the number of anticipated guests, on his website.  

 

Commissioner Gaiter asked Mr. Pope to clarify the condition that “each camp session reduces total number of community hall events by one.” Mr. Pope explained that for every camp session held at the property, the number of events allowed at the community hall is decreased by one. Furthermore, he stated that the number of smaller events would probably be decreased first, as that would provide the maximum amount of flexibility.

 

Commissioner Gaiter asked Mr. Pope to estimate the number of weddings he would host during a week. Mr. Pope stated that because most weddings occur on Fridays and Saturdays, and given the condition that he will only host one event on his property per day, the property would average two weddings per week. 

 

Some discussion ensued between the Board and Mr. Pope about noise levels and hours of operation. Mr. Pope stated that he intends to have all events and clean-up concluded by 10:00 p.m.

 

Chair Johnson opened the hearing to public comment and Dave Twedt, Shelby Majors, Mary Perina, John Schmid, Joan Welch-Schmid, Liz Whitney, Joe Sullivan, Rebecca Douglas, Jim Rice, and Dick Spiess, all surrounding land owners, addressed the Board in opposition to the special review. Most were willing to accept the proposed camp use; however, all voiced concern with the community center use, specifically related to increased noise, alcohol consumption, increased traffic, and decreased property values. Many of the individuals above also stated that the proposed business would create a commercial use in a residential neighborhood, which would not create harmony or compatibility.

 

Bobbie Randolph, owner of the Tapestry House event center, addressed the Board in opposition to the community center use. Ms. Randolph stated that while her event center is a good fit, the Board should not assume that Mr. Popes community center would also be a good fit. She also stated that another event center would not increase the total number of events in the area but would dilute the number of events at surrounding businesses.

 

Paul Pellegrino, Keenan Pope, Kathy Duskin, Phillip Gottula, Kelly Stadleman, Pat Mahonnui, Connie Jesser, Mark Larkin, Ashley Pope, Arleen Yusnus, Kelsey Pope (presented a letter from Joel Cooper), Nelda Pope (presented a letter from William “Skip” Caddoo), Reid Pope, and Cheryl Pope addressed the Board in favor of the special review application. Many cited the Mr. Pope’s honest, law abiding nature and the positive effects on the economy as reasons to support the special review application. 

 

Chair Johnson closed the hearing to public comment and allowed Mr. Pope to address the Board in rebuttal. Mr. Pope stated that he has proactively tried to accommodate all of his neighbors needs and concerns; however, the surrounding land owners are not willing to compromise. Mr. Pope suggested all of the properties on Bingham Hill be placed in a conservation easement, which would restrict all changes, which seems to be the intent of Bingham Hill residents.

 

Some discussion ensued between the Board and staff regarding traffic estimates and thresholds. Ms. Wilkinson explained that even the largest events would not increase traffic flow above the county’s threshold.  

 

Commissioner Gaiter stated that during his visit to the Pope property, he noticed an overwhelming number of business uses in the surrounding area; therefore, he did not feel the neighborhood was strictly residential, as portrayed during public comment. Commissioner Gaiter also stated he did not believe the noise ordinance restrictions would be breached for either the camp or the community hall. Lastly, Commissioner Gaiter noted the willingness of the Popes to mitigate their neighbors concerns and thanked the Pope family for their attempt to compromise.

 

Commissioner Donnelly explained that during his visit to the Pope property and the Schmidt property, he was able to gain an appreciation for the extensive measures taken by the Popes to ensure the proposed uses would be harmonious to the neighborhood. Commissioner Donnelly stated that he was in favor of upholding staff’s recommendation of approval. 

 

Chair Johnson stated that the county’s land use code was enacted to establish and support expectations for land use. If the community hall use was allowed, the 5,000 potential guests to the Pope property would significantly alter the neighborhood, thereby dashing the expectations set forth through the established residential zoning. Chair Johnson stated he was in favor of upholding the recommendation of the Planning Commission by supporting the proposed camp and appeal but not the proposed community hall.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Pope Special Review for a community hall, file #10-Z1777, subject to the conditions recommended by staff as they appear above.

 

Motion carried 2-1, Chair Johnson dissenting.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Pope Special Review for a seasonal camp, file #10-Z1777, subject to the conditions recommended by staff as they appear above.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Pope Special Review for an appeal to section 8.6.3.C of the Larimer County Land Use Code, file #10-Z1777, subject to the conditions recommended by staff as they appear above.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

There being no further business, the Board adjourned at 11:00 p.m.

 

TUESDAY, MAY 11, 2010

 

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS MEETING

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 a.m. with Frank Lancaster, County Manager. Chair Johnson presided and Commissioners Donnelly and Gaiter were present. Also present were:  Donna Hart and Deni LaRue, Commissioners’ Office; Mark Peterson and Jerry White, Engineering Department; Gary Buffington, Tim D’Amato, Meegan Flenniken, and Dave Lentz, Natural Resources Department; Matt Lafferty, Planning Department; Jeannine Haag and William Ressue, County Attorney’s Office; and Melissa Lohry, Deputy Clerk.

 

1.         PUBLIC COMMENT:  Robin Jones addressed the Board in regards to the special event permit application for parking and camping on the Graves property. He explained that on May 4, 2010, the Board decided not to allow camping to occur on the proposed site due to the proximity to a recently discovered bald eagle’s nest. Mr. Jones explained that he had been in touch with eagle experts from the United States Department of the Interior regarding the nest and all of the experts indicated that camping on the proposed site would not negatively effect the eagle. Mr. Jones asked the Board if they would approve the camping use if he presented a letter from the United States Department of the Interior.

 

Chair Johnson stated that if a letter was received from the Department of the Interior, he would like to receive direction from the Department of Natural Resources before granting approval to camp on the Graves property.

 

Commissioners Donnelly and Gaiter agreed.

 

Lee Tucker and Larry Newman addressed the Board to discuss their concerns regarding the Boxelder Stormwater Authority.

 

2.         FOSTER AND KINSHIP CARE MONTH PROCLAMATION:   Jamie Amungaard, a foster parent in Larimer County, explained that there is a great need for foster parents in Larimer County and requested the Board proclaim the month of May as Foster and Kinship Care Month in order to raise awareness of the programs.

 

Commissioner Donnelly read the proclamation.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners proclaim May 2010, as Foster and Kinship Care Month in Larimer County.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

3.         APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE WEEK OF MAY 3, 2010:

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the minutes for the week of May 3, 2010.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

4.         REVIEW OF THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK OF MAY 17, 2010 :  Ms. Hart reviewed the schedule for the upcoming week.

 

5.         CONSENT AGENDA:

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the consent agenda as it appears below:

 

05112010A001           CONTRACT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE STATE OF COLORADO FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, DIVISION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE FOR FELONS OF SEX OFFENSES

 

05112010A002           RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF, AND GRANT AGREEMENT, BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE STATE BOARD OF THE GREAT OUTDOORS COLORADO TRUST FUND FOR THE THREE BELL I PROJECT

 

05112010A003           AMENDMENTS I AND II TO THE FEBRUARY 1, 2010, AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, OWNER AND DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACTOR, AND GH PHIPPS CONSTRUCTION CO FOR LARIMER COUNTY FAIRGROUNDS AND EVENTS CENTER – THE RANCH – 1ST NATIONAL BANK EXHIBITION CALL BUILDING NO. 8 RENOVATIONS

 

05112010A004           EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDS LANDOWNER ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS APPLICATION AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE STATE FOREST SERVICE FOR RED MOUNTAIN OPEN SPACE PROJECT #5308420-05

 

05112010A005           EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDS LANDOWNERS ASSITANCE PROGRAMS APPLICATION AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE COLORADO STATE FOREST SERVICE FOR RAMSAY – SHOCKEY OPEN SPACE PROJECT #5308420-04

 

MISCELLANEOUS:            Larimer County Sheriff’s Office Enhanced Compensation Program Plan Document; 2010 LCDHS 60-Month Extension Due to Hardship Policy LCWC P&P 02-133; and 2010 LCDHS Grandparent Guardianship Eligibility and Payment Standards Policy.

 

LIQUOR LICENSES:         The following licenses were approved and issued:  Glen Haven General Store – 3.2% – Glen Haven; Overland Foods – 3.2% – LaPorte; and Be Local Northern Colorado – Special Event 6% – Fort Collins.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

6.         REAPPOINTMENT OF LARIMER COUNTY PEST INSPECTOR:  Mr. Buffington, Ms. Flannikin, and Mr. D’Amato requested that Dave Lentz be reappointed as the Pest Inspector for Larimer County.  Mr. Buffington explained that the county pest inspector is tasked with inspecting for mountain pine beetle, spruce ips, Douglas fir beetle, and Dutch elm disease. Furthermore, the appointed position is a two year designation, which is currently filled by the county forester, Mr. Lentz.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners reappoint the County Forester, Dave Lentz, as the Larimer County Pest Inspector for an additional two year term.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

7.         RESOLUTION FOR PEST CONTROL DESIGNAITON:   Mr. Buffington requested the Board add Thousand Cankers Disease to the Resolution Concerning County Pest Control and Plant Disease Control Procedure. Mr. Lentz explained that the disease, which affects black walnut trees, is responsible for the death of trees in Boulder County and has recently been discovered in two trees located in the southern portion of the county; therefore, he anticipates a growing need to inspect for the disease in coming months.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Resolution Designating Pests to be controlled.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

05112010R001           BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION DESIGNATING PESTS TO BE CONTROLLED

 

8.         APPROVAL TO EXPAND DUTIES OF LARIMER COUNTY WEED ADVISORY BOARD AND NAME CHANGE:   Mr. D’Amato requested the current Weed Advisory Board be tasked with providing direction to the forestry program, which does not currently possess a sounding board. If approved, the Weed Advisory Board would be renamed the Larimer County Land Stewardship Advisory Board and would provide citizen-directed advice to help address an increasing number of issues pertaining to both the weed district and forestry program. 

 

Chair Johnson asked if any members of the current Weed Advisory Board had forestry experience. Ms. Flennikin stated that there were not any current members with forestry experience; however, there is a vacant position on the board and one of the individuals who applied for appointment possesses a strong forestry background.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Weed Control Advisory Board name change to Larimer County Land Stewardship Advisory Board, with the inclusion of advisory board duties to the forestry program.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

9.         APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT FOR HERMIT PARK:   Mr. Buffington requested approval to amend the conservation easement currently in place for Hermit Park Open Space. Mr. Buffington explained that the open space was acquired by the county in 2007, at which time a conservation easement was granted to the Estes Valley Land Trust. The amendment request is to eliminate one reserved building site, located within the open space, and allow the county to continue to rent two camper cabins for an additional five years, allowing the Department of Natural Resources to continue to receive additional income. Mr. Buffington noted that approval of the amendment had been granted by the Estes Valley Land Trust.

 

Commissioner Gaiter asked how many cabins are currently located within the open space. Mr. Buffington stated that there are fifteen cabins total but the two in question were the most secluded and, in the past, environmental impacts caused by guests of the two cabins has been minimal.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve Amendment No. 2 to the Deed of Conservation Easement for Hermit Park.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

05112010D001           AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT ON HERMIT PARK BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE ESTES VALLEY LAND TRUST

 

10.       LEGISLATIVE UPDATE:  There were no legislative items to discuss.

 

11.       COUNTY MANAGER WORKSESSION:  Mr. Lancaster informed the Board that he and Lorenda Volkner, Human Resources Director, plan to work together to form mandatory guidelines for department heads to follow during their quest to fill open positions. Mr. Lancaster stated the guidelines would provide an emphasis on dispersing workloads to eliminate the need to fill empty positions and trying to fill open positions internally.

 

12.       COMMISSIONER ACTIVITY REPORTS:  The Board discussed their attendance at events during the last week.

 

13.       LEGAL MATTERS:  Mr. Ressue requested the Board go into executive session for conferences with an attorney for the purpose of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions. (Affidavit provided.)

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners go into executive session for conferences with an attorney for the purpose of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions as outlined in 24-6-402(4)(b) C.R.S.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

There being no further business, the Board adjourned at 11:00 a.m.

 

THURSDAY, MAY 13, 2010

 

The Board met with Matt Lafferty,  Jeannine Haag, and Robin Jones of the Mishawaka Inn, for a worksession regarding the Mishawaka Special Event Permit. No formal action was taken; however, Chair Johnson requested that the following be added to the minutes for this week:

 

Mr. Lafferty explained that the Colorado Department of Wildlife (CDOW) would not write a letter giving approval of camping at the Graves property regarding an active bald eagle nest on the southeast corner of the Graves property. Mr. Lafferty stated that CDOW recommended "no surface occupancy within a ¼-mile radius of active nests." CDOW also indicated that they would take action if the nest or eagle was distressed. Commissioners Gaiter and Donnelly were in favor of approving the Special Events Permit provided that camping would not be permitted within approximately 900-feet of the eagle nest and that a physical barrier be erected. Commissioner Johnson stated that because there was no information to analyze the situation he would definitely not support allowing camping to occur on the property.

 

 

 

 

 

 

__________________________________________

  STEVE JOHNSON, CHAIR

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

 

 

 

 

 

SCOTT DOYLE

CLERK AND RECORDER

 

ATTEST:

 

­­______________________________________

Melissa E. Lohry, Deputy Clerk