Loveland Bike Trail
 
> Meetings & Minutes > Commissioners' Minutes > BCC Minutes for 05/21/12  

MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

 

 

MONDAY, MAY 21, 2012

 

LAND USE HEARING

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 3:00 p.m. with Matt Lafferty, Principal Planner. Chair Pro-Tem Johnson presided and Commissioner Donnelly was present. Also present were:  Traci Shambo, Engineering Department; Dave Shirk, Estes Valley Planning Department; Rob Helmick, Planning Department; Jeannine Haag, County Attorney’s Office; and Melissa Lohry, Deputy Clerk.

 

Chair Pro-Tem Johnson opened the hearing with the Pledge of Allegiance and Mr. Laffterty requested item #2, “Amendments to the Larimer County Land Use Code – Fire Standards,” be added to the consent agenda.

 

Chair Pro-Tem Johnson explained that the following items were on the consent agenda; therefore, they would not be discussed unless requested by the Board, staff, or a member of the audience.

 

1.         EAGLES CREST RESORT SUPPLEMENT CONDOMINIUM MAP:   This is a request for approval of the first two condominium units within a previously approved development. In March 2011, the Board approved the preliminary and final condominium maps for Eagle Crest Resort Condominiums. The preliminary condo map established development rights for eleven units, and the final condo map established Unit 11 and a clubhouse.

 

Per state statute, condominium maps cannot be filed until construction is substantially complete, which means condominium maps are reviewed and recorded in several phases.

 

Staff recommends approval of the First Supplemental Map of Eagles Crest Resort Condominiums and authorization for the chair to sign the plat when the conditions are met and the plat is presented for signature.

 

2.         AMENDMENTS TO THE LARIMER COUNTY LAND USE CODE – FIRE STANDARDS, FILE #12-CA0121 (TABLED MAY 14, 2012):  This is a request to amend the Land Use Code by Repeal/Replacing Section 8.1.4 and Section 8.1.14.P clarifying standards for fire protection, including provisions regarding water supply and access and modifying provisions for dead-end roads. The proposed amendment had been previously discussed at work sessions in various draft forms over the last two years. There was no one present at the Larimer County Planning Commission hearing to discuss this item, and after a brief staff presentation, the Larimer County Planning Commission took action to recommend to the Board of County Commissioners approval of the proposed amendment.

 

1.         Repeal and replace Section 8.1.4 with:

8.1.4 Fire protection level of service standards

A.   Overview: The provision of adequate fire protection will be determined through the location of development, availability of a water supply for fire fighting, and access to development.  Specifically, the type of dwelling units or non-residential construction, the surface and length of access roadways, and the fire fighting water supply availability will determine how fire protection is provided.  Fire protection service is provided by one of three entities: 

1.   a municipality or a special district/authority;

2.   a volunteer departments; or,

3.   the Sheriff.

Emergency medical service is provided by a mix of ambulance service, fire districts and or “quick response teams.” Access to a site as further defined in this section is required for emergency medical service.

 

B.   Applicability and Relationship to Adopted Fire Codes, enforceability  

1.   These standards apply to all applications for conservation development, planned land division, subdivision, minor special review, special review, site plan review, public site plan review, and special exception submitted under this code.  These standards do not apply to Rural Land Plans submitted under section 5.8 of this code.

2.   The standards of this section shall be considered the minimum requirements even for those areas within the boundaries of a fire district that have adopted a fire code which is also adopted by the Board of County Commissioners.

3.   A fire protection plan shall be required for those developments that cannot comply with the requirements of this section of the code.

 

C.   In general:

1.   The fire district or other appropriate agency may, based upon their adopted fire code, request additional requirement for development proposals as a result of development location, size or type of construction, in which case one of the following shall occur:

§  The applicant may agree to the higher standard, which would be implemented through a condition of approval , or

§  The Board of County Commissioners, upon the recommendation of the fire district may impose a higher standard as a condition of the approval of the development proposal, or

§  If not required as a condition of approval by the Board of County Commissioners the fire district may elect to enforce a higher standard through their own enforcement processes.    

Disclosure documents required as a part of the final documents for a development application, recorded as part of the final approval, shall include language stating that the county will not enforce or be responsible for enforcing a higher standard unless required as a condition of approval by the Board of County Commissioners.

2.   Fire protection plans shall be reviewed by the appropriate district and a recommendation from the fire district shall be provided.  If the fire district fails to provide comment or recommendations on the fire protection plan within the allotted review time, the review maybe performed by the Larimer County Sherriff, Office of Emergency Services.

3.   Fire protection plans proposed for areas of the county not within a fire district boundary, shall receive a review and recommendation by Larimer County Sherriff, Office of Emergency Services. 

4.   The Board of County Commissioners shall approve proposed fire protection plans as a part of the development review approval of preliminary plat, special review, special exception or minor special review.

5.   The planning director shall approve proposed fire protection plans as a part of the approval of applications for site plan review and public site plan review. 

6.   Fire fighting water supply connections for fire protection shall be approved by the water supply entity and that all physical connections (i.e. screw threads) shall meet the requirements of the fire protection provider.

 

D.   Standards for residential development in a GMA or other designated urban area.

1.   General Standards

      1. New development within growth management overlay zone district areas (GMA districts) and other designated urban areas in the county's master plan (i.e. LaPorte) must be located within a five-mile travel distance of an existing, manned fire station.
      2. Development applications proposing access to serve 30 or more dwelling units, shall provide two access points.  If the access serves less than 30 units, an approved secondary/emergency access may be required. 

2.   Water supply: Developments within GMA districts and other designated urban areas in the county's master plan, where a public water supply designed to provide water for fire fighting purposes is available must comply with the following requirements:

  1. The development must be connected to a public water system designed and constructed to supply a minimum fire flow of 1,000 (gpm) with a minimum residual pressure of 20 pounds per square inch (psi); and,

The development must provide fire hydrants spaced no more than 1,000 feet from each other and located to adequately serve residential structures.

  1. Residential fire sprinklers will be required when an adequate water supply is either unavailable or inadequate to supply fire fighting water to hydrants.
  2.  A combination of access length and inadequate water supply may dictate the requirement for residential fire sprinklers.

3.   Fire Fighting Access:

a.   Will meet the Urban Area Road Standards,

b.   Will have a minimum travel way width of 20 feet, generally have full connectivity to a public road system

c.   Secondary (emergency) access may be required. 

d.   Will have no uninterrupted road segment which results in a dead end road length of more than 660 feet.

e.   All access roads shall be capable of supporting fire apparatus with a weight of 80,000 pounds; 

f.   All dead end accesses, irrespective of length shall incorporate turnarounds with a minimum radius of 50 feet. 

g.   A lesser standard may be approved by the Board of County Commissioners.

 

E.   Standards for non-residential development in a Growth Management Area or other designated urban area.

1.   Water Supply: All development which is subject to review as defined in Section 6 of this code in Urban Areas of Larimer County shall:

      1. Be served by fire hydrants connected to a public water system designed and constructed to supply fire flows of 1,500 (gpm) at 20 pounds per square inch (psi) minimum residual pressure within 1,000 feet of said buildings .
      2. Shall include a fire sprinkler system designed and installed according to NFPA if a water system (hydrants) meeting these requirements is not available, or: the structure includes any fire containment area in excess of 5000 square feet. 
      3. If a public water system is not available the fire protection provider and Chief Building Official must approve any fire protection plan or alternate system prior to installation. 

2.   Fire Fighting Access:

a.   Will meet the Urban Area Road Standards;

b.   Have a minimum travel way width of 20 feet,

c.   Will generally have full connectivity to a public road system,

d.   Secondary (emergency) access may be required. 

e.   There will be no uninterrupted road segment which results in a dead end road length of more than 660 feet.

f.   All access roads shall be capable of supporting fire apparatus with a weight of 80,000 pounds. 

g.   All dead end accesses irrespective of length, shall incorporate turnarounds with a minimum radius of 50 feet.

h.   Access for fire fighting, equipment and firefighters shall be provided to all sides of any structure. 

i.   A lesser standard may be approved by the Board of County Commissioners.

 

F.   Standards for residential development outside a GMA 

1.   General standards for a rural development or development outside a GMA.   

      1. Developments outside GMA districts and other designated urban areas have no requirement for proximity to a fire station, due to the variety of jurisdictions, providers and character of the area.  
      2. Development applications proposing access to serve 30 or more dwelling units, shall provide two access points.  If the access serves less than 30 units, an approved secondary/emergency access may be required.   

2.   Water supply for firefighting

  1. When a public water supply with adequate pressure and flow for fire hydrants is available it shall be utilized.  If hydrants are provided they must supply fire fighting water at 500 (gpm) at minimum 20 psi residual pressure and be spaced at no more than 1000 feet between hydrants. 
  2. Certain public water providers do not have systems designed to accommodate hydrants, in those cases residential fire sprinkler systems will be required.
  3. When a public water supply is not available, a fire protection plan must be developed by the applicant for review and recommendation by either the fire protection provider or the Sheriff’s Department, Emergency Services.  Elements that must be included in fire protection plan include but are not limited to the following:
        • All development which use on-site water storage or residential fire sprinkler systems will be required to provide a funding mechanism to pay for periodic inspections and maintenance through the property owners association or equivalent entity created pursuant to section 12.6.6.
        • All development will be required to provide on-site water storage totaling a minimum of 2,000 gallons per residential unit outside wildfire hazard areas and 3,000 gallons per residential unit within wildfire hazard areas. The fire authority responsible for serving the area or Emergency Services must review, approve and periodically inspect such on-site storage; and
  4. At the time of evaluating a development, if it is clear that structures will be separated by less than 200 feet, a residential fire sprinkler system meeting the requirements of this section shall be required. 
  5. Residential fire sprinklers will be required in all cases when a public water supply is either unavailable or inadequate to supply hydrants or if a combination of access length and water supply dictate the need. 

3.   Fire Fighting Access:

  1. Shall meet the Rural Area Road Standards required for fire protection
  2. Shall be a minimum travel way of 20 feet in width. 
  3. Must not exceed 660 feet in length from a secondary access point.
  4. If the distance is more than 660 feet then residential sprinklers shall be required. 
  5. All roadway construction shall be designed to support equipment/apparatus weight of 80,000 pounds, can be of an all-weather surface. 

 

G.   Standards for Non-residential /development outside of a GMA  

1.   Water supply: All development which is subject to review as defined in Section 6 of this code, located in rural areas of Larimer County, shall be served by a public water system designed and constructed to supply fire flows of 1,000 (gpm) at 20 pounds per square inch (psi) minimum residual pressure within 1,000 feet of said buildings. If the water supply cannot meet this standard then plans for the building(s) must include a fire sprinkler system designed and installed according to the requirements of the fire protection provider, and an approved fire protection plan. 

2.   Fire Fighting Access:

      1. Shall meet the Rural Area Road Standards
      2. When required for fire protection shall be a minimum of 20 feet in width. 
      3. Shall not be more than 660 feet in length from a secondary access point.
      4. If the distance is more than 660 feet then fire sprinklers shall always be required. 
      5. All roadway construction shall be designed to support equipment/fire apparatus weight of 80,000 pounds, and;
      6. be an all-weather surface.

 

H.    Application Requirements.  In addition to any submittal requirements in the technical supplement to this Code, applicants must provide a narrative describing the proposed water supply for fire protection or a fire protection plan. Where applicable, the narrative must include a vicinity map showing the location of the fire station and route used for calculating the "proximity-to-fire-station" criteria. 

 

I.   Definitions.

Fire sprinkler systems - All fire sprinkler systems, whether required by the applicable fire district or chosen by the applicant for a development as part of a fire protection plan, must be designed and installed to meet National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards.

Fire Protection Plan –A site/development specific plan for fire suppression and safety which addresses the following components:

    1. Water available for fire fighting by source
    2. Maintenance of the water supply
    3. Distance to supply
    4. Distance between structures
    5. Access to supply and structures
    6. Special plans/designs to address the existence and mitigation of wildfire hazards
    7. Entity responsible for providing fire protection services (fire district fire department or Larimer County Sheriff) 
    8. The fire protection plan shall use national standards for gallons and flow duration as described in the International Fire Code (IFC) and, as appropriate, be prepared by a qualified and licensed engineer.

Emergency/secondary access – An all-weather surface access way which is intended only for emergency use; must have a travel surface of at least 20 feet in width capable of supporting fire apparatus up to 80,000 pounds (the weight standard may be altered on the approval of the fire service provider).

 

Adequate fire fighting water supply – A public or community water supply that can supply water to a fire hydrant at a pressure and flow rate of 1000/1500 gpm in GMA/urban areas and 500 gpm in outside of GMA areas.  The residual pressure shall be 20 pounds per square inch (psi).  This typically requires a minimum 6” diameter water line that is designed to supply fire hydrants, and may require looping or other connections within a water system to ensure pressure and flow rates. 

 

  1. Repeal and replace Section 8.14.1.P. with:

 

8.14.1.P – Dead end length

  1. The maximum length of a dead-end access shall be no greater than 660 feet in a Growth Management Area or other designated urban area. 
  2. Dead-end road systems outside of a GMA are not limited in length but shall provide a secondary/emergency access if the principal access is:
    1. Crossed by drainage channels which have culverts that cannot pass the 50 year design frequency storm with no more than1 foot of flow across the road; or if the principal access is located in an area subject to a wildfire fire hazard where trees cannot be readily restricted from that area adjacent to the road by a distance of at least the mature height of said trees; or any other identifiable or geologic hazards that have the potential to block the access.
    2. In all cases dead end roads shall be provided with inter-visible turn outs of at least 10 feet in width and 30 feet in length, no less than 500 feet apart.
  1. Land divisions that cannot meet this standard must provide a second point of access. The second access must be either a dedicated, public right-of-way or an easement specifically granted for emergency access purposes.

 

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the consent agenda as it appears above.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

There being no further business, the Board recessed at 3:05 p.m.

 

LAND USE HEARING

 

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

 

1.         RAWHIDE ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION (TABLED ON APRIL 23, 2012):   This vacation request has been brought forward at the direction of the Board of County Commissioners and this hearing is a continuation of the hearing that was tabled on April 23, 2012. This is a request to vacate portions of county held rights-of-way along Rawhide Road. As a result of the realignment and reconstruction of the Rawhide Flats Road (also known as County Road 15) by the City of Fort Collins as required by Larimer County to provide adequate access to Soapstone Prairie Natural Area, it is necessary to vacate the unused portions of deeded public rights of way as well as any prescriptive public rights of way that may exist.

 

Staff recommends approval of the request to vacate portions of the old alignment of Rawhide Flats Road. Portions of this recommended vacation include both deeded and prescriptive rights of way and it is the intent of this vacation process to vacate both. A utility easement for Qwest Corporation, doing business as CenturyLink QC, will be retained and designated in the Resolution approved by the Board of County Commissioners.

 

Chair Gaiter opened the hearing to public comment and Al Scott, James Martin, Leslie Scott, Health Miller, Chris Zwiefel, Gerald Ditus, Jason Graves, and John Stokes addressed the Board in opposition to the vacation due to a perceived higher level of safety on the rights-of-way.

 

The Board requested further discussions with the Road and Bridge Department and with the City of Fort Collins regarding the safety of Rawhide Flats Road.  

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the vacation of unnecessary deeded and prescriptive public rights-of-way of the old alignment of Rawhide Flats Road, also know as County Road 15, as recommended by staff in Sections 1 and 2 of Township 10N, Range 69W. No portions of deeded or prescriptive right of way associated with County Road 84 shall be vacated. And approval of the vacation of all deeded and prescriptive public rights-of-way located in Sections 2, 11, 12, 13, and 14 in Township 11N, Range 69W, and Section 35, Township 12N, Range 69W; across lands currently owned by the City of Fort Collins and managed as Soapstone Prairie Natural Area.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

There being no further information, the Board adjourned at 7:45 p.m.

 

TUESDAY, MAY 22, 2012

 

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS MEETING

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 a.m. with Interim County Manager, Neil Gluckman. Chair Gaiter presided and Commissioners Donnelly and Johnson were present. Also present were: Donna Hart and Deni LaRue, Commissioners’ Office; Mark Peterson, Engineering Department; Bob Herrfeldt, Fairgrounds and Event Center; Chad Gray, Linda Hoffman, and Samantha Mott, Planning Department; Shannon Barnes, Gary Buffington, and Dan Rieves, Natural Resources Department; Marc Engemoen, Public Works Department; Irene Josey and Myrna Rodenberger, Treasurer’s Office; Jeannine Haag and William Ressue, County Attorney’s Office; and Melissa Lohry, Deputy Clerk.

 

Chair Gaiter opened the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

1.         PUBLIC COMMENT:  Pete Sakala addressed the Board regarding a possible fireworks ban in Larimer County. Mr. Sakala encouraged the Board to weigh the economic impact to the county if they consider implementing a ban.

 

Mel Hilgenberger provided updates on the Larimer Chorale, Be Centenial, the proposed CSU stadium, and the vacant Poudre School District Superintendent position.

 

Eric Sutherland discussed economic development and the City of Fort Collins Open House regarding urban renewal authorities and tax sharing.

 

2.         APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE WEEK OF MAY 14, 2012:

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the minutes for the week of May 14, 2012.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

3.         REVIEW OF THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK OF MAY 28, 2012:  Ms. Hart reviewed the upcoming schedule with the Board.

 

4.         CONSENT AGENDA:

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the consent agenda as follows:

 

PETITIONS FOR ABATEMENT:  As recommended by the County Assessor, the following Petition for Abatement was approved:  Darlene King & Mert Family LP, LLLP.

 

05222012A001           DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND COULSON EXCAVATING COMPANY, INC FOR PROJECT NO. 9061; 2012 RESURFACING PROGRAM

 

05222012A002           GRANT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE STATE OF COLORADO ACTING BY AND THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL AFFAIRS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE DIVISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT FOR THE 2012-15 COMMUNITY SERVICES BLOCK GRANT ALLOCATION

 

05222012A003           COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT CONTRACT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND LARIMER HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP

 

05222012A004           BENEFITS CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND DENVER SERIES OF LOCKTON COMPANIES LLC

 

05222012R001           RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PLAN TERMINATION       

 

MISCELLANEOUS:  Findings and Order – The Forks LLC, doing business as The Forks Food n’ Fuel; Findings and Order – The Forks LLC, doing business as Pryme Tyme at The Forks; Findings and Order – Trout Tavern LLC; Recommendation for Mid-Term Appointment of Robert Allman to Red Feather Lakes PAC; Recommendation for Mid-Term Appointment of Terri Donnelly to Red Feather Lakes PAC.

 

LIQUOR LICENSES:  The following licenses were approved and issued: JJ’s Lounge, Inc. – Tavern – Fort Collins and Villa Tatra Inc. – Hotel and Restaurant – Lyons; and Dakota Kids Inc. – Retail Liquor Store – Fort Collins.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

5.         REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT:   Duane Penny and Matt Sun, both from Berthoud Habitat for Humanity requested a variance to Section IV, 19 of the “Resolution Establishing Special Event Permit Required for Larimer County Roads,” which states that “no more than two bicycling events or road closures will be permitted on an individual section of county road during any 30 day period.”

 

Mr. Penny explained that the Berthoud Fall Classic is entering into its second year and has encountered a scheduling conflict with CSU’s Ram Bicycle Classic, which has moved from May to September, causing a three day overlap of events and a possible violation of the above mentioned resolution.

 

After some discussion, Commissioner Johnson expressed his belief that the three day overlap was nominal and due to the race being at the end of the riding season, he was inclined to support the variance.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the waiver to allow the Berthoud Fall Classic Ride to occur on October 6, 2012.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

6.         NEW ANNUAL VEHICLE AND BOATING PERMITS FOR 2012:   Mr. Buffington, Mr. Rieves, and Ms. Barnes proposed new annual vehicle and boating permits for Larimer County Parks and Open Spaces. If approved, the new passes would be transferable between members of the same household and would cost $75. In addition, staff and the Parks Advisory Board proposed eliminating paddling permits, second vehicle permits, and the requirement for multiple permits for multiple motorized vessels transported on one trailer.

 

Mr. Buffington noted that the cost of the proposed vehicle passes would be an increase of $10; however, the cost of the pass has not increased since 2004.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board of County Commissioners allow staff to proceed with the public hearing process for the new Larimer County Parks Annual Vehicle and Boating Permits for 2013.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

7.         NATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS WEEK/LARIMER COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS’ ANNUAL REPORT:   Mr. Engemoen informed the Board that the third week in May is National Public Works Week and presented the Larimer County Public Works annual report. Mr. Engemoen noted that the report is actually a compilation of one report from each of the six departments that comprise Public Works – Engineering, Fleet, Natural Resources, Road & Bridge, Solid Waste, and The Ranch.

 

The Board thanked Mr. Engemoen and all of the departments for their hard work.

 

8.         APPROVE LAPORTE AREA PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE (LAPAC) BY-LAW CHANGES:   Ms. Mott presented the proposed LAPAC by-laws to the Board for approval. The proposed changes to Section 3 of Article 1 and Section 1 of Article IV were intended to revise the current language and to meet statutory requirements. Ms. Mott noted that the proposed changes were unanimously approved by the LAPAC members.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the amendments to the Laporte Area Planning Advisory Committee by-laws with the changes to Section 3 of Article 1 (Introduction) and Section 1 of Article IV (Meetings).

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

9.         REGARDING BUILDING PERMITS AND LAND USE APPROVALS FOR MORNING FRESH:   Robert Graves, Ms. Hoffman, and Mr. Gray addressed the Board to request affirmation that construction of the yogurt manufacturing building may proceed under an agricultural building permit; direct the applicant to file a special review application no later than August 22, 2012; allow continuation of the value-added agricultural use during the special review process; and find that the use must cease if the August 22, 2012, deadline is not met or if the special review application is denied.

 

Ms. Hoffman explained that while dairies are considered to be a farm use, and therefore, a use by right under the Larimer County Land Use Codes, the Morning Fresh Dairy has made incremental improvements and expansions over the years without pursuing building permits or land use approvals. Their recent expansion into yogurt production is considered a value-added agricultural use and special review approval is required via contracts with the proposed purchasers and the county land use code; however, the special review process can be a very time consuming process, therefore, Ms. Hoffman proposed allowing the applicant to continue production and building expansion, at his own risk, until the special review hearing.  

Chair Gaiter asked Mr. Graves if he understood that he was proceeding at his own risk and that the use must cease if the August 22, 2012, deadline is not met or if the special review application is denied. Mr. Graves stated that he understood.

 

Some discussion ensued between the Board and staff regarding fire code requirements and the anticipated level of public interest. The Board voiced their support for local agricultural business.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the construction of the yogurt manufacturing building may proceed under an agricultural building permit; direct the applicant to file a special review application no later than August 22, 2012; allow continuation of the value-added agricultural use during the special review process, and find that the use must cease if the August 22, 2012, deadline is not met or if the special review application is denied.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

10.       APPROVE THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT FOR COUNTY MANAGER:   Mr. Gluckman stated that the agreement is not ready for approval and therefore, requested the item be tabled.

 

11.       INTERIM COUNTY MANAGER WORKSESSION:   Mr. Gluckman informed the Board that Colorado Counties Inc. will form a new committee consisting of members of the Board of County Commissioners and Clerk & Recorders from across the state.

 

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

 

13.       LEGAL MATTERS:  Ms. Haag, Ms. Ressue, Ms. Rodenberger, and Ms. Josey requested the Board go into executive session to discuss negotiations regarding a software contract as outlined in 24-6-402(4)(e) C.R.S. with no decision to follow.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board of County Commissioners go into executive session for the purposes of determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, and instructing negotiators.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

There being no further business, the Board adjourned at 10:45 a.m.

 

THURSDAY, MAY 24, 2012

 

EXECUTIVE SESSION

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 2:40 p.m. with Interim County Manager Neil Gluckman.  Chair Gaiter presided, and Commissioner Donnelly was present.  (Commissioner Johnson dialed in via conference call after the meeting commenced.)  Also present were:  Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney; and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners go into executive session for confidential legal advice, as outlined in 24-6-402(4)(b)

 

Motion carried 2-0.

 

The executive session ended at 3:10 p.m., with no further action taken.

 

 

 

 

 

__________________________________________

   LEW GAITER III, CHAIR

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

 

SCOTT DOYLE

CLERK AND RECORDER

 

ATTEST:

 

______________________________________

Gael M. Cookman, Deputy Clerk

 

______________________________________

Melissa E. Lohry, Deputy Clerk

 

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