HomeMy WebLinkAbout20110586 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
MINUTES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
FEBRUARY 28, 2011
The Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, met in regular session in full
conformity with the laws of the State of Colorado at the regular place of meeting in the Weld County
Centennial Center, Greeley, Colorado, February 28, 2011, at the hour of 9:00 a.m.
ROLL CALL: The meeting was called to order by the Chair and on roll call the following members
were present, constituting a quorum of the members thereof:
Commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer, Chair
Commissioner Sean P. Conway, Pro-Tem
Commissioner William F. Garcia
Commissioner David E. Long
Commissioner Douglas Rademacher
Also present:
County Attorney, Bruce T. Barker
Acting Clerk to the Board, Elizabeth Strong
Director of Finance and Administration, Monica Mika
(Clerk's Note: Due to technical difficulties, there is no digital recording available for this meeting.)
MINUTES: Commissioner Rademacher moved to approve the minutes of the Board of County
Commissioners meeting of February 23, 2011, as printed. Commissioner Conway seconded the
motion, and it carried unanimously.
READ ORDINANCE BY TAPE: Commissioner Conway moved to read Code Ordinances #2011-2,
#2011-3, and #2011-4 by tape. Commissioner Garcia seconded the motion, which carried
unanimously.
CERTIFICATION OF HEARINGS: Commissioner Rademacher moved to approve the Certification of
Hearings conducted on February 23, 2011, as follows: 1) USR #1769 - Marcum Midstream 1995-2
Business Trust, dba Conquest Water Services. Commissioner Conway seconded the motion, which
carried unanimously.
AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA: There were no amendments to the agenda.
PUBLIC INPUT: Gary Booton, Weld County resident, requested that the Board consider allowing
people a one (1) year period of time to operate a business from their home before having to rezone
their property, in order to determine whether the business is viable, since many residents have been
laid off from employment. He indicated a neighbor wants to make cabinets; however, they cannot
afford to start a business and pay for the rezoning at the same time. He stated allowing people one (1)
year before having to apply for rezoning could help to stimulate the economy, Chair Kirkmeyer stated
the Board recently made changes to the Code involving home businesses, in an effort to be more
�� 1 I Minutes, February 28, 2011 2011-0586
Page 1 BC0016
lenient, especially regarding the associated costs. She stated she does not know the specifics of
Mr. Booton's situation; however, she recommends he speak to Kim Ogle, Department of Planning
Services, to discuss the available options. Commissioner Conway inquired as to whether Mr. Booton
has had discussions with the Department of Planning Services about the matter. Mr. Booton indicated
he has not discussed the matter with staff; he has only discussed the matter with his neighbors.
Commissioner Conway stated it seems Mr. Booton is describing a home business and it may not be as
difficult as he thinks to begin one, and he concurred with Chair Kirkmeyer's recommendation for
Mr. Booton to speak to Mr. Ogle about the matter. Chair Kirkmeyer stated the Board is open to further
discussions, and it recently changed the Code to address this issue.
R. Chris Eikenberg, Weld County resident, indicated a group of approximately 50 women and one (1)
man have been meeting at UNC (University of Northern Colorado) and various libraries to discuss child
support matters. She indicated she still has the same question that she expressed at the meeting on
February 23, 2011, as to why there is a different policy adhered to by Weld and Larimer Counties than
the Colorado Department of Human Services, and she wants to protest the inequitable division of child
support fees by the Federal Support Registry, which must be paid by the applicant. She stated out of
7,000 cases, over 90 percent of the child support recipients are women with children; therefore, the fee
is a form of gender-specific discrimination. Ms. Eikenberg indicated she does not think the County
hires quality attorneys, since one of the County attorneys stated on the record he has never calculated
child support rearage, and she has ordered a copy of the court transcript for the hearing where this
occurred. She stated that others have indicated to her they have had similar problems with the
collection of child support rearage. She stated she will be distributing fliers at an upcoming conference
with Mayor John Hickenlooper. Ms. Eikenberg stated she has two (2) chronically ill children and her
ex-husband works for the State, the County Attorney objected to him having to pay an extra $97.00 per
month in child support, which is wrong. She stated she is disabled; however, she maintains a garden
and she rarely utilizes the food bank. She stated she was awarded $133,000.00 as lifetime wages in a
settlement which she spent within two (2) years, and this was mentioned to the judge in an effort to
disparage her character; however, she divorced in the year 2007, and the money was awarded in the
year 1998. She stated the Commissioners have not been responding to her through e-mail or during
public input at the Board meetings. She requested the Commissioners attend the meeting she has
organized, which will be held on March 19, 2011, at 3:00 p.m. Commissioner Conway inquired as to
where the meeting will be held. Ms. Eikenberg stated the meeting location is yet to be determined;
however, she will e-mail the location of the meeting to the Board when it has been determined.
Commissioner Long indicated he received Ms. Eikenberg's letter and he is speaking with the
Department of Human Services tomorrow to determine whether its policies stray from the State's
policies. He stated the Department has room to stray in certain areas, yet not in others, and he will
determine whether it has varying policies in inappropriate areas. Ms. Eikenberg indicated the
magistrate did not believe she paid the annual fee due to information provided by the County Attorney.
Commissioner Long indicated he will also investigate the formulas utilized to determine child support.
Doug Meyer, resident, stated it is a pet peeve of his when State officials indicate that water belongs to
the State, since it does not. He read a portion of an article from the Denver Post, from October 4, 1998,
and he submitted an article, titled Public Perceptions, Preferences, and Values for Water in the West,
into the record, marked Exhibit A. He stated even people living in cities understand that water is
necessary for agriculture, and he indicated a full version of the study can be found at the website
address included on Exhibit A, which is http://www.cwi.colostate.edu/publications/sr/17.pdf.
CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Rademacher moved to approve the Consent Agenda as printed.
Commissioner Garcia seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously.
Minutes, February 28, 2011 2010-0586
Page 2 BC0016
BIDS:
PRESENT BID #61100045, TRAFFIC PAINT AND BEADS - DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS:
Monica Mika, Director of Finance and Administration, stated said bid will be presented for approval on
March 14, 2011.
APPROVE BID #61100036, BI-FUEL (CNG) CONVERSION KITS FOR SEVEN (7) VEHICLES -
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE/FLEET MAINTENANCE: Ms. Mika stated several work sessions have
taken place regarding this bid and she recommended the bid from Semi Service, Inc., be accepted.
Commissioner Garcia moved to approve the bid from Semi Service, Inc., based on staff's
recommendation. Seconded by Commissioner Long, the motion carried unanimously.
APPROVE BID #61100039, CONCRETE, WASHED ROCK, AND SQUEEGEE "ON CALL" -
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS: Ms. Mika recommended that different vendors be awarded
different portions of the bid, based on the locations of vendors, as delineated in a letter from Pat
Persichino, Director, Department of Public Works. A motion to approve staff's recommendations was
made, which was seconded by Commissioner Conway, and the motion carried unanimously.
APPROVE BID #61100040, 2011 STEEL BID - DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS: Ms. Mika
indicated this bid was scheduled for approval on March 9, 2011; however, due to fluctuating prices,
staff requests emergency approval today, and she read the recommendations into the record, indicating
which vendors are recommended for each of the various types of products. In response to
Commissioner Conway, Ms. Mika indicated the prices could substantially increase if the bid approval is
delayed. Commissioner Long moved to approve staff's recommendations. Seconded by
Commissioner Garcia, the motion carried unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS:
CONSIDER RESCINDING RESOLUTION #2010-2899, DATED DECEMBER 13, 2010, AND
CORRECTED PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OR REFUND OF TAXES - COLORADO FRONT
RANGE HOLDING COMPANY, C/O DARREL ADOLF/COLORADO COMMUNITY BANK: Christopher
Woodruff, Assessor, indicated the incorrect mill levy was assessed in December, 2010, and the
corrected tax abatement should be in the amount of $3,675.48, for Tax Year 2009. Commissioner
Conway disclosed for the record that he is a stockholder in Colorado Community Bank. Commissioner
Rademacher moved to rescind Resolution #2010-2899, dated December 13, 2010, and approve the
corrected Petition for Abatement or Refund of Taxes from Colorado Front Range Holding Company,
c/o Darrel Adolf/Colorado Community Bank. Seconded by Commissioner Long, the motion carried
unanimously.
CONSIDER PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OR REFUND OF TAXES — ANDREW WINFREY:
Mr. Woodruff indicated this property is located within the City of Dacono, and it was a split property,
which was part residential and part commercial; however, it is no longer a split property, since there is
no longer any business activity on the property and has not been since the year 2007. Commissioner
Garcia moved to approve said abatement of taxes, in the amount of $3,850.69, for Tax Year 2009,
based on staff's recommendation. Seconded by Commissioner Long, the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OR REFUND OF TAXES — VECTOR AIR, LLC:
Mr. Woodruff stated this property is located within the Erie Airpark, and it was assumed the property
would have full septic facilities; however, it has been brought to his attention that the septic system has
never been installed, which warrants a change in the property value. Commissioner Conway moved to
approve said abatement of taxes, in the amount of $1,145.42, for Tax Year 2008, based on staff's
recommendation. Seconded by Commissioner Garcia, the motion carried unanimously.
Minutes, February 28, 2011 2010-0586
Page 3 BC0016
CONSIDER PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OR REFUND OF TAXES - OWENS-BROCKWAY GLASS
CONTAINER, INC., C/O DUFF AND PHELPS, LLC/BRUCE CARTWRIGHT: Mr. Woodruff indicated
an appeal was made in the year 2009 for the equipment used in the plant, and the Assessor's Office
has been requesting information and to inspect the plant for years. He stated staff was finally able to
conduct an inspection in the year 2010, which resulted in an adjustment, based on the uses of the
property. He indicated there has been a stipulation filed for Tax Year 2010, and he recommended the
partial approval of the petition for Tax Year 2008, in the amount of $71,321.87. No representatives of
Owens-Brockway Glass Container, Inc., or Duff and Phelps, LLC, were present. Commissioner Long
moved to approve, in part, said abatement of taxes, in the amount of $71,321.87, based on staff's
recommendation. Seconded by Commissioner Conway, the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OR REFUND OF TAXES - RPM PROPERTIES, RLLP:
Mr. Woodruff stated this request is for a Tax Year 2008 adjustment; however, he is not persuaded an
adjustment is appropriate, based on the information submitted by the petitioner's representatives. He
recommended denial of the petition, and stated the market approach supports the recommendation of
denial. Commissioner Garcia stated the letter from the representative indicates they researched sales
from outside of this area. Mr. Woodruff stated his staff reviewed those sales; however, it is difficult to
make the necessary economic adjustments between communities which are so different. He stated the
income information was also considered, in order to make a determination. There were no
representatives of RPM Properties, RLLP, present. Commissioner Long moved to deny said petition,
based on staff's recommendation. Seconded by Commissioner Garcia, the motion carried
unanimously.
CONSIDER TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF CR 6 BETWEEN CRS 21 AND 23: Janet Carter,
Department of Public Works, stated said closure will commence March 7, 2011, through March 11,
2011, in order to replace two (2) culverts, and magnesium-chloride will be used for dust abatement on
the detour route. She stated message boards will be placed in advance, and road signs and barricades
will be used throughout the closure. Commissioner Rademacher inquired as to why this closure was
not consolidated with the nearby closure for a bridge. Ms. Carter indicated the closures were not
consolidated due to the spacing between the project locations, and staff does not want closures to last
for an extended timeframe. She clarified the scheduling of the work is not simultaneous because the
bridge crew also completes the culvert work; however, she can advise the crews the Board would like
to see the closures consolidated. Commissioner Rademacher stated staff should consider
consolidating the closures on high-volume roads. In response to Chair Kirkmeyer, Ms. Carter stated
people will be able to cross County Roads 6 and 21. Commissioner Rademacher moved to approve
said temporary closure. Seconded by Commissioner Garcia, the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR DESIGN OF INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENTS FOR CR 23 AND SH 392 AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN - TOWN OF
WINDSOR: Wayne Howard, Department of Public Works, stated the agreement is related to the
realignment project to widen and improve the safety of the currently offset intersection of County
Road 23 and State Highway 392. He stated the costs will be shared among the Town of Severance,
Weld County, and CDOT (Colorado Department of Transportation). He indicated the total cost of the
project is estimated to be $400,000.00, with $200,000.00 being paid from a grant, CDOT paying
$100,000.00, Weld County paying $50,000.00, and the Towns of Windsor and Severance each paying
$25,000.00. In response to Commissioner Conway and Chair Kirkmeyer, Mr. Howard confirmed the
Mayor of the Town of Windsor signed the agreement after the changes were implemented. Chair
Kirkmeyer explained the reference to the cost of construction was removed from Paragraph 6. The
motion was made and seconded to approve said agreement and authorize the Chair to sign, and it
carried unanimously.
Minutes, February 28, 2011 2010-0586
Page 4 BC0016
CONSIDER INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR DESIGN OF INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENTS FOR CR 23 AND SH 392 AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN - TOWN OF
SEVERANCE: Based on previous discussion, Commissioner Rademacher moved to approve said
agreement and authorize the Chair to sign. Seconded by Commissioner Long, the motion carried
unanimously.
CONSIDER APPLICATION FOR VICTIM ASSISTANCE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT (VALE) GRANT
FOR VICTIM WITNESS ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN: JoAnn
Holden, District Attorney's Office, stated this grant is applied for each year, and $120,000.00 is being
requested this year, which is the same as the amount requested last year. She stated the application
was discussed at a work session on February 23, 2011, and there will be no matching County funds
required. Commissioner Conway moved to approve said application and authorize the Chair to sign.
Seconded by Commissioner Long, the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER APPLICATION FOR VICTIM ASSISTANCE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT (VALE) VICTIM
SERVICE UNIT AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN: Susie Cvancara, Sheriff's Office, indicated this
grant is applied for each year, to provide crisis intervention and services to victims of crime, and
$66,328.00 is the amount being requested this year. Commissioner Long moved to approve said
application and authorize the Chair to sign. Seconded by Commissioner Garcia, the motion carried
unanimously.
CONSIDER CUSTOM PUBLICATION AGREEMENT FOR WELD COUNTY 150TH ANNIVERSARY
AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN - NORTH COLORADO BUSINESS REPORT: Glen Czaplewski,
Weld County Intern, indicated this is an agreement for a custom publication which will be inserted into
the Northern Colorado Business Report. Commissioner Conway moved to approve said agreement
and authorize the Chair to sign. Seconded by Commissioner Garcia, the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER RESCINDING RESOLUTION #2010-3059, DATED DECEMBER 29, 2010, AND
CORRECTED RESOLUTION APPOINTING DAVE BRESSLER TO REGIONAL COMMUNICATIONS
ADVISORY BOARD: In response to Commissioner Conway, Elizabeth Strong, Acting Clerk to the
Board, clarified the Resolution being rescinded specified a specific term expiration date; whereas, the
proposed corrected Resolution, specifies Dave Bressler is appointed to the Regional Communications
Advisory Board, without a term expiration date, which was the original intent. Commissioner Garcia
moved to rescind Resolution #2010-3059, dated December 29, 2010, and approve the corrected
Resolution appointing Dave Bressler to the Regional Communications Advisory Board, with no term
expiration date. Seconded by Commissioner Rademacher, the motion carried unanimously.
OLD PLANNING BUSINESS:
CONSIDER REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF SUBMITTAL OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
FINAL PLAT, PF #1114 - PYRENEES PROPERTIES, LLC: Mr. Ogle stated the property
owner/developer requested a three (3) year extension, as outlined in the staff memorandums. In
response to Commissioner Rademacher, Mr. Ogle clarified this is the third extension the applicant has
requested, and the two (2) previous extensions were granted for one (1) year periods. In response to
Commissioner Conway, Mr. Ogle confirmed staff is in favor of the request. Chair Kirkmeyer inquired as
to why staff supports the request. Mr. Ogle stated many people are in the same situation, and this
applicant has been making significant progress and just has an engineering issue remaining, which the
applicant is working on.
Minutes, February 28, 2011 2010-0586
Page 5 BC0016
In response to Chair Kirkmeyer, Todd Hodges, representative for Pyrenees Properties, LLC, stated the
applicant has no intention of abandoning this project, and a lot of developers have had to delay projects
in this economy. He stated the outstanding items will be dealt with when the property is actually
developed, and the applicant still has the ability and intent to complete this project. Chair Kirkmeyer
inquired as to how much the cost of improvements will be. Mr. Hodges indicated he does not have the
figures in front of him; however, the information is from the year 2007; therefore, the costs will need to
re-evaluated. Commissioner Conway moved to approve the request for a three (3) year extension.
Commissioner Long seconded the motion. Commissioner Conway indicated the Board generally
approves one (1) year extensions; however, granting this applicant three (3) years will save time and
effort, by the applicant not being required to submit a request for extension each year. He stated
homes may continue to decrease in value as much as 25 percent over the next two (2) years. There
being no further discussion, the motion carried unanimously.
NEW PLANNING BUSINESS:
CONSIDER REQUEST TO MODIFY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS #13 AND #14 OF USR #1695 -
A & W WATER SERVICE, INC.: Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services, stated Use by
Special Review Permit #1695 was approved in March, 2010, and originally Development Standard #13
stated, "Adequate hand washing and toilet facilities shall be provided for employees and patrons of the
facility, at all times. Portable toilets may be utilized on the site for up to six (6) months, or until the office
building, pipe storage yard, or potash facilities are utilized (whichever occurs first). The applicant may
utilize portable toilets for an additional twelve (12) month period (beyond the initial six (6) month period)
if permission is granted by the Board of County Commissioners. After these periods have elapsed, an
Individual Sewage Disposal System shall be required." He stated Development Standard #14 stated,
"Upon implementation of the pipe and storage yard, the potash mixing facility, or the office, whichever
first occurs, a permanent adequate water supply shall be provided for drinking and sanitary purpose,
and..." He stated the applicant is requesting that Development Standard #13 be modified to state,
`Adequate hand washing and toilet facilities shall be provided for employees and patrons of the facility,
at all times. An office building and an Individual Sewage Disposal System shall be constructed when
there are full time employee stations on the site. Portable toilets may be utilized on the site to
accomplish this until an office building is utilized, whereupon an Individual Sewage Disposal System
shall be required,"and that Development Standard #14 be modified to state, "Upon construction of an
office and an Individual Sewage Disposal System, a permanent adequate water supply shall be
provided for drinking and sanitary purposes, and..." He stated the reason the applicant is requesting
the Development Standards be modified is because an office will not be on-site for 12 to 14 months.
Lauren Light, Department of Public Health and Environment, stated she had recommended the
language in proposed Development Standard #13 which stated, "An office building or an Individual
Sewage Disposal System shall be constructed when there are full time employee stations on the site,"
be changed to state, "An office building and an Individual Sewage Disposal System shall be
constructed when there are full time employee stations on the site,"and that the language in proposed
Development Standard #14 be changed from "Upon construction of an office or an Individual Sewage
Disposal System, a permanent adequate water supply shall be provided for drinking and sanitary
purposes, to state, "Upon construction of an office and an Individual Sewage Disposal System, a
permanent adequate water supply shall be provided for drinking and sanitary purposes." She stated
the reason she recommended the word "or"be changed to "and" in both of the proposed Development
Standards is because there will be no septic system without an office building. (Clerk's Note: Both of
the recommended changes described by Ms. Light appeared in the proposed Resolution.) Ms. Light
indicated it was agreed upon that when there are five (5) full-time employees, the office building will be
constructed; therefore, the word "five (5)" needs to be inserted before the words "full time employee
Minutes, February 28, 2011 2010-0586
Page 6 BC0016
stations" in Development Standard 13. In response to Commissioner Rademacher, Ms. Light clarified
there is no office on-site currently and there are no full-time employees stationed at the site.
Kristen Heinz, legal representative for A &W Water Service, Inc., stated the USR Permit was approved
for various uses, and the property includes a commercial water well and an existing residence, which
the applicant considered using as the office; however, everything changed with the CDOT requirements
concerning State Highway 60. She stated the site is a commercial well facility, as well as a
loading/unloading facility, and she requested the septic requirement be delayed until there are
employees at the site for long periods of time. Commissioner Rademacher inquired as whether there is
a timetable from CDOT for the highway construction. Ms. Heinz indicated she expects the construction
plans to be finalized by the end of the week.
Gary Wright, President of A & W Water Service, Inc., stated he intends to commence construction by
April 15, 2011. In response to Chair Kirkmeyer, Mr. Wright indicated he does not have a problem with
the recommendations made by Ms. Light. Chair Kirkmeyer gave the opportunity for public testimony;
however, none was provided. Commissioner Rademacher moved to approve said modified
Development Standards, as amended. Seconded by Commissioner Garcia, the motion carried
unanimously.
CONSIDER AMENDED RECORDED EXEMPTION #4439 - THOMAS AND STEPHANIE BENNETT:
Michelle Martin, Department of Planning Services, requested that both this and the following item of
business be called up for discussion at the same time. Chair Kirkmeyer called up the next item of
business for discussion in conjunction with this item. Ms. Martin indicated Section 24-8-20 of the Weld
County Code states, "A three-lot recorded exemption application may be submitted when contiguous
land ownership equals a minimum of one hundred twenty-two (122) acres. Remaining continuous
property must be included unless the remaining parcel equals at least eighty (80) acres; is a parcel
otherwise recognized as a complete half of quarter section; is a lot of an existing recorded exemption;
or is a parcel created prior to the initiation of subdivision regulations. Two (2) of the proposed parcels
shall be less complete than thirty-five (5) acres in size, and the third parcel must be at least one
hundred twenty (120) acres in size." She stated the Weld County Code allows a three (3) lot recorded
exemption when the third parcel is at least 120 acres in size, and the applicants are proposing to
reduce Lot C of 2nd Amended Recorded Exemption #3466 to 60 acres in size and the remaining
balance of Lot C will be absorbed by Lot B of Amended Recorded Exemption #4439. She stated
proposed Lot B of Amended Recorded Exemption #4439 will be approximately 123 acres in size.
Ms. Martin indicated there is a proposed realignment of the County Road 24, to connect with County
Road 22, and there are no improvements on the property other than oil and gas wells. In response to
Commissioner Rademacher, Ms. Martin confirmed the area in green on the overhead map is located
within the floodplain.
Heidi Hansen, Department of Public Works, concurred that the area in green is the floodplain and there
are concerns about that, which the applicants are aware of, and the applicants will need to have an
engineer complete a model. She stated the applicants are hoping to use Lot B for gravel mining, and
the proposed realignment of County Road 24, to connect with County Road 22, will travel through Lot B
and create an orphan parcel. She indicated her original referral comments requested that the
applicants address the orphan parcel; however, the alignment is conceptual and it has not been
surveyed; therefore, it seemed unfair to require the applicants to address the matter. She stated she is
now requesting that the applicants simply show the proposed alignment on the plat. Chair Kirkmeyer
inquired as to whether the realignment is proposed by the applicants or the County. Ms. Hansen
clarified there are no plans to construct County Road 24; however, it is the County's adopted alignment,
as opposed to the applicants' intentions.
Minutes, February 28, 2011 2010-0586
Page 7 BC0016
Mr. Hodges, representative for Thomas and Stephanie Bennett, as well as Carol Kuipers Living Trust,
indicated his clients are requesting a lot line adjustment between the aforementioned two (2) existing
recorded exemptions, and there is no clean way to amend the Recorded Exemption. He stated the
proposed amendment is the only way to complete the adjustment without creating another Recorded
Exemption, and the line delineated for Lot B is a natural land split along an abandoned mine.
Mr. Hodges stated the land swap is based on the existing railroad map, and it will help facilitate the
extension of County Road 24. He stated the property owners were not in agreement originally, since
they did not want the road to be constructed there; however, they are now open to a potential future
road, which can be negotiated at the time of development. He stated this is not evasion; it is the only
logical way to complete the adjustment without creating an additional parcel. In response to
Commissioner Conway, Mr. Hodges stated the finger shaped area in the map indicates the access
location if this Amended Recorded Exemption is approved. In response to Chair Kirkmeyer,
Ms. Hansen confirmed the access to proposed Lot B will be a shared access for the gravel operation.
She stated she has reviewed the proposed access points; however, the property owners will need to
apply for a permit. Chair Kirkmeyer inquired as to whether the proposed new access on County
Road 23 is a good location for the large gravel trucks to access the parcel, in addition to the applicants.
Ms. Hansen confirmed this is a good location for the gravel trucks to utilize, and she stated there was
an average daily traffic count of 1,403 vehicles on County Road 23 in the year 2008. She indicated
County Road 23 is considered a collector road, and it would become an arterial road after the new
alignment. Chair Kirkmeyer gave the opportunity for public testimony; however, none was provided.
Commissioner Rademacher moved to approve Amended Recorded Exemption #4439. Commissioner
Garcia seconded the motion. Chair Kirkmeyer stated she will support the motion because there are no
new buildable sites being proposed, and the new access will also be utilized for the gravel operation.
Chair Kirkmeyer indicated the floodplain will define the building envelope; therefore, it is not necessary
to add a related Development Standard, and the other Commissioners concurred. In response to Chair
Kirkmeyer, Mr. Hodges indicated the applicants find all of the Development Standards to be acceptable.
There being no further discussion, the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER SECOND AMENDED RECORDED EXEMPTION #3466 - CAROL KUIPERS LIVING
TRUST: Ms. Martin indicated the Board may want to remove Condition of Approval 3.A, based on
previous discussion, which states, "The applicant shall submit a proposed building envelope(s) for
Lot C to the Department of Planning Services for review. Upon approval by the Department of Planning
Services, the building envelope shall be delineated on the plat. Additional building envelopes shall be
labeled `alternative building envelope.' All building envelopes shall take into consideration impacts to
productive farm ground as well as the location of incompatible uses, flood plain, ditches, wetlands,
geological hazards, accesses, preferable locations, oil/gas easements and oil/gas structures which
must meet setbacks as required by Section 23-6-10 of the Weld County Code." She indicated
Condition of Approval 5.C also refers to the building envelope; therefore, the Board may want to
remove it from the notes required on the plat. Ms. Martin indicated Condition of Approval 5.C was on
the referral from the Department of Public Works; therefore, the Board may want to speak to a
representative from that Department, in order to make sure it is not problematic to remove the item.
Ms. Hansen indicated it would be acceptable to remove Condition of Approval 5.C. Mr. Barker
suggested the Board can just indicate it would like to eliminate all references to the building envelope
from the Resolution, and the Board indicated it was in favor of the suggestion. Mr. Hodges indicated
the applicants find the remaining Development Standards and Conditions of Approval to be acceptable.
Commissioner Garcia moved to approve Second Amended Recorded Exemption #3466, as amended,
with the removal of the references to the building envelope. Seconded by Commissioner Long, the
motion carried unanimously.
Minutes, February 28, 2011 2010-0586
Page 8 BC0016
FIRST READING OF CODE ORDINANCE #2011-2, IN THE MATTER OF REPEALING AND
REENACTING, WITH AMENDMENTS, CHAPTER 5 REVENUE AND FINANCE AND CHAPTER 20
ROAD IMPACT FEES, OF THE WELD COUNTY CODE: Elizabeth Relford, Department of Public
Works, stated the County contracted with a company to complete the Impact Fee Study, which was
completed in October, 2010. She stated multiple work sessions have been conducted from October,
2009, through January, 2011, and the intent of the proposed Ordinance is to combine drainage and
capital expansion into Chapter 20. Chair Kirkmeyer gave the opportunity for public testimony; however,
none was provided. Commissioner Rademacher moved to approve Ordinance #2011-2 on first
reading. Seconded by Commissioner Long, the motion carried unanimously.
FIRST READING OF CODE ORDINANCE #2011-3, IN THE MATTER OF REPEALING AND
REENACTING, WITH AMENDMENTS, CHAPTER 23 ZONING, CHAPTER 24 SUBDIVISIONS, AND
CHAPTER 26 RUA, OF THE WELD COUNTY CODE: Tom Parko, Department of Planning Services,
stated the proposed changes were approved by the Planning Commission and reviewed by the Board
in a work session. Chair Kirkmeyer gave the opportunity for public testimony; however, none was
provided. Commissioner Long moved to approve Ordinance #2011-3 on first reading. Seconded by
Commissioner Conway, the motion carried unanimously.
FIRST READING OF CODE ORDINANCE #2011-4, IN THE MATTER OF REPEALING AND
REENACTING, WITH AMENDMENTS, CHAPTER 29 BUILDING REGULATIONS, OF THE WELD
COUNTY CODE: Mr. Parko stated the proposed changes were approved by the Planning Commission
and reviewed by the Board at a work session. Chair Kirkmeyer gave the opportunity for public
testimony; however, none was provided. She inquired as to whether the Board needs any additional
works sessions scheduled for any of the three (3) Ordinances. Commissioner Long indicated he would
appreciate a work session for this Ordinance, in order to review the language and make sure it reflects
the intent of what was discussed in the previous work sessions. Mr. Barker stated the only change
being proposed for this Ordinance that was not discussed with the Board is a clarification of partial
vacation has been added to the Ordinance. Commissioner Conway moved to approve Ordinance
#2011-4 on first reading. Seconded by Commissioner Long, the motion carried unanimously.
RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES: The resolutions were presented and signed as listed on the
Consent Agenda. Ordinances#2011-2, #2011-3, and #2011-4 were approved on first reading.
Let the minutes reflect that the above and foregoing actions were attested to and respectfully submitted
by the Acting Clerk to the Board.
Minutes, February 28, 2011 2010-0586
Page 9 BC0016
There being no further business, this meeting was adjourned at 10:40 a.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLO DO
ATTEST: •��� `
•, { ��" a .ara Kirkmeyer, hair
Weld County Clerk to the • • - 69
• �irJr• ,' � can . Conway, Pro-Tem
BY: -ti
Deputy Clerk to the Board"
Will F. G cia
APP M: (D'CO\
David E. Long (
u ty A torney b„ L1
Douglas/Radema her
Minutes, February 28, 2011 2010-0586
Page 10 BC0016
Public Perceptions , Preferences and Values
for Water in the West
Selected Results from A Western Survey
James Pritchett, Alan Bright, Andrea Shortsleeve, Jennifer Thorvaldson, Troy Bauder and Reagan Waskom
Colorado State University
Overview
Irrigated agriculture is a primary water user in the prioritize household and agricultural water use over
western United States, but rapid population growth landscape watering. When addressing long-term
is driving a reallocation to urban areas. By 2030, an scarcity, respondents prefer reservoir construction and
estimated 33 million additional people are projected reuse systems over other acquisitions and, in particu-
to be living in the West, requiring approximately 30 lar, are not in favor of water transfers from agriculture.
billion more gallons of water for consumption (Western In order to pay for capital investments, respondents
Governors' Association, 2006). target increased fees for the heaviest
Water continues to move from water users and increased fees for
farms to cities, with expected and new development. Respondents are
sometimes unexpected results. The not averse to limiting growth and
social, economic and environmen- joining water and land use planning
tal results of these water transfers • in order to address long-term
are important yet are sometimes _ I;�,. scarcity.
not well understood. Growth and �� I'w ._.
'~: A majority of respondents are
subsequent water conflicts are often r T 61"4", t;r,+s, r:'*
focused in agricultural areas where .: willing to pay additional fees on
- -#1;c: ‘,t: their summer watering bill to
key water resources are fragile and � -- _-- • '��'�" �:`•• -�
scarce, as pointed out in the Bureau fund water related programs. The
of Reclamation's Water 2025 willingness to pay for pursuing
Report. • different long- and short-term water
r� management strategies is calcu-
The purpose of this study is to " ;'`� , a! lated. The least popular programs
benchmark the public's view of 4` ' ' .. ' "i . , ,' • include increasing household water
water reallocation issues with par- � ; efficiency by subsidizing efficient
ticular focus on households. An water appliances. Respondents
internet survey is used to gauge the public's percep- are in favor of household conservation, but are split
tions in the areas of water knowledge, perceived water on whether these programs should be voluntary or
scarcity, strategies for easing scarcity in the short and mandatory. Survey results suggest a preference for
long run, re-investment in rural communities that lose local control of household conservation standards; yet,
water as part of their economic base, household con- respondents do not feel they are well represented in
servation of water resources, preferences in public water policy and institutions. A vast majority support
policies and institutions, and attitudes about wildlife changes in current water law.
and water.
A number of other issues, including rural reinvest-
Survey responses from 6,250 individuals in the West ment options, the tradeoffs between the economy and
( 17 states) provide several water-related themes. First, environment, and water for wildlife are considered in
respondents generally believe that water is scarce in the study. A full version of the study can be found at:
the West, conditions are more difficult outside of their http://w . . • • • . - - . . ublications/sr/17. . df.
home state rather than within it and that scarcity will EXHIBIT CO1 '
increase in the future. In the short term, respondents Zi z eh /
pubic i ' p " i- Universi
Strategies for Securing Water Supplies
Short-Term Scarcity
At times, the states in the West have experienced temporary (less than 2 years) water shortages for a variety of
reasons.
If facing short-term scarcity, municipal water providers have several options for acquiring or stretching water
supplies. These options include:
C. Restricting the amount of water that can be used 5 . Restricting the amount of water that can be used
on private lawns and landscapes. by industry (e.g., commercial manufacturing,
mining, or power plants).
2. Restricting the amount of water that can be used
on public landscapes (e.g., parks and golf courses). 6. Draining reservoirs and lakes.
3 . Permanently transferring water from farms to the 7. Increasing water rates (bills) paid by private
city. households.
4. Temporarily renting water from farms to the city. 8. Putting a limit on water projects that help protect
wildlife and fish habitat.
Respondents' were asked to rank these strategies as the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd best strategy, and these response are
summarized in Figure 1 using the relative importance statistic.
Restricting outdoor watering is the preferred short-term strategy, as indicated by the left hand side of Figure 5 .
Permanent water transfers from farms to cities are the lowest ranked strategy, along with draining lakes, charging
higher water rates, and limiting habitat projects.
40 -f
35
30
25
c
c
8
20 ■ West
■ Colorado
S
3 15
a&
10
5
0 -�
Restrict Restrict Public Permanent Temporary Limit Industry Draining Lakes Higher Rates Limit Habitat
Private Watering Transfers Water Lease Projects
Watering
Figure 1. Relative rankings of strategies for meeting demand during short-term scarcity.
Long-Term Water Scarcity
As mentioned previously, respondents are keenly aware of the potential for long term water scarcity. In contrast to
short-term water strategies, the opportunities to develop water for long term use are more capital and construction
intensive and require long-term planning. Opportunities for meeting long-term scarcity include:
1 . Reusing waste water on private lawns and land- 5 . Requiring that households take steps to conserve
scapes (e.g., homes and private businesses). water (e.g., use low flow toilets ).
2. Reusing waste water on public landscapes (e.g., 6. Constructing pipelines.
parks and golf courses).
7. Reusing waste water, after it is treated, for use
3 . Building reservoirs and other storage projects. within the home.
4. Limiting the growth of cities to a level that is 8. Buying water from farmers.
supported by a sustainable water supply.
The 1st, 2nd, and 3rd best option for meeting long-term water needs were ranked by survey respondents as
indicated by Figure 2.
I
25
20 -7
`Irk\
V�`w
YY
Y 15 - I
aj
oc
11.1
to
c ■ West
a
E ill ID _ ■ Colorado
a 10
0
cv
ce
IP
5 ,„ IP _
i
Limit Growth Buy Water Build Construct Reuse on Reuse Water Reuse Water Require In-
of Cities from Farmers Reservoirs Piplelines Private Lawns in Homes on Public Home
Storage Landscapes Conservation
Figure 2. Relative ranking of long-term water strategies by survey respondents.
Among western respondents, the most popular strategies for meeting long-term needs are to build reservoirs
(relative ranking of 20%) and reuse water whether it is on private lawns (20%) or public landscapes ( 18%). The
least popular alternative is to buy water from farmers (3.2%). Colorado responses are presented in the red columns
and mirror the opinions of those in the West, although there is relatively more support for limiting growth and
relatively less support for buying water from farmers.
Each of the options listed in Figure 2 will require capital expenditures, and municipal water providers will be
charged with acquiring funds. Opportunities for funding include:
"1. Increase rates on all water bills. 5. Issue city or municipal district bonds.
2. Increase water rates for households that use more 6. Re-allocate funds from other parts of the city
water. budget to pay for water.
3 . Increase fees on new homes and new housing 7. Obtain subsidies from the federal government.
developments.
4. Increase water rates for new housing
developments.
J
Respondents were asked to rank the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd best options among these funding alternatives. The relative
importance rank of each alternative is presented in Figure 3.
Obtain Federal Govt. Subsidies
Reallocate City Budget Funds to Water
Issue Bonds
Increase Water Rates for New Housing ■ Colorado
■ West
Increase Fees on New Housing Development
Increase Water Rates Based on Use
Increase Rates on all Water Bills
711
/
0 5 10 15 20 25
Relative Importance Ranking (%)
Figure 3. Relative ranking of funding opportunities for long term water development.
Hello