> Meetings & Minutes > 1995 Minutes

PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1995

SUBDIVISIONS

(#184 & #209)

The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 a.m. in regular session with Russ Legg, Chief Planner. Chair Disney presided; Commissioners Clarke and Duvall were present. Also present were: Al Kadera, Subdivision Administrator; Planner Carol Evans; Elaine Spencer, Rex Burns and Harry Lynam, Engineering; Jerry Blehm, Environmental Health; Vaughn Furniss, Parks Department; and Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney. Recording Clerk, S. Graves.

Mr. Legg informed the Board that the Seven Springs Ranch Planned Unit Development (#94-MS0568) has been withdrawn by the applicant and therefore removed from today's agenda.

Chair Disney stated that the following are consent items and will not be discussed in detail unless requested by the Commissioners or members of the audience.

1. CIMARRON LAKE AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 2, 3, 5 & 6 (#94-SA0633):

23-08-69; NORTH OF DOUGLAS ROAD (COUNTY ROAD 54) ON THE

EAST SIDE OF SHIELDS STREET (COUNTY ROAD 17); 9.45 ACRES;

3 LOTS; FA-FARMING ZONING (02-13-95).

This is a request to reconfigure existing lots. Staff Findings include: 1) Cimarron Lake Subdivision was approved in 1994; 2) The Jackson Ditch was used as a dividing line between some of the lots. This Amended Plat will reconfigure four lots into three slightly larger lots that make better use of the site; 3) The County Health and Engineering Departments, and all utilities serving this area, have reviewed the proposed Amended Plat and stated no objections. The Staff Recommendation is for approval of the Amended Plat of Lots 2, 3, 5 & 6, Cimarron Lake Subdivision.

2. RED FEATHER RANCH AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 6, 9 & 12

(#94-SA0634): 18-10-72; NORTHEAST OF RED FEATHER LAKES;

3 ACRES; O-OPEN ZONING (02-13-95).

This is a request to reconfigure three existing lots resulting in two building sites. Staff Findings are: 1) Red Feather Ranch Subdivision was approved in 1973; 2) The existing lots are slightly smaller than the minimum lot size required in the O-Open Zoning District. The proposed Amended Plat will bring the lots into compliance with the zoning by adding part of Lot 9 to Lots 6 and 12; 3) The County Health and Engineering Department, and all utilities serving this area, have reviewed the proposed Amended Plat and stated no objections. Poudre Valley REA requests ten-foot utility easements along both sides of any existing electric lines on this site.

The Staff Recommendation is for approval of the Amended Plat of Lots 6, 9 and 12, Red Feather Ranch Subdivision, with the condition that any existing electric lines on the site be identified on the Plat and be provided easements as requested by REA.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Clarke moved that the Board adopt the Staff Findings and Staff Recommendation and approve the Cimarron Lake Amended Plat of Lots 2, 3, 5 & 6 (#94-SA0633) and the Red Feather Ranch Amended Plat of Lots 6, 9 & 12 (#94-SA0634).

Motion carried 3 - 0.

3. TURNER MINOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT APPEAL (#94-EX0632):

03-09-68; 4 MILES NORTHEAST OF WELLINGTON; 12 ACRES;

2 LOTS; O-OPEN ZONING (02-13-95).

This is a request for authorization to process a Minor Residential Development on a parcel that did not exist on May 5, 1972. Mr. Kadera submitted a map of the area and reviewed the major concerns and issues. Staff Findings include: 1) The property in question is not eligible for an MRD because it cannot meet minimum lot size. If the parcel is made larger by adding some of the adjacent property, the lot will not be in the same configuration that it was in 1972 when Senate Bill 35 was adopted; 2) The MRD process was intended to allow the creation of a limited number of building sites where the impacts are minimal and the property can meet all the minimum requirements. The subdivision process is in place to address the situations where there are problems with meeting minimum standards; 3) Staff consistently recommends denial of all appeals because the decision is a policy matter that should be determined by the Board of County Commissioners. The Staff Recommendation is for denial of the Turner Minor Residential Development appeal.

Ed Turner, applicant, addressed the Board and noted that they purchased this property on April 21, 1972, prior to the passage of Senate Bill 35, and they feel as private citizens and landowners they are being denied their constitutional rights to develop their land in such a manner to best benefit their family; however, they have agreed to purchase an additional eight acres, thereby incurring further indebtedness, to meet the requirements. During the discussion among the Board, it was agreed that this location is not going to cause any significant impact and can be considered as an exception, without setting a precedent.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board approve the Turner Minor Residential Development Appeal (#94-EX0632).

Motion carried 3 - 0.

4. WYNDHAM HILL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, PRELIMINARY

PLAT AND REZONING (#94-MS0428): NW 19-06-68; SOUTHEAST

CORNER OF COUNTY ROAD 32 AND COUNTY ROAD 13 (LEMAY),

SOUTH OF GREENSTONE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND

WEST OF PROPOSED PATTERSON PUD; 42.9 ACRES; 18 LOTS;

FA-1 FARMING ZONING (02-13-95)

This is a request for approval of a Preliminary Plat to divide 42.9 acres into 18 residential lots of .6 acres to 4.7 acres, with one commercial lot of 1.5 acres and 18 acres of open space, and for rezoning to create a 1.5 acre commercial area. Mr. Legg reviewed the major concerns and issues, and submitted an updated letter from the Public Works Department regarding traffic in the area. Staff Findings include: 1) The proposed Wyndham Hill Planned Unit Development is not consistent with the zoning of the site due to the business use of the property; 2) The proposed residential density appears consistent with the current rural non-farm guidelines adopted as part of the Intergovernmental Agreement; 3) Approval of the Wyndham Hill Planned Unit Development, with the proposed business use and the unresolved issues associated with the proposed community horse area, may result in significant negative impacts on the transportation system and natural environment of surrounding properties; 4) The proposed business area is not in conformance with the rural non-farm guidelines and the Intergovernmental Agreements with the City of Fort Collins and Loveland. That agreement provides that rural non-farm areas shall not be rezoned to commercial.

The Staff/Planning Commission Recommendations are for denial of the proposed commercial use and rezoning from FA-1 to C-Commercial; denial of the Master Plan of the Wyndham Hill Planned Unit Development; and denial of the proposed Preliminary Plat., until such time as more information is obtained on the horse facility and the non-residential use is removed from the plan.

In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Blehm stated that as part of the wildlife study, the prairie dog issue needs to be addressed. Mr. Burns described the plan for a proposed trail along Stanton Creek and the intent for the trail to cross under County Road 32 and possibly extend under County Road 13. Mr. Burns also noted that Stanton Creek is slightly unstable and, over time, the banks will migrate and erode into the creek; therefore, he suggested that the applicant prepare a plan for the stabilization of the banks. Mr. Furniss noted that Stanton Creek is proposed as a major connection between Fort Collins and Loveland; the City of Fort Collins has secured easements through Greenstone Subdivision and put in a bike-pedestrian culvert on the north side of this property. Mr. Furniss also noted that the City of Fort Collins has agreed to pay for the study of oversizing the culvert to accommodate a bike/pedestrian path and pay for the oversizing.

Jan Peterson of Peterson Design, representing the applicants, presented a three-dimensional map and noted that the original design concept for this proposal was designed in such a way to be sensitive to the specific environmental conditions of this site He noted that they chose to do a PUD rather than a subdivision because it would allow them to be more innovative in terms of proposing mixed uses and cluster development with large open space areas, which they have done. He stated that they are very concerned about the quality of the development and about the appearance and they absolutely do not want to have the traditional nuisance commercial type business on the property, they strictly want to have a small residential style office park building and the applicants are willing to state that use in the covenants so it could never be anything else. Mr. Peterson noted that the open space they have provided has exceeded requirements. Mr. Peterson addressed the traffic concern as it relates to the business use and noted that the applicants are willing to remove the access in and out of CR 32, if that is the desire of the Board. There was discussion of the traffic counts on CR 13 and Mr. Peterson noted that this development will generate a very small amount of traffic on the road compared to the total traffic and it doesn't seem fair to single this applicant out as the sole funding source for improving these roads; they are more than willing to pay their fair share. He submitted a proposal for the Wyndham Hill Horse Facility, noting that it will be high quality facility with high standards; he noted, however, that it is not an absolute for sure that it will be built - it depends on the people who buy these properties. The proposal stated that the number of horses will be limited on the property and there would be managed scheduled use of the open space so it would not be overgrazed; if the horse facility is not built, that land will remain in open space.

At this time the hearing was opened for public comments. Sandra Tinsman, residing directly west of this property, spoke in support of the open space concept but, as the development is proposed at this time, she supports the recommendation for denial. She thinks the density is too high and the lot sizes are incompatible with the neighboring properties, which range from 1 to 4 acres or more. She further stated that the commercial use is inappropriate and not in conformance with the IGA, the horse barn could present significant adverse impacts, and she wants the mosquitoes managed properly. Wanda Patterson, adjoining landowner, supports the proposal and noted that it fits in with the corridor plan and stated that larger lots are more difficult to maintain. Bob Long, resides west of this site, stated that a lot of creative ideas have gone into this proposal; however, he is concerned that the surrounding areas have larger lot sizes and noted that this proposed density would be appropriate if it was on 80 acres and he is also concerned about the commercial use. Tom Cipriana, resides in Highland Park Subdivision, expressed concern about the density and about the commercial use. Frank McCray spoke on behalf of the project, noting that the applicants have developed this in the spirit of the Corridor Task Force with the clustering and open space and have proposed a quality development. Marty Noonan, applicant and member of the Corridor Task Force, responded to some of the concerns raised, noting that the property immediately adjacent to the north of them is approximately 1/3 acre per lot and has city density, there are a lot of 1/2 acre lots surrounding this development, and what they have proposed creates a soft border or feathering. She addressed mosquito control, density, traffic, congestion, and expressed willingness to participate in road dust control, but does not feel they should be totally responsible for all road improvements. Ms. Noonan stated that the commercial use will actually help with congestion as it will be a small office building and will eliminate the need for at least two persons to leave the area each day for work. With regard to the bike trail, they are willing to grant an easement for extension of the bike trail. Tom Noonan addressed the concern regarding an existing building on their property, which belongs to someone else, stating that it will be removed in a few days; it was noted that this is the zoning violation that is referred to in the staff report. Bud Stump stated that this applicant has made every effort to satisfy the county and the staff and asked why this developer has to pave CR 13 and yet if this proposal is denied, will it be paved by the county; Mr. Burns responded negatively. Mr. Stumpf questioned this stating that it doesn't make sense to require this developer to carry the total burden of road improvements. Ms. Spencer responded for general information that if there are over 200 trips per day on a road, the county will apply magnesium chloride and that works up to 450 trips per day; at this point, CR 13 is at 800 trips per day and the mag chloride is not working. She expects that the Transportation Plan which is being developed will require that sometime within the next 20 years, this road should be paved; however, it is their recommendation that any time that the existing trips on the road exceeds what the county can adequately maintain, that the road either be reconstructed and paved or declare that the development is premature. Harry Sauer, member Corridor Task Force, informed the Board that one thing everyone on the Task Force could agree on was that to have a subdivision with 43% open space is more desirable than to have 4 or 5 acre parcels.

In summary, Jan Peterson noted that this is a Master Plan and the applicants are willing to work with staff on any part of it, but requested the Board not to deny it, but to give them a chance to work on it to address the concerns.

At this time, the public portion of the hearing was closed and opened for discussion among the Board. Commissioner Clarke stated that he visited the property and thinks that the lot sizes are compatible with others in the neighborhood and he feels that everyone that lives around CR 13 should help pay for the road improvements and not just require one developer to pay it all. He is in favor of the small office park building because he likes the idea of not having to drive to work, but he recommends that a condition be written that that is all it could ever be. Commissioner Duvall expressed concern with the Board changing the rules as they go, even though she too thinks it is a good idea to be able to walk to work and the proposal does fit in with the corridor recommendations. She asked if the horse facility wasn't built, would people have horses on their individual lots; Mr. Peterson responded "No". She stated she is not ready to turn it down and not ready to approve it and she would like to see this proposal go back to the Planning Commission. Chair Disney concurred with Commissioner's Duvall's comments; in addition, he is concerned about the run off from the pond and would like to give staff time to review the horse plan and answer some of the road questions.

After further discussion, the Board determined it would be appropriate to refer this proposal back to the Planning Commission to address the following issues and concerns: 1) Require a humane and ecologically sound management plan for the prairie dogs; 2) Achieve a better understanding of the Stanton Creek as a wildlife habitat area and how it will be protected, and resolve the trail question; 3) Resolve the details of improving CR 13, such as what improvements should be made and how the cost of such improvements will be allocated between the developer and others who would benefit from the improvements; 4) Resolve the question on the unstable creek banks; 5) Resolve the question of the inlet into the pond; 6) Determine whether a commercial use of the property can be permitted without breaching the terms of the IGA. Input from Fort Collins and Loveland should be obtained about this issue. If a commercial use can be permitted under the IGA, determine whether such use of the property is feasible and/or appropriate. If a commercial use is feasible and/or appropriate, determine what specifically the covenants will state to insure that the design of the commercial buildings is residential in character and to insure that the commercial use will remain as approved; 7) Determine the most appropriate access for such business development; 8) Determine whether internal roads in this development should tie in or connect with adjacent subdivisions or whether such roads may serve this development along with no connections to adjacent properties. Chair Disney recommended that a note be placed on the plat stating that the county is not responsible for mosquito control and also a note notifying potential property owners on the cul-de-sac that a right-of-way is dedicated on the stub streets and someday a street may be constructed at that location

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board refer the Wyndham Hill Planned Unit Development, Preliminary Plat and Rezoning back to the Planning Commission to resolve the concerns outlined above and, based on its resolution of those concerns, recommend whether or not the project should be approved.

Motion carried 3 - 0.

5. LINDEN RIDGE SUBDIVISION SECOND FILING (#94-SU0591):

NE 11-07-68; TWO MILES EAST OF I-25 ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF

COUNTY ROAD 48 (THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF COUNTY ROAD

48 AND COUNTY ROAD 3 INTERSECTION) PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED

AS #S-19-88; 29.94 ACRES; 9 LOTS; FA-1 FARMING ZONING (02-13-95)

This is a request to divide Lot 1 of the Linden Ridge Minor Residential Development into 9 lots for single family residential use; seven lots are approximately 2.5 acres and two lots are proposed at about 5.5 acres. Ms. Evans provided a brief summary of the proposal and stated that at the time the Lindenridge 1st Filing was approved, the applicant proposed a concept plan outlining their intentions for the future--that concept was Lindenridge 2nd. She submitted an aerial photo and located the site on the map for the Board. Staff Findings include: 1) The proposed Linden Ridge Subdivision 2nd Filing is consistent with the FA-1 Farming Zoning of the site and appears to be consistent with existing development in the general area; 2) There are existing farming operations in the vicinity of this project, but there are no high intensity uses such as feed lots or dairies in the immediate area; 3) Percolation testing on the proposed lots show that the project meets the technical requirements for on-site sewage disposal; 4) Approval of the proposed Linden Ridge Subdivision 2nd Filing, with the following conditions, should not result in any significant negative impacts on surrounding properties, utility services, transportation facilities, or the natural environment.

Commissioner Duvall questioned the legality of this applicant having this property divided and approved previously through a MRD; Ms. Evans responded that it is allowable to go through the subdivision process after a MRD is approved to request a replat of a lot. Commissioner Disney asked about condition #3 under the Planning Commission recommendations stating that some lots may require engineered septic systems, which are more expensive to install and more difficult and expensive to maintain. Ms. Evans stated that which lots this requirement will apply to will be determined at the time the perc test is done and the purpose of this condition is to give notice that when a buyer purchases one of these lots there is a possibility that they might have to install this type of septic system. Commissioner Disney asked how the $813 road fee was calculated, if this location is within the standard response time for fire protection, and suggested that another condition be added that the county is not responsible for subdivision road maintenance.

Lou Kinzli, applicant, addressed the concerns of fire protection, noting that response time is estimated to be five minutes and that fire hydrants are available in the First Filing. With regard to the concern about the septic systems, it will be mandatory for the homeowner to have their systems pumped every four years and in the 2nd Filing, they are planning for easements so if public sewer comes into the area they will be ready for it. Mr. Kinzli stated that funds will have to be collected through annual dues to maintain the roads in the 2nd Filing; this was not a requirement for lots in the 1st Filing.

The Staff/Planning Commission Recommendation is for approval of the Preliminary Plat for Linden Ridge Subdivision 2nd Filing, with the following conditions: 1) The Final Plat shall be completed in strict conformance with the conditionally approved Preliminary Plat, including all notes; 2) All concerns and comments from the County Engineering Department shall be addressed in the Final Plat application; 3) The applicant shall submit a site plan designating septic envelopes in areas where perc tests have been conducted. The Final Plat shall note that a site plan is on file in the Larimer County Planning Department designating specific septic envelopes for each lot in the area where perc tests had been conducted. The plat shall note that some lots may require engineered septic systems and that these systems are more expensive to install and more difficult and expensive to maintain than standard septic systems; 4) The Homeowner's Association covenants must include a provision for payment of annual dues by lot owners for routine septic system pumping. Such system pumping will be administered by the Homeowner's Association with cleanout of the tanks to take place at least every 4 years. The specifics of this maintenance proposal must be approved by the Larimer County Health Department. Covenants shall be recorded with the Final Plat; 5) All improvements associated with this project (roads, street signs, hydrants, water lines and other utilities) shall be included in a Subdivision Improvements Agreement which shall be secured by appropriate collateral in a type and amount approved by the County Commissioners; 6) Construction plans for water lines and access roads shall be subject to the approval of the County Engineering Department, ELCO Water District, and the Poudre Fire Authority. Plans must be approved and signed by these agencies prior to recording the Final Plat; 7) All conditions set forth by ELCO Water District shall be complied with as part of the Final Plat process; 8) All easements requested by utility companies shall be shown on the Final Plat; 9) The Final Plat must dedicate additional right-of-way along the frontage road with County Road 3 and County Road 48 to provide a half right-of-way of 35' along each of these roads; 10) In addition to notes stated elsewhere in these conditions, the Final Plat shall contain the following notes: a) Prospective lot owners should be aware of the existing agricultural activities in this area. Agricultural uses often result in noise, odors and dust that might not be compatible with residential uses. Larimer County will not take any action to stop or hinder legal agricultural uses of property in this area; b) Larimer County Park fees will be collected at building permit issuance for new single family dwellings on these lots; c) The Section 2.8 Road Fee of $813 shall be collected at building permit issuance for new single family dwellings on these lots; d) This general area is used for goose hunting from November to January of each year. Lot owners should be willing to coexist with a variety of wildlife species which use this area; e) Engineered footings and foundations shall be required for all construction on these lots; f) A radon test shall be conducted in all new residential structures after the structures are enclosed, but prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Test results shall be submitted to the Larimer County Planning Department; g) Septic envelopes are shown on each lot; no structures or driveways are permitted in these area; 11) School fees of $8 per lot shall be paid prior to recording the Final Plat; 12) The location of the drain tile on this property shall be mapped, along with appropriate easements, on the Final Plat. Covenants should address maintenance of the drain tile; 13) Proposed street names for the cul-de-sac shall be submitted to the Planning Department. Names must be approved and shown on the Final Plat; 14) Underground utilities are required for this development; 15) A note shall be included on the Final Plat stating: Lot owners agree to participate in any future Special Improvements District should one be formed to bring public sewer to the area. The Final Plat shall provide easements for future public sewer; 16) Maintenance of these subdivision roads will not be the county's responsibility.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Clarke moved that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the Staff Findings and Staff/Planning Commission Recommendation and approve the Linden Ridge Subdivision Second Filing (#94-SU0591), with the conditions as amended.

Motion carried 3 - 0.

The meeting adjourned at 12:00 noon.

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 1995

HUMAN RESOURCES STANDING MEETING

(#210)

The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:30 a.m. in regular session with Ralph Jacobs, Director of Human Resources. Chair Disney presided; Commissioners Clarke and Duvall were present. Also present were: Suzanne Comcowich, Employee Relations and Classification Specialist; Neil Gluckman, Assistant County Manager; and Frank Lancaster, County Manager. Recording Clerk, S. Graves.

1. Position Reclassification: Mr. Jacobs described the county's classification system, noting that employees are placed in pay grades in a manner that is consistent with the difficulty and responsibility of their positions. Mr. Jacobs reviewed reclassifications and stated that most positions are reclassified because the position changes; in most cases, the department head has the discretion to raise a position from a 1 to 2 by using reasonable criteria and other changes require review by the Personnel Department. Mr. Jacobs stated that in the vast majority of requests, the requests are justified and the position is reclassified; he further noted that performance doesn't enter into reclassification. Much discussion followed between the Board and Mr. Jacobs concerning how much time it takes for a reclassification; Ms. Comcowich stated that the average reclassification takes between three to six weeks. Commissioner Duvall noted that comments have been made to the Board concerning the time it takes for requests to be reviewed; she asked Mr. Jacobs, when reclassification requests are received, if he could provide a reasonable date when an answer may be expected. It was noted that with technology changing so quickly, job evolution occurs, but it does not necessarily warrant reclassification. The Board agreed that there is a need for reclassifications, but also a need to improve the processing. In summary, the Board requested Mr. Jacobs to: 1) Determine a time perimeter for reclassification requests; 2) Provide specific reasons for the reclassification based on market data; and 3) Consider seriously the department head requests. Various pay incentives were discussed, such as "Pay for Performance" and a "One-Time Bonus".

2. Controlled Substance and Alcohol Testing Policy: Mr. Jacobs requested Board approval for a revision to the Larimer County Personnel Policy Manual which will assist the County in complying with the U.S. Department of Transportation Drug and Alcohol testing regulations. He noted there are three departments in the county with employees who are going to have to be tested within the next few weeks - Road & Bridge, Sheriff, and Fleet Management. In reviewing the Controlled Substance and Alcohol Testing Policy, Commissioner Clarke recommended several changes; i.e., #3 under the Statement of Policy should be changed from four hours to eight hours, to read: "No employee shall perform safety-sensitive functions within eight hours after consuming alcohol. Under #1 under Section B on page 3 he recommended a change from 0.04 to 0.02 to read "An employee who is involved in an accident and is found to have a confirmed positive drug test or a confirmed alcohol test result of 0.02 or higher, as a result of a post accident drug or alcohol test, will be dismissed from employment".

M O T I O N

Commissioner Clarke moved that the Board approve a revision to the Larimer County Personnel Policy Manual and adopt the Controlled Substance and Alcohol Testing Policy, with the recommended revisions as outlined above, to enable the County to comply with the U. S. Department of Transportation Drug and Alcohol Testing Regulations.

Motion carried 3 - 0.

3. Employee Human Resources Advisory Committee: As directed by the Board last Fall, Mr. Jacobs noted he has sent out letters to the elected officials and department and division directors requesting one employee from each department be selected to serve on the Employee Human Resources Advisory Committee. Mr. Jacobs stated that the deadline is March 15, 1995 and he is starting to receive names of persons to serve on this Committee.

4. Pilots-Life Insurance: Mr. Jacobs noted that when the county decided to change life insurance companies in 1994, the new policy does not cover the employees in the Sheriff's Department which are pilots. After discussion of several alternatives, the Sheriff has agreed to pay the premium of $700 out of his budget for a separate policy through Life Insurance Company of North America (LINA) to cover these pilots. Therefore, Mr. Jacobs requested Board approval, and the Chair's signature, on a travel accident policy for the Sheriff's pilots for 1995. Mr. Jacobs noted that this policy has been approved as to form by Assistant County Attorney Marla Hehn.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board approve the LINA Business Travel Accident Policy for the Sheriff's Pilots for 1995, and authorize the Chair to sign same

Motion carried 3 - 0.

The meeting adjourned at 10:35 a.m.

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1995

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

(#211, #212 & #213)

The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:30 a.m. in regular session at Wellington Junior High School. Chair Disney presided; Commissioners Clarke and Duvall were present. Also present were: Dick Anderson, Facilities Manager; Ralph Jacobs, Human Resources Director; Donna Hart, Assistant to the County Manager; Neil Gluckman, Assistant County Manager; and Frank Lancaster, County Manager. Recording Clerk, S. Graves.

1. Introduction: Chair Disney introduced the Board and County Staff to a 6th grade class and two 9th grade Civic classes from Wellington Junior High School; he indicated on a large map of the County which district each Commissioner represents. Each Commissioner gave a brief history of their background before becoming a County Commissioner. Chair Disney briefly explained county government and discussed the purpose of "County Seat for a Day".

2. Recommendation on Siting for Courthouse/Administrative Offices: Mr. Anderson made a presentation on the proposed site for the new Criminal Justice Center and Administrative Offices Facility. He noted that a study to find the best possible site has transpired over the past 16-18 months; a number of sites have been analyzed and the site north of the existing Courthouse has been recommended as the best available site. Mr. Anderson stated that the Building Team has asked him to come to the Board for approval of their recommendation to build the new Criminal Justice Center on Block 31, with the current building to house the expanded Administrative Offices to meet their needs for the next twenty years. Mr. Anderson stated that the new Criminal Justice Center will be a three-story building with 90,000 square feet. Questions and discussion followed regarding money currently being expended for rental space for county offices, which may not be available in the future, previous discussions held with the City of Fort Collins regarding Block 31, public and private partnerships, the need for further discussions with the City of Fort Collins, consequences if the Criminal Justice Center was located at the Detention Center site, etc.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Clarke moved that the Board continue to pursue the expansion of county facilities on Block 31 with the expansion being done in conjunction with our partners, the City of Fort Collins, and we continue to cooperate with them to build a Criminal Justice Center and parking structure on Block 31, that we pursue the idea of remodeling the existing County Courthouse for County administrative offices to include the functions which exist there now, and to give us space for further expansion in the future, and to continue to work with the private sector to try and come up with ways to better utilize this very valuable ground; and that in the Criminal Justice Center we include in those plans specifically not only space for the courts, but also the District Attorney, Probation Department, and Community Corrections, with the Sheriff's Department relocated to the Detention Center site, with the understanding that opportunities for cooperative financial partnerships be discussed with the City of Fort Collins and the private sector.

Motion carried 3 - 0.

At this time, several students from the 9th grade Civics Class asked several questions of the Board regarding this action.

3. Request to Hire Financial Consultant for Facilities: Mr. Anderson reminded that Board that when the consulting firm of Interplan was hired, part of their total package was the financial consultant of Coley-Forrest. Mr. Anderson stated that through an investigation of this firm to see if the county should hire them, they realize that they have much experience working in public and private sectors. Mr. Anderson noted that $20,800 of the total of $230,000 allotted for consulting services has been budgeted for financial consulting; discussion followed and CONSENSUS OF THE BOARD was to direct Mr. Anderson to move toward hiring Coley-Forrest as the financial consultant for the Criminal Justice Center and courthouse facilities.

4. Request for Leave Sharing for Critically Ill Employee: Mr. Jacobs requested approval from the Board to allow a waiver of policy to permit the transfer of sick leave to Dan Fair, a Larimer County employee in the Assessor's Office who has a life threatening illness, from Roshan Fair and from willing employees in the Assessor's Office; this request to be effective January 27, 1995 through the end of February, 1995, on an as-needed basis.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board approve a waiver of policy to allow a transfer of sick leave to Dan Fair from Roshan Fair and employees in the Assessor's Office who desire to donate some of their leave, effective January 27, 1995 through the end of February of 1995.

Motion carried 3 - 0.

5. Response to Environmental Advisory Board Recommendations: Mr. Lancaster submitted a listing of the responses to the recommendations from the Environmental Advisory Board for the Board's review; Mr. Lancaster noted he sent a copy of same to John Barnett, Director of Planning. CONSENSUS OF THE BOARD was to approve the list of responses and voiced their pleasure that an action due date was given beside each recommendation.

6. Request for Approval of High Priority Technology Improvements: Mr. Lancaster submitted a listing of all the pending technology requests the Board has received. Mr. Lancaster stated that based on discussions with the Information Technology Advisory Committee (ITAC), Jim. Stokes, Bob Keister and Mr. Lancaster reviewed this listing and ranked the requests A, B and C based on priorities. Mr. Lancaster noted that an "A" ranking was given to those requests which appear to be critical in order for departments to continue to operate. Mr. Lancaster stated that $600,000 has been budgeted for technology upgrades in 1995, and he recommends that the Board approve the "A" items and then at a future time, the Board continue discussing the "B" and "C" items. Mr. Lancaster stated that during the budget process, they asked the departments what they could fund themselves, in an effort to get people to pay for requests out of their own funds, and he noted that many of these requests have been resolved. Mr. Lancaster further noted that all the "A" items are compatible with networking.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board authorize the expenditure of $182,700 out of the $600,000 previously authorized for technology for the "A" priorities in the Technology Decision Packages for 1995, as recommended by Mr. Lancaster, Mr. Stokes and Mr. Keister.

Motion carried 3 - 0.

7. Worksession:

-- Letter from Glacier View Fire Protection Board: In response to a letter from the Glacier View Fire Protection Board regarding an error in the mill levy assessment for 1995 and requesting the error be corrected before they start collecting tax revenue, Mr. Lancaster informed the Board that he drafted a letter stating there is nothing that can be done at this time because tax assessment bills have already been mailed, but an adjustment can be made in 1996.

-- Items for Next Week's Standing Meetings: For the Board's information, Mr. Lancaster submitted the agenda items for the Social Services, Public Works and Planning Standing Meetings. Commissioner Duvall requested that during the Planning Worksession, that a listing of projects scheduled for 1994 be submitted for the Board's review to determine if those goals were met, before proceeding on to the 1995 goals.

-- Cabinet Worksession: The subjects for the next Cabinet Worksession will be to review the feedback from the division and department heads regarding the appraisal system and possibly some of the discussion items carried over from Policy Worksession.

-- Policy Worksession: Of the five items listed for Policy Worksession, the Board selected Fund Balance Philosophy, Service Priorities Philosophy Statements and Control vs. Service as the three main subjects for discussion.

8. Commissioners' Reports:

-- Commissioner Clarke reported on a briefing he will be attending in Parker, Colorado on February 20, 1995 regarding Super Slab which relates to the Board's railroad relocation project. Commissioner Clarke informed the Board that Super Slab will be a combination rail and automobile corridor which would take off from I-25 near Fort Collins and continue east and then go straight south and bypass all the major population areas in northern Colorado on into the edge of DIA and continue south to Colorado Springs and Pueblo.

-- Commissioner Duvall recommended that progress reports on the 1995 Commissioners' Work Plan be kept in the forefront to keep the public aware of its progress and possibly do several press releases to give more visibility to what the Board is trying to accomplish in 1995.

-- Chair Disney reported that he and Commissioner Clarke met with the Thompson R2J School District Officials and they are very interested in cooperating with the county in planning as it relates to land use and as the land use dictates the need for new facilities; he noted they are exploring of idea of hiring a staff person to work with the various planning departments they have to interact with the City of Fort Collins, City of Loveland, Town of Berthoud, and the County so that we have a better dialogue going on between the school district and other jurisdictions.

9. Document Review: The following documents, of a routine nature, were considered by the Board:

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board approve the Minutes for the week of February 6, 1995 and the Agenda for the week of February 20, 1995, as submitted.

Motion carried 3 - 0.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board approve Petitions for Abatement, as recommended by the County Assessor, for: Clark; O'Keefe; Kenyon; Chimney Rock; Eklund; Gaucin/LLamas; and Stiles.

Motion carried 3 - 0.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board approve the State of Colorado, County of Larimer, Office of the Treasurer Six-Month Report Statement of the Semi-Annual Condition of Larimer County.

Motion carried 3 - 0.

LIQUOR LICENSES: County Approval was granted to South Taft Liquor - 6% - Fort Collins, CO. and Gasamat No. 110 - 3.2% - Fort Collins, CO. Licenses were issued to: Drink N Dawg - 6% WITH EXTENDED HOURS - LaPorte, CO.; City Park Liquors - 6% - Fort Collins, CO.; Branding Iron Liquor, Inc. - 6% - LaPorte, CO.; Sundance Steak House & Country Club - 6% WITH EXTENDED HOURS - Fort Collins, CO.; Best Western Coach House Motor Inn - 6% WITH EXTENDED HOURS - Loveland, CO.; Convenience Plus No. 7 - 3.2% - Fort Collins, CO.; and Horsetooth Marina Resort, Inc. - 3.2% - Fort Collins, CO.

M O T I O N

Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board approve the following documents:

A95-05 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY

COMMISSIONERS AND RUSSELL C. BARGER (Use of Property

as a Firearms Range by the Sheriff's Department)

C95-11 CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY

COMMISSIONERS AND THE STATE OF COLORADO,

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH & ENVIRONMENT

(Application for Reimbursement of Expenses for Cleanup of Leaking

Storage Tanks at the Larimer County Shop, 1303 N. Shields Street)

R95-18s FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MASTER PLAN

AND PRELIMINARY PHASE PLAN OF MCKEE CHARITABLE

TRUST PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT

R95-19s FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION DENYING THE REPLAT OF LOT 20,

BUCKSKIN HEIGHTS 1ST FILING

Motion carried 3 - 0.

At the end of the meeting, Wellington resident Len Roark thanked the Board for today's meeting with the citizens and students and noted that he is very impressed with the Board and how they are reaching out to the public.

The meeting adjourned at 12:15 p.m.


______________________________________

JIM DISNEY, CHAIR

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

( S E A L )

ATTEST:


_______________________________________

Sherry E. Graves, Deputy County Clerk

February 15, 1995