> Meetings & Minutes > Commissioners' Minutes > BCC Minutes for 08/06/12  

MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

 

 

Monday, August 6, 2012

 

LAND USE HEARING

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 3:00 p.m. with Matt Lafferty, Principle Planner. Chair Pro-Tem Johnson presided and Commissioner Donnelly was present. (Commissioner Gaiter joined the meeting after it was already underway.)  Also present were: Karin Madson, and Brenda Gimeson, Planning Department;  Traci Shambo, Clint Jones, and Eric Tracy, Engineering Department; Doug Ryan, Environmental Health Department; David Ayraud, County Attorney’s Office;  and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk.

 

Chair Pro-Tem Johnson opened the hearing with the Pledge of Allegiance.  Mr. Lafferty then noted two changes to two items listed on the consent agenda, a typographical error on item #2, and the removal of condition #5 on the Solider Canyon/Mill Canyon Amended Plat.  No one in the audience wished to pull these items off of consent, so the Board agreed to the changes.  Chair Pro-Tem Johnson then explained that the following items were on the consent agenda and would not be discussed unless requested to do so by the Board, staff, or members of the audience: 

 

1.         SOLDIER CANYON/MILL CANYON AMENDED PLAT AND EASEMENT VACATION, FILE #12-S3115:  This is a request to amend the plat of Lots 1 and 2 of the Soldier Canyon Estates First Filing and Lot 1 of Mill Canyon Estates to amend the boundary lines and vacate a utility easement. 

 

This property is located west of Horsetooth Reservoir at the intersection of Jackpine Drive and White Pine Drive. Two of the properties are located in the Soldier Canyon Estates Subdivision 1st Filing, recorded in 1965, and the other lot is in the Mill Canyon Estates Subdivision recorded in 1969.  The lots are proposed to be amended to place the existing driveway onto one lot, adjust the existing lot line between two lots to fix a “flag” lot, and correct a boundary line to allow a leach field to be placed within the corrected lot.  The request includes an easement vacation for a 10-foot utility easement along the common lot lines that if left intact, would go through the middle of the new resulting lot. 

 

The following agencies have provided comments or verbally indicated they have no comments to the proposal:  The Larimer County Addressing Coordinator, and the Larimer County Department of Health and Environment. The Larimer County Engineering Department has requested an additional right-of-way be dedicated to correct a right-of-way line that currently doesn’t meet up with Lot 3.  Condition #4 has been included to staff’s recommendations to address this issue. 

 

Additionally, the Assessor’s office has indicated that a portion of the properties are located in different tax districts. Before the amended plat can be completed, an inclusion in the tax districts will need to be completed for the Pest Control District and the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. The applicants have been contacted and are working to complete the inclusion process. 

 

All the affected utility companies have agreed to the request regarding the easement vacation.

 

The proposed changes will not adversely affect any neighboring properties or any county agency.  The Amended Plat will not result in any additional lots and staff believes that it makes sense to vacate the easement which would otherwise go through the middle of the new lot.  Staff finds that with the conditions as listed below, the request meets the requirements of the Larimer County Land Use Code.

 

The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Amended Plat Lots 1 and 2 of the Soldier Canyon Estates First Filing and Lot 1 of the Mill Canyon Estates, file #12-S3115, and subsequent utility easement vacation, 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.    All conditions of approval shall be met and the Final Plat recorded by February 6, 2013, or this approval shall be null and void.

 

2.    The vacation of the utility easement and the reconfiguration of the lots lines shall be finalized at such time when the plat and findings and resolution of the County Commissioners are recorded. 

 

3.    Prior to the recordation of the Final Plat the applicant shall make the technical corrections required by Dale Greer, Land Surveyor of the Larimer County Engineering Department and by County staff requested by e-mail on July 6, 2012.

 

4.    Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated at the small triangular corner of Lot 3 to provide a continuous 60-foot right-of-way for White Pine Drive.

 

2.         FOX/O’DELL APPEAL, FILE #12-PS0037:   This is a request for an appeal to the requirements of Section 4.3.10.H.2.c of the Larimer County Land Use Code for a detached accessory dwelling unit to exceed 800-square-feet.  If approved, the proposed detached accessory living area will be 1040-square-feet in size.

 

The subject property is 5-acres in size and located off of County Road 4.  The subject property contains a 2,685-square-foot house as the primary single family residence.  The structure for the Accessory Living Area currently exists and was approved as a residence for family members in the 1970’s; however, no formal record of this approval can be located. The property was split by exemption in 1984 (Odell-Fox Exemption 58-83EX) and the exemption plat included the following note: “The little house on parcel 1 should cease to be used for residential purposes at such time, as it is no longer occupied by family members.” According to the applicant, the smaller house was originally used as a dwelling for the parents of Barbara Fox. Later, grandchildren lived in the building. This application is to create a formal record of approval for the residence, so that it is clear that the dwelling has county approval.

 

The applicant submitted an application for Public Site Plan Review June 8, 2012.  A detached accessory living area can be approved administratively through the Public Site Plan process by the Planning Director; however, the request needs to meet all applicable criteria. This request does not meet all criteria since the dwelling is larger than allowed by the Land Use Code, unless this appeal is approved.

 

Neighbors and review agencies were notified of this request and no objections were received from neighbors.  Review agencies had no major concerns or issues. The Engineering Department did note that the property appears to have sufficient parking.

 

The Development Services Team finds that the proposed appeals, allowing additional square footage to an Accessory Living Area, by allowing the existing square footage to be utilized will:

 

o  Not subvert the purpose of the standard or requirement.

o  Not be detrimental to the public health, safety or property values in the neighborhood.

o  Be the minimum action necessary.

o  Not result in increased costs to the general public.

o  Be consistent with the intent and purpose of the code.

 

The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Fox/O’Dell appeal, file #12-PSP0037, and the request to allow a 1,040-square-foot detached Accessory Living Area with the following conditions:

 

1.   This approval shall automatically expire in two years if the use has not commenced and/or a building permit and/or development construction permit(s) are not issued.

 

2.   The site shall be developed consistent with the approved plan and with the information contained in the Fox/O’Dell Public Site Plan Review, file #12-PSP0037, 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 Fox/O’Dell Public Site Plan.

 

3.   In the event the applicant fails to comply with any conditions of approval, or fails to use the property consistent with the approved Public Site Plan, the 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 Public Site Plan approval should not be revoked, and/or bring a court action for enforcement of the terms of the Public Site Plan.  All remedies are cumulative and the county’s election to use one shall not preclude use of another. In the event county must retain legal counsel and/or pursue a court action to enforce the terms of this Public Site Plan approval, the applicant agrees to pay all expenses incurred by the county including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney’s fees.  The county may conduct periodic inspections to the property and reviews of the status of the Public Site Plan as appropriate to monitor and enforce the terms of the Public Site Plan approval.

 

4.   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 Public Site Plan approval.

 

5.   The owner is responsible for obtaining all required building permits for the Accessory Living Area. All applicable fees, including permit fees and Transportation Capital Expansion Fees, shall apply to this use.

 

6.   The habitable space of the accessory living area shall be limited to 1,040-square-feet.

 

7.   The accessory living area is to be used solely for owners and guests of the occupants of the single-family dwelling or those providing a service on site in exchange for their residency.

 

8.   The accessory living area must not be rented or leased separately from the single-family dwelling.

 

3.         WARBERG FARM CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, FILE #04-S2296:  This is a request to extend the Warberg Farm Development Agreement to include an extension to the Phase II start date to May 31, 2017, and the Phase II completion date to May 31, 2019. The Final Plat for the Warberg Farm Conservation Development was recorded in two phases on July 5, 2007.  The Development Agreement for the property included a completion date for Phase II by May 31, 2012. 

 

The Developer has requested an extension noting that, in their opinion, any market demand for the development that materializes in the next few years will only consume the lots in Phase I and the funds for that phase will be utilized to fund Phase II.  The Development Services Team supports this request as the current market conditions do not appear to warrant additional residential lots at this time. We hope that the market conditions will change in the near future at which time collateral can be posted and Phase II of the development realized.  This arrangement would allow the entitlements acquired through the final plat process to continue and allows the requirement for the provision of construction collateral to be deferred until the time of construction.

 

The Development Services Team supports the request to extend the Warberg Farm Conservation Development Phase II start date to May 31, 2017, and the completion date to May 31, 2019.

 

The Development Services Team recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the request to extend the start and completion date for the Warberg Farm Conservation Development (file #04-S2296) until May 31, 2017, and May 31, 2019, respectively, by Amending the Development Agreement with the following conditions:

 

1.   The Development Agreement shall be amended and recorded by November 6, 2012. 

 

2.   The developer shall continue to timely pay all annual real property taxes for the property.

 

3.   The developer shall submit a letter, statement, or report to the Planning Department annually, for service providers (water) confirming the service providers willingness to provide service pursuant to previously approved plans and specifications.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the consent agenda, as amended.

 

Motion carried 2-0.

 

4.  ATLAS TOWER/AT&T CMRS SPECIAL REVIEW, FILE #12-Z1876:  This is a request for Special Review approval of a 70-foot windmill designed CMRS tower and associated equipment. The tower will be designed for future co-location.

 

The Planning Commission discussed this Special Review request at their meeting on June 20, 2012. Much of the discussion regarding the proposal centered on the revised design of the proposal tower (windmill top has been removed resulting in a lower height tower), the notice sent out for the public hearings (CMRS – Commercial Mobile Radio Service was not spelled out), the projected coverage of the facility, property values, and noise concerns.  One neighbor attended the hearing. Planning Commission forwarded a unanimous recommendation for approval of the application.  The notice for the Board of County Commissioners hearing today was modified to reflect the revised proposal and to more clearly state that the application is for a Commercial Mobile Radio Service or “cell tower”.

 

The Planning Commission recommends to the Board of County Commissioners, approval of Atlas Tower/AT&T CMRS Special Review, file #12-Z1876, 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 Atlas Tower/AT&T CMRS Special Review, file #12-Z1876, 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 Atlas Tower/AT&T CMRS 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.    All antennas shall be mounted as close as possible to the structure to reduce the visual profile of the tower.

 

9.    Prior to building permit application, the applicant shall obtain an access permit and private road construction permit from the Engineering Department.  Access to the site shall address the comments in Ms. Shambo’s memo dated Mar 23, 2012, including the requirement for a culvert.

 

10.   Appropriate measures shall be taken to control erosion and sedimentation during all phases of construction. Disturbed areas shall be repaired to a condition equal or better than the existing condition, including reseeding with a native seed mix.

 

11.   Prior to building permit application, the applicant shall provide a copy of an executed access easement and maintenance agreement.

 

12.   The building permit application for the proposed facility shall address the requirements of the Poudre Fire Authority regarding battery storage, if applicable.

 

13.   The tower shall not be lit.  The light on the equipment building shall be designed, shielded, aimed, located and maintained to prevent glare and light trespass on abutting properties and the vicinity. 

 

14.   Prior to building permit application, the applicant shall provide a letter withdrawing the previously approved zoning application, file #10-Z1830. That zoning approval shall be voided and no longer eligible for a building permit. 

 

15.   The existing driveway will be utilized as the access point, and the support building shall be placed northeast of the tower as far as possible.

 

16.   A windmill will be placed on top of the tower, as reflected in the original proposal.

 

 

Ms. Madson briefly explained the request, as outlined above; noting that citizen comments she received pertained mostly to noise and fire concerns, and the possibility of reduced property values. 

 

Jeff Keith, applicant, explained the history of the tower and how he originally proposed to install a windmill at the top so the structure would better compliment the landscape.  He stated that he was open to any ideas or suggestions, and requested the Board’s support on this application.

 

Chair Pro-Tem Johnson opened up the hearing for public comment and the following individuals addressed the Board:  Nancy Easley, Tawana Vigil, Betty Wilmoth, and Lori Paden.  They listed concerns regarding the lack of notification, disturbance of natural wildlife, access to the tower, and disguising the tower so it would blend-in with the landscape.

 

Chair Pro-Tem closed public comment and discussion ensued regarding the access point and how best to camouflage the tower. The Board agreed that the windmill top was appropriate and stated that the applicant should use the existing driveway as the access point, and place the support building northeast of the tower as far as possible. These changes are now reflected in the conditions outlined above, as numbers 15 and 16.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners Approve the Atlas Tower/AT&T CMRS Special Review, file #12-Z1876, subject to the conditions as outlined and amended above.

 

Motion carried 2-0.

 

5.  NEWT PLANNED LAND DEVELOPMENT LOT 2 CHANGE OF CONDITION AMENDED PLAT AND APPEAL, FILE #12-S3119:   This is a request for an Amended Plat to remove Condition #2 from the plat of the Newt Planned Land Development (PLD). Lot 2 was created in 2009 (file #07-S2739), and was one of two lots created. The plat for this subdivision was approved by the Board of County Commissioners with Condition #2:

 

“As a condition of approval, the lowest opening elevation of any structure placed on proposed Lot 2 will be 104.12 feet or higher, using the same relative datum as shown on the preliminary plat that established the Robert Benson Lake spillway as being at an elevation of 102.62 feet.”

 

The current owners have had the property evaluated and determined that to build at the required elevation is expensive and unnecessary. After talking with the County Engineering Department, the owners learned that the condition may have been incorrect or unnecessary.

 

The spillway of the reservoir is located to the east of the subject property and in all likelihood; if the reservoir were to “spill” the water would flow to the east, not to the south toward the subject property and the proposed new house. At the time the condition was added, the reviewing engineer did not have adequate information on the spillway and added the note as a precaution. Since that time, the Engineering Department has received information which renders the note unnecessary.

 

The request includes a fee appeal to refund the amended plat fee of $600. The applicant requests the appeal given that the subdivision was approved with a potentially incorrect condition, an error of the county that the applicant should not be responsible for.

 

Staff received emails from two neighbors; both indicated no objections to the request.

 

Based on a site visit comments from Engineering, the lot does not appear to be located within the ponding area of the reservoir and appears to be outside the path of the spillway. Based on this information, the Engineering Department does not have any objection to removing the plat note.

 

The request to remove Condition #2 from the Newt PLD plat, to eliminate the need to build the proposed house at a higher elevation than the spillway, will not create any additional lots, adversely affect any neighboring properties or any county agency, adversely affect access or utilities for any other lots, or invalidate other conditions of approval placed on this lot with the Newt PLD plat. It is the assessment of the Development Services Team that the request meets the requirements of the Larimer County Land Use Code.

 

During the process to create this subdivision, the county was given information about the spillway that staff believed to be accurate and the Development Services Team conditioned the approval based on that information. Since the original approval, interpretation of the spillway information has changed and staff supports the change to condition #2; however, staff does not believe that the fee waiver is necessary in this case due to the nature of the amended plat. Staff notes that any relief of fees given to the applicant is detrimental to the Planning Department because the cost of staff time spent processing the request will need to be absorbed.

 

The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Newt PLD Lot 2 Amended Plat, Removal of Plat Note; file #12-S3119, subject to the following condition:

 

1.    All other previous conditions of approval and plat notes will continue to apply and will not be affected or changed by this action.

 

The Development Services Team recommends denial of the Bundy Fee Appeal, a request to waive the fee associated with this amended plat request. Should the Commissioners wish to approve the request, the Team suggests the following condition:

 

1.   The direct costs of application processing, copying, postage, notices, and public hearings shall be paid.  The direct costs are estimated to be $150.00; this would result in a $450.00 application fee waiver.

 

Mr. Lafferty explained that staff supports the removal of the note, and is somewhat impartial to the request for refunds.

 

(At this time Commissioner Gaiter joined the meeting.)

 

Jeff Bundy, applicant, stated that he feels the original condition, as imposed, is incorrect. Therefore, he requests that the county make the necessary corrections without the imposition of fees. 

 

During public comment, Danielle Bundy, stated that the applicants also wish to build a basement on this property. 

 

There was no further public comment.

 

Commissioner Donnelly supported the removal of the plat note and waiving of the fees.  Commissioner Gaiter agreed with removal of the plat note, and could support some reduction in fees.  Chair Pro-Tem Johnson agreed with removal of the plat note, but would not support a waiver or reduction of fees.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Newt PLD Lot 2 Amended Plat Removal of Plat Note; file #12-S3119, subject to the conditions as listed above.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

M O T I O N

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners partially approve the Bundy fee appeal, all except for the $150 application fee, as outlined in the condition above.

 

Motion carried 2-1; Chair Pro-Tem Johnson dissenting.

 

6.   HERNDON EXEMPTION AMENDED PLAT, FILE #12-S3117:   This is a request to remove a note from the Plat of the Herndon Exemption that states: “No further division by exemption will be allowed.”  The 70+ acre property is situated on the west side of County Road 43, approximately 2 miles southwest of Glen Haven.

 

The area surrounding the property consists of large rural residential ranches and properties to the south and Forest service lands on the west, east and north boundaries. The property is zoned RE-1 (Rural Estate).  There are currently no residences on the property.

 

The property originally consisted of 82+ acres and the southern portions of the property contained a non-conforming campground.  To settle issues between the County and the property owner regarding the non-conforming campground the property owner was granted an exemption to divide 11.22 acres from the 82 acres so that the balance of the property could be sold and the campground brought in to compliance with County Regulations. As part of the agreement the County required the no further division by exemption note to be placed on the plat.

 

The property owner now wishes to sell the larger parcel and would like to split it into 2 thirty-five acres properties rather than the 1 that exists. This is in direct conflict with the note on the plat and the intent of the original approval.

 

The Department of Health and Environment have commented that the Colorado Division of Water Resources should be consulted regarding the allocation of well permits.  This is largely due to the previous exemption and potential increased impact to the existing groundwater in the area.

 

The property in question has already been divided by exemption and a plat note on the Exemption Plat verifies that no further division by exemption would be allowed.  This does not preclude the property owner from seeking approval of a Rural Land Plan or a Conservation Development, which would be reviewed by the appropriate departments and agencies and considered by the Board of County Commissioners.

 

Because appropriate processes are in place to accomplish division of the land, and the original intent of the plat note, the Development Services Team does not support this request.

 

The Development Services Team recommends denial of the Herndon Exemption Amended Plat, File #12-S3117, to remove the plat restriction prohibiting further division of the property by exemption.

 

Mr. Lafferty explained that staff does not support removing the plat note, as it would effectively create three lots, where only two were allowed by right of Senate Bill 35.  Some discussion ensued and when asked for his legal opinion, Mr. Ayraud stated that he can only assume the plat note was included for the very purpose of not allowing further division by exemption.

 

Lonnie Sheldon, representative for the applicant, presented a folder to the Commissioners and reviewed its contents, which explained the entire history of the parcels involved and the “uncertainty” that surrounded the initial division of the property.

 

Stewart Olive, attorney for the applicant, reviewed more history and the deeds to the property.  He also explained that there were some disputes with the neighbors regarding camping on the parcel that was split off with the original exemption.

 

Joy McKinley, co-owner of the property, explained that they jointly purchased the land with the intent to further divide it; however, her husband passed away in 1994 and they have been holding the property in limbo.

 

Harry Schroeder, co-owner of the property, explained that if there was any inclination that further subdividing the property would be an issue, then he would not have purchased the property at that time.  He stated that the plat note was only recently brought to his attention, and he was dumbfounded when it was discovered.

 

There was no public comment on this matter.

 

Much discussion ensued.  Commissioners Donnelly and Gaiter were inclined to approve the removal of the plat note, whereas Chair Pro-Tem Johnson believed the intent was clearly delineated on the original plat.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Herndon Exemption Amended Plat, File # 12-S3117, and remove a plat restriction prohibiting further division of the property by exemption.

 

Motion carried 2-1; Chair Pro-Tem Johnson dissenting.

 

The hearing adjourned at 5:40 p.m.

 

 

TUESDAY, AUGUST 7, 2012

 

 

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 a.m. with County Manager Linda Hoffmann.  Chair Gaiter presided, and Commissioners Donnelly and Johnson were present. Also present were:  Donna Hart and Deni LaRue, Commissioners’ Office; Steven Balderson, Troy Griffin, Al Gould, and Darrell Hammett, Facilities and Information Technology Division; Nick Christensen, and Kevin Johnston, Sheriff’s Department; Doreen Bellfy, and Melissa Lohry, Clerk and Recorder’s Office; Russ Legg, and Candace Phippen, Planning Department; Joe Ferrando, Community Corrections Department; Charlie Johnson, Engineering Department; and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk.

 

Chair Gaiter opened the hearing with the Pledge of Allegiance. 

 

1.   PUBLIC COMMENT:  Mel Hilgenberg commented positively on the county’s continuing efforts regarding relief for the fire victims; he also commended the Board on their fiscal responsibilities regarding the county budget, and reiterated his opinion that the county should implement an internet sales tax, and legalize marijuana in order to tax it as well.

 

2.   APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE WEEK OF JULY 30, 2012

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the minutes for the week of July 30, 2012, as amended.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

3.  APPROVAL OF THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK OF AUGUST 13, 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 listed below:

 

08072012A001           POUDRE RIVER TRAIL INITIATIVE GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AND THE GREAT OUTDOORS COLORADO TRUST FUND; LARIMER COUNTY; CITY OF GREELEY; TOWN OF WINDSOR; TOWN OF TIMNATH; AND THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS

 

08072101R002           RESOLUTION CALLING AN ELECTION REGARDING LARIMER COUNTY HORSESHOE VIEW ESTATES SOUTH PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 44

 

08072101R003           RESOLUTION CALLING AN ELECTION REGARDING LARIMER COUNTY HORSESHOE VIEW ESTATES NORTH PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 53

 

08072101R004           RESOLUTION CALLING AN ELECTION REGARDING LARIMER COUNTY TERRY SHORES PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 54

 

08072101R005           RESOLUTION CALLING AN ELECTION REGARDING LARIMER COUNTY SOLDIER CANYON ESTATES PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 52

 

MISCELLANEOUS:   Letter of Understanding between the South Fort Collins Sanitation District and Larimer County to clarify easement rights;  Fiscal Year 2013 Treatment Services Solicitation - #1082-2013-0015. 

 

LIQUOR LICENSES:  The following liquor licenses were approved and/or issued:  CSU Concessions & Stadium – Hotel and Restaurant – Fort Collins; CSU Concessions – 3.2% - Fort Collins; Vern’s Liquor – Retail Liquor Store – LaPorte; Legacy Land Trust – Special Event 6% - Wellington; Prime Tyme @ The Forks – Tavern - Livermore; Forks Food-N-Fuel- 3.2% -  Livermore.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

5.  RECOGNITION FOR FACILITIES PERSONNEL:   Chair Gaiter recognized Mr. Gould and Mr. Hammett for their efforts in fixing a bracket in his office that pulled out of the wall and broke apart.  He explained that Mr. Hammett fabricated a new bracket (at home and on his own time), that is now installed and holding his plant very nicely.  Chair Gaiter presented them both with the “Hanging Bracket Award” for their efforts.

 

6.   DISCUSSION OF REMOVING FIRE RESTRICTIONS COUNTY WIDE:  Mr. Christensen and Mr. Johnston explained that the high fire danger situation has passed, and that the surrounding counties and U.S. Forest Service have removed their restrictions, so they recommended that the Board also remove the county-wide fire restrictions.  Mr. Johnston stated that the forecast is for typical August weather with the usual monsoonal flow of moisture into the area.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners rescind the resolution implementing fire restrictions in Larimer County.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

7.   RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING VOTE CENTERS FOR THE 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION:   Ms. Bellfy presented the list of proposed Vote Centers for the 2012 Presidential Election, and requested approval on the same. Ms. Bellfy noted that the public comment period ended the day prior, and that they had not received any citizen comments.  Some discussion ensued regarding the number of Vote Centers required, staffing, rent, and associated costs. 

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the number and locations of Vote Centers and accept into record any written comments submitted during the public comment period.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

08072012R001           RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING VOTE CENTERS FOR THE 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

 

8.  BUILDING PERMIT FEE REDUCTIONS FOR REPLACEMENT OF STRUCTURES DESTROYED OR DAMAGED IN THE HIGH PARK AND WOODLAND HEIGHTS FIRES:   Ms. Phippen presented ideas for a one-time, per property reduction in building permit fees for those affected by the High Park and Woodland Heights fires.  Much discussion ensued regarding the options presented.  Ultimately, the Board noted that all property owners have the right to appeal for additional considerations, and they agreed to support a fee reduction in the amount of $1000.

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve a one-time, per parcel reduction in building permit fees in the amount of $1000, together with itemized conditions as presented by the Building Department’s proposal.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

9.   BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO CONVENE AS THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION: 

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board of County Commissioners convene as the Board of Equalization.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the referee recommendations for the hearings held July 30, 2012, through August 3, 2012.

 

Under discussion of the motion, Chair Gaiter stated that he would prefer to see preliminary data regarding how many hearings were held and what percentages were approved or denied, in conjunction with approving the referee recommendations.  Staff within the Clerk and Recorder’s office will consider implementing this for the next reappraisal year in 2013.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board of County Commissioners reconvene as the Board of County Commissioners. 

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

 

10.   WORKSESSION:   Ms. Hoffmann updated the Board on several items she is currently working on.  She also requested that action be taken regarding the recent worksession item the Board had regarding a personnel matter. 

 

M O T I O N

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve a one-time supplemental transfer from general fund reserves to the Workforce center budget in the amount of $27,549.00, for calendar year 2012, for a personnel matter.

Motion carried 3-0.

 

11.  COMMISSIONER ACTIVITY REPORTS:   The Board reviewed their events during the past week.

 

12.  LEGAL MATTERS:   There were no legal matters to discuss.

 

 

 

__________________________________________

   LEW GAITER III, CHAIR

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

SCOTT DOYLE

CLERK AND RECORDER

 

ATTEST:

 

______________________________________

Gael M. Cookman, Deputy Clerk