County Offices, Courts, and the Landfill will all be closed on Monday, May 30, 2016 for the Memorial Day Holiday. Critical services at Larimer County are not disrupted by closures.
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
LAND USE HEARING
The Board of County Commissioners met at 3:00 p.m. with Matt Lafferty, Principal Planner. Chair Donnelly presided and Commissioners Johnson and Gaiter were present. Also present were: Rob Helmick, Planning Department; Clint Jones, Engineering Department; Doug Ryan, Environmental Health Department; Jeannine Haag, County Attorney’s Office; and Denise Ruybal, Deputy Clerk.
Chair Donnelly opened the hearing with the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODES – MICRO-BREWERIES, WINERIES, AND DISTILLERIES AS A PRINCIPLE USE IN CERTAIN NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICTS – Mr. Lafferty asked that this item be removed from the agenda. There was no one in opposition, and the item was removed.
2. ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE – TO ALLOW ASSEMBLIES AS A PRINCIPLE USE IN CERTAIN NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICTS
3. ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE – TO INCREASE THE MEDIAN INCOME LEVEL FOR OWNER-OCCUPIED AND RENTER-OCCUPIED UNITS UP 125% OF THE AREA MEDIAN
Mr. Lafferty asked that these two items be tabled until the May 27 2014, Board of Commissioners Administrative Matters Meeting. After a brief discussion, there was no opposition. These two items will be tabled until May 27, 2014.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Johnson moved that the two Estes Park Development Code items be tabled until May 27, 2014.
Motion carried 3-0.
Chair Donnelly noted that the following items were on the consent agenda and would not be discussed unless requested by the Board, staff, or members of the audience:
4. ESTES PARK DEVELOPMENT CODE – AMEND CODE TO REQUIRE CONCURRENT APPLICATION REVIEW: The requested amendment to the Estes Valley Development Code is to clarify that staff has the authority to promulgate processing schedules for related development applications, and in all cases, require review and approval of related development applications by the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners prior to review by the Board of Adjustment.
The Estes Valley Development Code does not state whether the Board of Adjustment review must occur before or after review by the Planning Commission/Boards. Clearer direction for developers is needed. The proposed code amendment was presented to the Estes Valley Planning Commission on December 12, 2013; the Commission voted unanimously (7-0) to recommend approval. The proposed code amendment was presented to the Town Board of the Town of Estes Park on March 25, 2014; the Town Board voted unanimously (6-0) to approve; minutes from this meeting are not yet available, though no one was present to speak either for or against the amendment.
The proposal is to revise the code as directed by the Town Board of Trustees to require the Board of Adjustment review after the Planning Commission and Board review in all cases. Advantages include increased clarity about the staff’s authority to promulgate processing schedules for related development applications and clearer policy direction on when the Board of Adjustment review shall occur. Disadvantages include time and cost to process Estes Valley Development Code test amendment, slightly more regulatory language, and the potential for longer review times for developers waiting on Board of Adjustment decisions on a non-controversial/minor variance request.
5. ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODED AMENDMENTS TO ALIGN REZONING, SPECIAL REVIEW, AND VARIANCE EXPIRATION WITH STATE VESTING LAWS: The requested amendment to the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) will allow longer time periods in which the code amendment (i.e. rezoning), Special Review and Variance approvals are valid.
Special Review and Variance approval expires after one (1) year from the final approval date. In each instance applicants must apply for a building permit or commence construction or operation within that one-year window. Failure to take such action within that time period automatically renders approval null and void. If approved concurrently with a development plan, rezoning also becomes null and void within one year. Per State law, site specific approvals such as development plans or subdivision plats are vested for a period of three years. Applicants often wish to process numerous, concurrent applications. One application package in such instances frequently includes a rezoning, Special Review or Variance. Problems may arise following approval of concurrent applications with the different time limitations: three years for the development plan, but only one year for other approvals. Applications that require concurrent review are often complex and warrant a three (3) year approval period.
The proposal is to amend the development code to align rezoning, special review and variance approvals with State mandated vesting periods. Advantages include greater flexibility for complex projects and to align with Section 3.10 Vested Rights of the EVDC, which establishes vesting rights for site-specific developments plans. Such plans are vested for a period of three (3) years following the final approval by the decision making body.
6. INDIAN CREEK MEADOWS LOT 14, AMENDED PLAT, FILE #14-S3217: This property is located east of the Town of Wellington, at the northwest corner of County Road 60 and County Road 3, and is located in the Indian Creek Meadows R.L.U.P. The property is currently zoned O-Open and that will remain the same. The Indian Creek Meadows R.L.U.P. received final approval in 1997. The project contained about 550 acres and was approved with 19 single-family residential lots, each allowed one single-family residence located within a designated building envelope. Each building envelope limited the development area.
This proposal is for an amendment to the building envelope for Lot 14 in the Indian Creek Meadows R.L.U.P. The current property owners would like to extend the building envelope about 50’ to the south to accommodate a new support structure. The boundary line of the lot will remain the same. All covenants, deed restrictions and other conditions which applied to the original Rural Land Use Plan will continue to apply. This proposal meets the review criteria.
The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Indian Creek Meadows R.L.U.P. Amended Plat, Lot 14, File 14-S3217, subject to the following condition(s):
1. The resultant lot is subject to any and all covenants, deed restrictions or other conditions that apply to the original lots.
2. The reconfiguration of the building envelope lines shall be finalized at such time when the findings and resolution of the County Commissioners is recorded with the exhibit showing the new location of the building envelope.
7. S BAR G LOT 2 AMENDED PLAT AND EASMENT VACATION, FILE #14-S3216: After approval and recording of the plat for the Minor Land Division, the applicant began installing utilities and discovered some discrepancies in the plat. These included the dedication of the access easement as public when the approval was explicitly for a private gated road. In preparation for the ultimate development of this site, the applicant began the installation of the utilities and now that they are in place he wishes to have specific easements located rather than blanket easements. Finally, the applicant has relocated the road and the easement needs to be vacated and relocated to accurately reflect its location.
The application meets the requirements of the Code and no agency or individual has commented negatively on the requested changes.
The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Amended Plat of Lot 2, S Bar G Minor Land Division and easement vacation/relocation, File #14-S3216, subject to the following condition(s) and authorization for the chairman 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 October 21, 2014, or this approval shall be null and void.
2. Prior to the recordation of the Final Plat, the applicant shall make the technical corrections required by Brian Helminiak, Land Surveyor of the Larimer County Engineering Department.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the consent agenda as outlined above.
Motion carried 3-0.
1. LEACH SOLAR DESIGN GARDEN PUBLIC SITE PLAN, FILE #14-PSP0056: Mr. Helmick explained the Clean Energy Collective proposal to place a 4-acre solar facility on a 15-acre parcel in the northern area of the Fort Collins GMA. The site at the north end of Whitcomb Street is currently rural in character with large lots and agricultural uses in the area. To the west of the site is the Fort Collins Nursery, a wholesale growing site; to the south is an equestrian facility, and large lot residential uses are in the area. A storage facility for trailers is located to the northeast of the site across Dry Creek.
The code provides for a small solar facility as a use allowable by Public Site Plan if the panels are ground mounted. The applicant made application for a facility and notice was provided to owners surrounding the site. Several owners commented either in writing or by phone, that they had no conflict. One owner was concerned about the potential impact to his view to the west from his property and the effect on property values.
The introduction of this use will not create an undesirable use in the area and will not negatively affect any surrounding property; however, because the one neighbor has issues which the applicant has been unable to resolve, this request has been scheduled for a hearing with the Board of County Commissioners for decision on the proposal.
Discussion ensued among the Commissioners regarding the 6 foot chain link screening fence with a privacy fence on the east side for Mr. Brooks, the issue with there being enough room for emergency equipment to gain entrance and access to the property and then to be able to turn around and leave the property, and the distribution line.
Mr. Miller with Clean Energy Collective presented a presentation regarding the proposal stating that they would like to keep this in place for 25 to 50 years.
Chair Donnelly then opened up the hearing for public comment:
- Doug Brooks spoke in opposition to the proposal in part to the decrease in property value he feels he will experience and feels the panels will ruin the view he currently has. He would like the panels placed at the northwest corner of the property instead.
- Susan Ring was not in opposition of the proposal but was concerned with the increased dust, the equipment transport and the condition of the bridge that would have to be crossed to access the property. She also wanted to know if the widening of the road would impact her property.
- Mary and Duane Leach addressed the Board regarding the above mentioned concerns. Mr. Leach uses the road to move his farming equipment and stated that the bridge mentioned is good to 70 tons. The facility cannot be moved to the northwest corner of the property as it would interfere with irrigation on the property. Mrs. Leach stated that there would little to no impact on the surrounding area once the panels were installed. Trips for maintenance would be about two times per year.
Mark Wadsworth, CEO of Poudre Valley REA, addressed the Board with questions regarding the positioning of the distributions lines, since power lines must be underground except where the electrical collector wiring is brought together for connection to the transmission or distribution network, adjacent to that network. Proposed transmission facilities must be identified and included as part of the small solar energy facility project. Clarification was needed regarding whether the lines would be underground until they meet the current distribution line on the property being serviced, at which time the lines would be moved above ground.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board of Commissioners approve the Leach Solar Garden, File #14-PSP0056, subject to the following condition(s):
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 are not issued.
Motion carried 3-0.
With there being no further business, the hearing adjourned at 3:50 p.m.
TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 2014
The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 a.m. with Linda Hoffmann, County Manager.
Chair Donnelly presided and Commissioners Johnson and Gaiter were present. Also present were: Donna Hart, Deni LaRue, and Lori Hodges, Commissioners’ Office; Dale Miller, Road and Bridge Department; Doug Ryan, Environmental Health Department; Deb Marsden, Sheriff’s Office; and Dana Polley, Deputy Clerk.
Chair Donnelly opened the meeting for public comment during which Greg Leveritt and Eric Sutherland addressed the Board.
Chair Donnelly then led everyone in the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE WEEK OF APRIL 14, 2014:
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the minutes for the week of April 14, 2014.
Motion carried 3-0.
2. REVIEW OF THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK OF APRIL 28, 2014: Ms. Hart reviewed the upcoming schedule with the Board.
3. CONSENT AGENDA:
M O T I O N
Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the consent agenda as outlined below:
04222014A001 LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO ROBERTS RANCH TIRE REMOVAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN LARIMER COUNTY AND INTRAWEST LLC
04222014R001 RESOLUTION FOR STATUTORY VESTED RIGHTS FOR DAVIS CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT FILE #12-S3097
MISCELLANEOUS: Larimer County Storm Mountain Public Improvement District No. 55 Advisory Board Bylaws; Larimer County Willows Public Improvement District No. 45 Advisory Board Bylaws; Larimer County Boyd’s West Public Improvement District No. 56 Advisory Board Bylaws.
LIQUOR LICENSES: The following licenses were issued and/or approved: Mountain Whitewater Descents – Beer and Wine – Fort Collins; Alicia’s Restaurant – Tavern – Fort Collins.
Motion carried 3-0.
4. CLIMATE WISE REPORT: Ms. LaRue briefly updated the Board on the County’s recent receipt of gold status from the City of Fort Collins Climate Wise Program for the year. Ms. Marsden gave some background information on the Green Practices Committee which is made up of staff who work throughout the County. She highlighted some of the goals and activities of the committee including submitting the annual Climate Wise Report. Then Mr. Ryan briefly spoke regarding the Climate Wise Report and what the tracking categories are and how the County achieved some of these goals throughout the past year. He also mentioned that there are opportunities for sustainability and energy conservation within the County’s Strategic Plan and that the Green Practices Committee looks forward to presenting them to the Board in the future.
5. FUNDING AUTHORIZATION FOR AIR PERMIT REVIEW: Mr. Ryan explained that the Environmental and Science Advisory Board is scheduled to review the anticipated draft Air Emissions Permit for the asphalt plant at the Martin Marietta facility. During a recent meeting, the Advisory Board agreed that retaining the services of a qualified consultant with experience in air permit evaluation would be greatly beneficial. Therefore, the Environmental and Science Advisory Board requested the Commissioners approve the expenditure of up to $3,600 for consultant fees as the County’s contribution, which is split 50% with the City of Fort Collins.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve appropriating $3,600 in transferring from general fund reserves to the Health Department budget for expenditure on retaining the services of a qualified consultant with experience in air permit evaluation for the purposes of the Martin Marietta asphalt plant evaluation.
Motion carried 3-0.
6. COUNTY MANAGER WORKSESSION: Ms. Hoffmann explained that there has been a lot of work done recently regarding getting material for road construction in the Glen Haven area. Ms. Hodges has worked with several different groups to get resources to this area, including the Town of Estes Park, Red Cross, City of Loveland, and CDOT. All of these entities have agreed to contribute different resources as long as the County also participates. She mentioned that this work is especially important because there could be extreme problems if there were ever another disaster in this area due to the lack of road structure.
Chair Donnelly and Commissioner Johnson expressed their desires to get this work done and that it would be foolish to pass up a partnership like this. Commissioner Johnson further expressed his thanks to Ms. Hodges for her work in organizing these resources and partnership.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve providing direction to staff to work with Non-profit, State and Municipal partners to transport road building materials from Estes Park to Glen Haven.
Motion carried 3-0.
Ms. Hoffmann also told the Board that she attended a workshop put on by the State for additional sources of funding for longer term flood recovery. She mentioned that one area discussed for funding private roads was historic resources, and there were many other ideas for non-traditional funding. She mentioned that the County might benefit from looking into a grant writer or consultant to specialize in looking for recovery money.
Lastly, Ms. Hoffmann thanked the City of Fort Collins for her ticket to the Jim Collins Event which she attended with the Commissioners.
7. COMMISSIONER ACTIVITY REPORTS: The Board reviewed their involvement at events during the past week.
8. LEGAL MATTERS: There were no legal matters for discussion.
The meeting ended at 9:55 a.m.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
CLERK AND RECORDER
Denise M. Ruybal, Deputy Clerk
Dana S. Polley, Deputy Clerk