Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20060545.tiff RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS MINUTES BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO FEBRUARY 22, 2006 TAPE #2006-07 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 22, 2006, 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 M. J. Geile, Chair Commissioner David E. Long, Pro-Tem Commissioner William H. Jerke Commissioner Robert D. Masden Commissioner Glenn Vaad Also present: County Attorney, Bruce T. Barker Acting Clerk to the Board, Jenny VanEgdom Director of Finance and Administration, Donald D. Warden MINUTES: Commissioner Jerke moved to approve the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners meeting of February 15, 2006, as printed. Commissioner Masden seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. CERTIFICATION OF HEARINGS: Commissioner Jerke moved to approve the Certification of Hearings conducted on February 14, 2006, as follows: 1) Violation Hearings; and Hearings conducted on February 15,2006: 1)CZ#1104-Jay and Sherrie Woods;2)USR#1536-Donald and Cheryl Hackett;and 3) PZ #1095 - Sonja Craighead, fka Sonja Stonestreet, c/o The Land Exchange, Attn: Mary Bartsow. Commissioner Long seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA: Chair Geile moved Item of Business#3, Consider Nonexclusive License Agreement for the Upgrade and Maintenance of WCR 39 Right-of-Way and authorize Chair to sign-Harlan and Susan Holsinger, to New Item of Business #8. PUBLIC INPUT: Ginny Shaw,City of Longmont resident,stated she is interested in preserving agricultural buffers between municipalities within southwest Weld County. Ms. Shaw stated another ballot initiative should be considered, since Boulder County, and the Towns of Longmont, Frederick, and Erie have expressed interest to preserve land along the Boulder Creek. She stated the ballot initiative should include purchase of development rights and conservation easements on agricultural properties. She further stated farmers and ranches have the alternative to sell their properties to developers; however, upon selling the development rights, a farmer would be allowed to keep the property, and it could remain in agricultural production. Ms. Shaw stated the Commissioners need to look forward to the future of Weld County, and 2006-0545 BC0016 D3 /3-Ob a moral obligation exists to protect the environment. Ms. Shaw submitted recent articles regarding agricultural buffers into the record, marked Exhibit A. John Folsom, resident of Weld County,stated the original ballot issue regarding conservation easements was introduced five years ago, and the Board was not entirely supportive of the ballot issue. Mr. Folsom stated the ballot issue did not have a chance to pass, since the citizens of the City of Greeley had recently turned down an open space ballot issue,and they represented approximately half of the voter turnout. He stated residents in rural Weld County did not understand why a sales tax was needed to conserve land; therefore, he recommended supporting a ballot initiative in which only the voters located Southwest Weld County could vote,where the preservation is most needed. He further stated the funds obtained from the sales tax should only be applied to land preservation in Southwest Weld County,where the tremendous growth is happening. Mr. Folsom stated Boulder County is participating in the efforts to preserve land since Weld County is not raising money for conservation easements; however, no land has been obtained to serve as buffers. He stated the Towns of Firestone, Frederick,and Erie have provided funds for the building of a trail system; however,Weld County has not provided any funds for the potion of the trail placed in the unincorporated sections of the County. He further stated private funding is not obtainable in the amount needed to provide for open space. He stated the Southwest Weld County 1-25 Corridor Study has emphasized economic development, and competition exists between the markets in Southwest Weld and Northern areas of the County;however,the Study has not provided for open space. Mr. Folsom stated he would prefer the issue to be placed before the voters as a Referendum,and read a Times-Call editorial into the record. He stated once land is gone, it is gone forever, and residents must preserve the nature of the County for future generations. Sharon Soucier, wildlife biologist and resident of Weld County, stated she is concerned about the rapid growth in Southwest Weld County,and she would like to see at least twenty percent of the land in that area preserved. She stated the United States Department of Agriculture,Soil Conservation Service, defines the soils in this area of the County as wetlands and prime farm land, which should be conserved for future generations. She further stated a significant amount of land should be set aside for the preservation of specific animal species which thrive in the area, and buffer zones are needed to protect wildlife. Ms. Soucier stated the Board needs to act now to preserve the wetlands,since the land cannot be brought back once it is destroyed. Ralph Soucier, resident of Weld County, stated he is concerned about the lack of buffer space between communities. He stated the Southwest area of the County is developing into an urban sprawl, and it is losing the feeling of a rural community. He further stated the massive growth has many negative effects, including the lack of planning for roads and schools. Mr. Soucier stated the residents in rural areas want access to open space, and the County should consider a better comprehensive plan for expansion. Artie Elmquist,resident of Weld County,stated he is concerned about the County's Mixed Use Development plan, and it is not appropriate for the County to consider the Saint Vrain Lakes development proposal until the MUD study is completed. In response to ChairGeile,Mr. Barker stated specifics regarding an upcoming land use proposal should be given at the time of the land use hearing, and not during Public Input. Mr. Elmquist clarified that the County should not consider any development proposals until completion of the MUD study. He stated two mill levy overrides have been defeated by voters of the Saint Vrain School District, and there is a proposed ballot issue for the Mountain View Fire Protection District, to ensure adequate fire protection is available in the area. He further stated infrastructure and services provided to high-density developments are difficult to provide without significant property tax increases. CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Long moved to approve the consent agenda as printed. Commissioner Masden seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. Minutes, February 22, 2006 2006-0545 Page 2 BC0016 PRESENTATIONS: RECOGNITIONOF SERVICES,SHERIFF'S OFFICE-DAVID MALCOM: Chair Geile read the certificate into the record, recognizing David Malcom for 28 years of service with the Weld County Sheriffs Office. Rick Dill,Sheriffs Office, accepted the award on behalf of Mr. Malcom, and stated Mr. Malcom was a very dedicated employee,and always had the interests of the public in mind. Mr. Dill expressed his appreciation to Mr. Malcom for his work ethic and dedication. COMMISSIONER COORDINATOR REPORTS: There were no Commissioner Coordinator Reports. WARRANTS: Donald Warden, Director of Finance and Administration, presented the following warrants for approval by the Board: All Funds $694,532.84 Electronic Transfers - All Funds $1,508.56 Commissioner Masden moved to approve the warrants as presented by Mr.Warden. Commissioner Long seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. BIDS: PRESENT 2006 TRAFFIC PAINT AND PAINT BEADS BID- DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS: Pat Persichino, Director of General Services, read the names of the nine vendors who submitted a bid into the record. Said bid will be considered for approval on March 8, 2006. PRESENT SIGN FACING AND MATERIAL BID FOR 2006 - DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS: Mr. Persichino read the names of the thirteen vendors who submitted a bid into the record. Said bid will be considered for approval on March 8, 2006. ACTION OF BOARD CONCERNING HAULING GRAVEL(CONTRACTTRUCKS)BID-DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS: Mr. Persichino stated staff recommends rejecting the bid, and a new bid will be completed with the Board's approval. Commissioner Jerke moved to reject said bid, based upon staffs recommendation. Seconded by Commissioner Masden, the motion carried unanimously. APPROVE CATTLE GUARDS BID - DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS: Mr. Persichino stated staff recommends acceptance of low bid from Big R Manufacturing, LLC, for a total cost of $42,020.00. Commissioner Jerke moved to approve said bid, based upon staff's recommendation. Seconded by Commissioner Long, the motion carried unanimously. APPROVE 2006 STEEL BID - DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS: Mr. Persichino stated staff recommends acceptance of the low bid or sole bid for each item, as follows: Big R Manufacturing for corrugated metal pipe; DBE Manufacturing for corrugated plastic pipe; Big R Manufacturing for structural plate pipe; Norfolk Iron and Metal for steel angles and tubing; DBE Manufacturing for steel piling; Norfolk Iron and Metal for channel iron; DBE Manufacturing for sign posts and fabricated guard rail post; DBE Manufacturing for guard rail,guard rail ends,and curved guard rail sections; DBE Manufacturing for tubular guard rail; J.D. Fields and Company for sheet piling; DBE Manufacturing for steel bridge deck and cattle guard cross bars; DBE Manufacturing for fencing; and Foothills Concrete Pipe for concrete products. Commissioner Masden moved to approve said bid, based upon staffs recommendations. Seconded by Commissioner Jerke, the motion carried unanimously. Minutes, February 22, 2006 2006-0545 Page 3 BC0016 NEW BUSINESS: CONSIDER PURCHASE OF SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR MIGRANT/SEASONAL HEAD START PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN-MARILLAC DENTAL CLINIC: Walt Speckman, Director of Human Services,stated Marillac Dental Clinic will provide dental services to enrolled Head Start children on the Western Slope. He stated the clinic will charge$15.00 to screen each child, and the clinic accepts reimbursement through Medicaid. Commissioner Long moved to approve said agreement and authorize the Chair to sign. Seconded by Commissioner Jerke, the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDER FOOD DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT FOR THE COMMODITY SUPPLEMENTAL FOOD PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN: Mr. Speckman stated the agreement defines the responsibilities and requirements governing the Commodity Supplemental Food Program. Commissioner Long moved to approve said agreement and authorize the Chair to sign. Seconded by Commissioner Masden, the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDER NONEXCLUSIVE LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR THE UPGRADE AND MAINTENANCE OF WCR 21 RIGHT-OF-WAY AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN - RICHARD BURD: Don Carroll, Department of Public Works, stated the agreement is a replacement for an agreement from 1977. He stated the property has been sold,and the new buyerdesires to utilize the agreement from 1977 to access the landlocked parcel. In response to Commissioner Jerke, Mr. Carroll stated there are no pending land use proposals associated with the property. Commissioner Jerke moved to approve said agreement and authorize the Chair to sign. Seconded by Commissioner Long, the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDER PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OR REFUND OF TAXES-GLACIER, LLC: Mike Sampson, Assessor's Office, stated the property is a small parcel that was part of a large purchase, and the property is encumbered by a long-term cell tower lease. He stated the value of the property is very minimal until the tower is removed. In response to Commissioner Masden, Mr. Sampson stated the size of the property is approximately one acre. In response to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Sampson stated Glacier, LLC, is not generating any income or interest from the cell tower. Further responding to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Sampson stated the company may be able to redevelop the piece of property in the future, to generate income. Commissioner Long moved to approve said petition. Seconded by Commissioner Vaad, the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDER PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OR REFUND OF TAXES-TERENCE RITZMAN: Mr.Sampson stated denial of the petition is recommended. He stated the property is a food court located in West Greeley, and the value of the property is currently $797,500. He stated a sale was completed in 2002, during the base period, at a price of$826,000, and the petitioner states that the property cannot generate more than $275,000. He further stated no justification exists to approve an abatement for that period of time. In response to Chair Geile, Mr. Sampson stated the income approach was utilized at the time of the valuation, and the petitioner used the valuation figures at the time the property was purchased. Commissioner Vaad moved to deny said petition. Seconded by Commissioner Jerke,the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDER PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OR REFUND OF TAXES-COLORFUL AVENUE,LTD., C/O PROPERTY TAX ADVISORS,INC.: Mr.Sampson stated denial of the petition is recommended. He stated the 2004 value was$9.5 million, and the property was purchased in 2000 for$11 million. He stated the property is located in the south part of the County, and the current value is $80.00 per square foot. He further stated the value of the property was lowered 2005,since circumstances changed considerably.Mr. Sampson stated Colorful Avenue has gone out of business, and the building will be placed on the market for sale;however,the building was fully operational at the time of the petition. He further stated the property owners appealed to the Board of Assessment Appeals in 2003, and the petition was withdrawn by the Minutes, February 22, 2006 2006-0545 Page 4 BC0016 company. Commissioner Long moved to deny said petition. Seconded by CommissionerJerke,the motion carried unanimously. CONSI DE RAPPOI NTMENTS TO AREAAGENCY ON AGING ADVISORY BOARD: Commissioner Vaad moved to appoint Mary Pat Eastwood,Josephine Sanchez,and Kenneth Whitney, and to reappointAdella Andrijeski and George Phil Shovar to the Area Agency on Aging Advisory Board, with terms to expire January 31, 2009. Seconded by Commissioner Long, the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDER NONEXCLUSIVE LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR THE UPGRADE AND MAINTENANCE OF WCR 39 RIGHT-OF-WAY AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN - HARLAN AND SUSAN HOLSINGER: Mr.Carroll stated the applicants are creating a four-lot Recorded Exemption,and access to the properties will be from Weld County Road 39, north of Weld County Road 24, for the length of one mile. He stated Weld County Road 39 is not maintained by the County;therefore, the applicants were requested to enter into a Nonexclusive License Agreement. He further stated several Recorded Exemptions occurred on adjacent properties in the early 1990's, before the Nonexclusive License Agreements were required. Mr. Carroll stated the Recorded Exemption was conditionally approved by the Department of Planning Services in September 2005, conditional upon the applicant to completing an agreement. He stated he received correspondence from the applicant's attorney on September22,2005,stating the applicants would not sign the agreement due to the liability and financial burden. He further stated staff worked to modify the agreement to meet the concerns of the applicant; however,no agreement has been reached,therefore,the issue has been brought to the Board for a decision. Lee Morrison, Assistant County Attorney,stated the discussion demonstrates the complications of trying to use the agreement when there is already use of the right-of-way. Mr.Carroll stated he provided a copy of the proposed agreement with the additional verbage added by the applicant, marked Exhibit A. Mr. Morrison stated some the proposed changes could stand; however,there is concern from staff that the agreement deviates from the standard form. He further stated the road is a public right-of-way,and if the agreement is revoked, members of the public cannot be stopped from using the right-of-way. Toni Thieman, real estate agent representing the applicants, provided a package of information regarding the property into the record, marked Exhibit B. Ms. Thieman stated the primary concern of the applicant is the liability that will be placed upon them, and the Department of Planning Services recommended presenting a revised agreement to the County Attorney's Office. She stated the applicants presented their version of the agreement on November 29, 2005, and it was their understanding that the version was approved through Mr.Carroll. She further stated the County Attorney's Office added some changes to the agreement, which concerned the applicants regarding the provision of indemnification. She stated the applicant's legal counsel recommended that the agreement not be signed. Ms. Thieman stated Weld County Road 39 is not maintained by the County;however,the traffic volume is heavier than most people realize. She stated an abundance of oil and gas traffic utilize the road, as well as the seven property owners within the one-mile stretch between Weld County Roads 24 and 26. She further stated the road has been maintained through cooperation of the seven property owners utilizing the road,without problems to date. She stated the applicants believe that 15 to 20 trucks, and approximately 100 to 200 vehicles utilize Weld County Road 39 on a weekly basis. She further stated the applicants are concerned there is no control over utilization of the road; therefore, the liability imposed upon the applicants is unreasonable. Ms.Thieman stated the applicants request approval of the agreement which eliminates the liability provision, and agree to all other aspects of the agreement. She stated many vehicles use the road as a shortcut,and the liability issue would be unfair to the applicant, since it involves a financial risk. Mr. Morrison stated Weld County Road 39 is not maintained by the County, and the language in the agreement states that the party maintaining the road assumes responsibility for the road. He stated more than one user will utilize this stretch of the road; however, Department of Public Works staff did not feel it was appropriate to remove the condition until the Board had knowledge of the situation. Ms. Thieman Minutes, February 22, 2006 2006-0545 Page 5 BC0016 provided a determination of tax revenues within the area, and the Recorded Exemption will bring in an estimated $6,000.00 per year in tax revenues. She further stated that if Weld County Road 39 ended at Weld County Road 26, the applicants would not be opposed to the liability issues. In response to Commissioner Jerke, Mr. Morrison stated the Nonexclusive License Agreement is written to assume that the road is being constructed by the applicant; however,the applicant is simply maintaining what is already in place. He stated the property owners within the area are performing the functions of the road,and oil and gas interests participate as well. He further stated the applicants are the new party, and the other parties have not entered into a formal agreement. Commissioner Jerke stated the road is in decent condition, and the agreement should be treated like all other agreements. Ms. Thieman stated the applicant's draft of the agreement has completely removed the language of Condition#4,and in the revised edition from the County Attorney's office placed the language back into the agreement. In response to ChairGeile,Ms.Thieman stated the applicants are requesting that Condition#4 be removed from the agreement. In response to Commissioner Jerke, Mr. Barker stated the language regarding liability is standard for the Nonexclusive License Agreement. Ms.Thieman stated she intends to sell three of the lots as the applicant's realtor,and she is concerned that future property owners will not want purchase the property due to the liability issues involved. In response to Commissioner Jerke, Mr. Barker stated the agreement may be assigned to the individual which owns the property; however, there is no incentive for the new owner to take over the agreement. Further responding to Commissioner Jerke, Mr. Barker stated the agreement is a license that is granted by the Board, and it cannot run with the land since it can be terminated or absolved at any time by the Board. He further stated the first owner may sell the property, and absolve themself of the liability related to the agreement, since they no longer own the property. In response to Chair Geile, Mr. Barker stated language included in the agreement regarding the applicant holding the County free from negligence, is standard language. He further stated that Colorado law provides that the County has immunity to liability on maintained roadways;however,upon licensing the road to another party, it is not certain that the party performing the maintenance has immunity. Commissioner Jerke moved to approve said agreement,with no modifications, and authorize the Chair to sign. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Vaad. Commissioner Vaad stated no compelling evidence exists for the deletion of the liability portion. He stated a sign on Weld County Road 39 identifies that the road is not a through road, and the applicants will not be the point of liability if an accident were to occur on the road. Commissioner Masden stated the County has entered into hundreds of Nonexclusive License Agreements, and no issues have resulted from any of the previously approved agreements. He stated approving an agreement outside of the standard format would cause future problems. Commissioner Long stated he is in agreement with the comments expressed. He stated the agreement serves an awareness purpose, and striking the liability language doe not preclude lawsuit regarding accidents. There being no further discussion, the motion carried unanimously. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES: The resolutions were presented and signed as listed on the consent agenda. No Ordinances were approved. Minutes, February 22, 2006 2006-0545 Page 6 BC0016 • Let the minutes reflect that the above and foregoing actions were attested to and respectfully submitted by the Acting Clerk to the Board. There being no further business, this meeting was adjourned at 10:30 a.m. 0,aa , BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS fie. ,4' I / 7* WELD C , COLORADO ATTEST: ailed 1. ' rIA dkr ' �j Weld County Clerk to the Board 'I C' CdN ctnivr �j '` David E. Long, Pro-Tem• �` BY.D u C k to the Boar ®1.1 '111"/ Willi M. Jerke UAL- RoberV. ,asderl� riA Glenn Vaad //� - Minutes, February 22, 2006 2006-0545 Page 7 BC0016 Zongino'-f 77ifies £/( - ate, 0,6 ollit)O,--it,aa c-, (/ . B i der Coup y asks Longmont to help with open space i in Weld By Brad Turner , + ,ell " While lade n t The Daily Tunes-Call wM t ow `��.. leaders made n0 , " f 1� eoµfder county • promises about Par- t Boulder County corn- op8n spec@ i. ticipating in the pro- missioners want * ject, conserving the Longmont Longmont to shell out Parks'open space property would likely as much as$500,000 to 4", d r rr+ " 9 a be in the city's inter- t, preserve a patch of �-' ," mtmrewr�-. est — and similar to I SPACE. open space along /f, f other open space �J .A_ L Boulder Creek in �'m" a deals the city has Weld County. ,t 1 made on its eastern . + MC ortHnued from Al. The$2.8 million ac- t ' r . K"+° edge, city adminis- - ' quisition would pre- a" ` •, : j trator Gordon ' land. If they agree to the con: serve more than 300 "" .I 1/4','"II,,,' u" F' °'- `I Pedrow said Thurs- „ ,(00 ' ,i day. . vauon easement, they would acres of creek habitat , „ ,Tale r !S "We allowed to build just six hon and help augment an ,"r' 2jy , „] I ta� " We have open while preserving a mile am open space buffer be- So b: of space land as a ,i half of lnd alon the creek. areas fast-growing i buffer at various lo- Consultants hired by the W areas in wen -' "a w v ,Let"'afb TM cations on the east County commissioners County and southwestru- "' ' i boundary," Pedrow studying the possibility of all( Weldral along r ,r i said. "We have a ing 90 square miles of urb County Line farmland Road. ,r 11° I . t r,,/;;;40,+ s„ strong interest in pre- density growth nearby, on 1 serving the Vra "It's a remarkable - » p wn west side of Interstate bl T ^+^� greenway co{rtder wildlife corridor," Boulder Countyproject would help establish Commissioner Ben Proposed could chi in u to$ rural buffer between Longmc Pearlman said Mon- conservation area p p and the De]Camino area. million to buy the day during a meeting conservation ease- Brad tamer can be ached. at between the commis- ease- Times-Call graphic 720-494-5420,or 1, email at sioners and Long- • City Council agenda/B5 said. Pearlman bmmer@ imascau.eom. moat City Council said.Open space ply- cials are also apply- members. "There's a ing for grant money lot of functional wetlands and some good to help offset the purchase. lakes." Frederick town leaders say they sup- County officials will accept any money port the project but haven't pledged any Longmont offers to fund the project, money yet.Erie leaders are also consider- Pearlman said. ing putting money toward the easement. The council will consider helping to buy Currently, the Williams family has the the conservation easement and consider right to build as many as-36 homes on the public comment on the matter at its 7 p.m.Tuesday session at 350 Kimbark St. •See SPACE/A3 Inside & Outside Dl Classifieds BI Front Range C4 Scoreboard CS Comics 88 Frontiers Cl Sports BS Community B4 Horoscope 84 Sudoku Partly to mostly cloud 83 Cone Zones B4 Movies AS T-C Line High: 34 LOW- 84 Crossword 83 Obituaries 65 Television B4 Dear Abby A4 Opinion - A2 Things to Do Complete forecast on Page 0 EXHIBIT let,C<,w,,,,,ait4 '° CREEK: ■Continued from Al *h ly's plan to build 36 homes on I But •Boulder County their property. I Boulder County has no reason to open space r Boulder County proposes to move any farther east, Doering +�:" Stongmont buy the development rights on 30 said. ikk f parks open space 1 of those lots as part of the con- "I think it's far outside their r Wit, ,gym servation easement, influence area,"he said. • r „ ° r. Though Boulder County will Boulder County officials have . a pitch in some funds, it still will strategically bought scattered Itt „�7+ need grant money" to make the land and easements on more t i fial°:(Q, estimated $2.75 million project than 83,000 acres, and that has .' 14t iq b " * work. I slowed or stopped growth, even rr : ' iv 4-r The county is applying for I on surrounding properties with- i s ',Ink', - Great Outdoors Colorado and out easements. •s ii, pc,, Farm and Ranchland Protection Frederick, one of the ` (F. grants to pay for a significant fastest-growing towns in the state, I, FF portion of the property. Officials wants to use open space to pre- :14 , +yp r . g,, ,. also hope to get Longmont,Fred- serve key natural corridors,such fyk '+' erick and any other municipality as Boulder Creek, rather than that wants a stake in the project putting a damper on growth. ay " to help out with funding. "It shouldn't be used as a ham- The proposal complements mer to control land-use planning v ...�. ( ! Longmont's Wildlife-manage- and growth,"Doering said. ment plan and open space and But Boulder County Open Proposed trails master plan,which identi- Space director Ron Stewart said conservation area fy Boulder Creek as a valuable his department has no such corridor. plans for Weld County. Times-Call graphic Frederick's master planning, "Little, scattered holdings is which covers the east side of not the idea here,"he said. Boulder Creek, has similar Boulder County wants to help Creek goals. preserve land between County I'm excited to see that hap Line Road and Boulder Creek, pen; it's a mile and a half of and that's it,Stewart said. Boulder Creek,".said Dan Wol- I Boulder County already has `buffer' ford, that is open space and helped place Weld conservation ease- trails superintendent, although ments on two Weld County prop- erties added that city officials still erties in that area: 160 acres on need to decide if they want to the Meglemre property and 75 participate financially in the acres on the Hodges property. for Cites project. Longmont rva has purceasemased ents Frederick Mayor Eric Doer- land or conservation easements ing agrees that it's a positive on nearly 1,500 acres surround- ,project, but he issued a caution ing the St. Vrain River, running as well. toward Boulder Creek. Frederick, Longmont "The In Greeley, Weld County com- biggest missioners have no qualms have similar goals "Tile biggest benefit is about Boulder County's interest benefit is the the in preserving farmland on their By Douglas Crowl preserva- side of the county line. The Daily Times-Call preservation of tion of "I can't see us having a prob- lb the leaders of the area surround- the Boulder the Boul- lem with it, Weld County Com- ,a Weld County stretch of land along der missioner Mike Geile said. ingCreek corridor Creek On the other hand, he said, Boulder Creek, Boulder County's pro- posal to protect the parcel is mostly and creating corridor Weld County's support goes only good news. and cre- so far. But beyond protection pf the valued the buffer acing the "I don't see us coining forward buffer be- with financial" assistance (for riparian corridor,Frederick hopes that between urban tween ur- open space) ...but then again,you Boulder Creek is a line in the sand for development ban de- don't know until you have a pro- Boulder County open space forays into velop- posal come before us,"Geile said. its back yard. that may occur ment that Boulder County has agreed to work I Douglas Crowi can be reached at in Frederick may oc- 303684-5253,or by e-mail at with landowners Les Williams and cur in dcrowl�imescall.Corn Martha Nelson-Williams to attempt to and urban Freder- place a conservation easement on development itl ick and most of their 357-acre property. urban de- In 2002, Frederick placed a conser- Longmont." velop- vation easement onAa small portion of I meat in the land along B der Creek. But the ! Frede ck Mayo Lon - town also applies.W the Williams fami- - Eric Doering wont,"he 81 See CREEK/A3 said. .3m � �a� � �£ a �£ £ Row a rrederlck ya gy° D.m C]"01 o:0 F.rC .w-.aAv a P�G. o o'C7 o N .:O a. 0t 10 G.� O O O (D a .o 0.-. 0'06 w u y0 wcN,, �� �5q° 07a�� a N05o m ��oC � CD ponderso., o om w o �, " a£ o om row iii 'p G. O y m� ma500S0o yjzI 50 "„ ,aa, D .M. O n land- E w .e a °�' ' °' �,a °' na`� F+ o.al °.c.o� _•owa t° ., CD o m �'°ona ]-b oaa o m 'o po (7-OW7" 5 C5- wx'w 91 CL m'oo o < a0 proposal o a c 'w+ m c�D cNm £' 5 �.�'a m Tm o �.� C. .no aY a � u,." 7� 0A'o ,< maw off' �� '� � C1,00 /� C-C ID b-“0" w' a n AC, m"%N'ti 0l0 D1 wa'N ON,CD croon Os 71 ."4� -, m '6 m . �'^. ti 8 ^'a o c m a a`D o 5's< 0 " a Boulder County.f w asON$ �wom�� R il y £ a £ y $�a"a�awwC � wants °' O�,.-. ^ oao.00 �D' cp, n ~mbwma5m m5dca'c5 5.2 ( p � /� to preserve oa To `-' cr:d coo 1".w '-'m s'.tm .a, y a°w m < < " ci•-"0 n0 a' l 1 c`�1�e� lll Weld , w R "' m o o a `Gb o��8 ° a "o, m':R °�'� ❑y-a� a• o.w o y c n:� a By Douglas CroW1 ` to c.D g S:5 5'x cn w i Q,a•o czi-0 g.— m a a y'o va "a"oG m n The Daily Times-Call a n`J o _e- a'B a O " a `8D y s m P' m` w m w ^-£ o m FREDERICK—Boulder County of- E,.n m o c y m o a m 5,5 ° T y ficials have asked the town of Freder- o ' £ 5�ncrq o o o m ° o 5 Et s�n , ti ick to endorse a plan to preserve agri- a w Po ti. a a; �' w I " a a ^ •- o cultural land on Boulder Creek in Weld g a°-z 2- m c�i,a m=p,..._'a� -5 Q� �e s, o `n 5.aa g-5 I m �' County. a s -, w w o a co They also want the'town to abandon p;a o x R .b s o Cr a+ c'°. o^x £ £ < o a"a w C plans to annex the parcel, which is a . o= m o. ro m cos.• 5.O a m a m m t:1:15 Pa Q planned for a small subdivision. a a,a a£ x w - o o a o cn ❑ E b F� The Frederick Board of Trustees 00-a < 0 B o o c.".< N.• o,a "n o y a " y w ,-n .5.•° a•o ^'a unanimous] voted to support Boulder ` m " to o.£.c w or o ^ova ro ^o a£'"'a °' County's plan Thursday night, but the - 0 < c " a.o s- o o a a o m m o y s-n o ' b board will wait to decide if it would w �.a'aa A w O '-' p 5 o c n�c m 0 a N-m c c 0 d it_x m a w r y back out on annexing the property. o TD a o o n w a °a • o o y e o a c The board also wasn't ready to com- p £ o q o : a —- a m^0 m a 3.�.o mit to pitching in on the estimated l wa`m'w m as m ua o,w a w ti a, -, $2.75 million cost to preserve the land - 0 w 9N° o ° F^c o m o 0 0 blg by buying the development rights and a a o a w a,at '-o o y g n a " " 1.3 p acing a conservation easement on a."'"0 m,o, y tea co ao ,-.E0 0 a a.°'.5.�:^ o e �'s,bthe land. moo .1 • Les Williams and Martha Nelson- , m m a„.3 a x x a-c r.m w .o z a d Williams own the property, a 357-acre 1 ro .-“D o 0 0 0 -, ,.y a a a 9 ty s,v " o v,i --- � (,fl parcel just south of Weld County Road 1 a £ w n iu o a - a efi w o m w ^0 o w w o 20/x on the west side of Boulder Creek 1 ma 5-.o ,_c a y ,•-• .b 8 ac<a"a „ `"'. m" n.m n ❑ ao'vaaw' y 5. �,.,a5 " owm �0a, CaaCPA= N5maow D See LAND/A3 m '"rt w m o 1:2•Z = ° - !"r y• m 0 I.G w ^_,o .a+m a .b�' c O w o�O O a a+ £' a a O a N w o P,w 'a 0 m £ e y 9 >c a a �b 'e ny ° eu Its - a :jo w0 . t< �-, o o5 o ", wa �J r 5a � £ a-. a?tc a5b am o £ o Acpa'ao cDc a .-s aao w oo < ' TO Dc'ma g 5-I-to c ws. oa N'-' o,w"-. G o `0 O. a wCL c42-o;" a 0 0 a` Eroo a d A, y CD ?..;'< 5 P y<y o m y72 am Cm n c ED x g Z1C `D _�,s as -at 0, wa.m 1.R.8 ,,-.08.4 a'°-".`"'.`y°y _ fl0) I3 a �ci,� w mow c.o jack, ,to ma a.w a 0 hw- oao a'O roam £ w00aw £.ya.yia as co a s ^ E o h- a o a g a'w'g .o o aa' �o 0— ' ao 0 0 w (�ap r- S ' m O O aaP4 to o5 a "a , a 3 D2' "na-.X R.2 N aaa r� m m EDE<.G..W-. y w ^•o n a 0. a o m a.CL E- w w<0C va,coo 5 '''5 10D ' T m m " w m ii 'o o N ai kO " m yagd as amgC. ;'*O N "+.£ O y.0., n O £ a'≤ 04 a s .a' 5- a b'aY e+ a'] H0y VocgDp' w /0,767490C) da-te kOL ice iO2 Making tough choices O Local farmers protest that the Fu- ture of agriculture in the area is en- C dangered by urban growth,which rt makes farming less feasible for a number of economic,infrastructure and compatibility reasons. Farmers claim they are dedicated to their farming heritage,even in the face of farming's alleged lack of fi- nancial viability,low commodity prices,vagaries of weather and other risks. That is,until their land becomes the target for development and the value of their land escalates expo- nentially from an agriculture use to an urban use.Then,typically,her- itage and way of life considerations take a back seat to dollars. The farmer must decide whether to stand fast,sell the land,become a developer or take the conservation easement route.Sell the land and run is the simplest choice. Developing the land offers an op- portunity for profits from both the land and improvements. However,conservation easements seem to offer the best of both worlds. The farmer profits from the money he gets from dedicating the conser- vation easement and still has the use of the land,living on and working it - as before. It also eliminates the specter of raising cash to pay an estate tax, which has hung over owners of farm property,except that capital gain taxes must be paid. Once sold or conserved,the oppor- tunity for the farmer and his descen- dants to profit from further appreci- ation in land value is lost. This is important if the profits from sale of,or an easement on,the land are spent or cannot be invested so as to bring gains comparable to just letting its value appreciate. Lastly,the farmer must ask him- self if the heritage of the land, that his antecedents have laboriously cre- ated and passed on to him,should not be preserved for the benefit of his de- scendants. JOHN FOLSOM r r Longmont 6'Ve0 C Weld EDITORIAL BOARD iv,' II'• JIM El5BERRY Publisher 1 r 392-4401•el5berryCa�greeleytrib.com * RANDY BANOFRT Managing editor • �, a •392-4436•bangert®greeleytrib.com a '- vt .4i++ KELLY ANN TRACER Assistant managing editor a ,- _ •Ext.11249•tracer®greeleytrib.com 1= :=". ( i�� t + KIM SPENCER City editor •392-4467•spencer®greeleytrib.com * NANCY NEMEC Opinion page editor pry. +u�..�, .. � � � •392-4470•nemec@9reeleytrib.com • E-mail letters and columns to:letters@greeleytrlb.com rid tt r_7 0 mail , - , Parking ticket shows downtown between municipalities,and keep"fresh air" in the area for our future generations. • Greeley is not customer-friendly Yes,the ballot did fail when presented several years ago in Weld.Now we see the My parking ticket represents one of the county as well as the surrounding munici- reasons downtown Greeley retail and palities grabbing ground on top of each restaurants have died.To have a city other for development.It will take serious employee running through the parking lots, work on part of both the county and the wandering through the streets with a skin- municipalities to correct this situation. ny hockey stick marking tires, shows the There is a variety of programs that could be attitude and cultural thinking of the local established in addition to conservation city government.No customer vision! easements. The Greeley Tribune's Jan.15 Web site The farmers and ranchers who are left in poll question addressed if changes are this area need another alternative rather needed to Greeley's city image.What do than to sell to the"high density" developer you think the remaining retails and restau- when they need to sell their ground.We rants feel seeing their businesses go down need to rethink our long-range goals of the financial slide.Downtown Greeley is what this part of the county will look like not customer-friendly. for future generations and start now to pro- In the future,I will spend my buying dol- tect it.We need your help in achieving this lays in Evans,Loveland,Fort Collins, goal. VIRGINIA SHAW Windsor and Denver.No haHSsles there.AROLD SMITH Longmont Johnstown City of Greeley needs to put in Better land preservation needed crosswalk near hospital, clinic to protect southwest Weld After the recent tragedy of Dr.David There is one area that is being seriously Manning,I feel compelled to write this let- overlooked jn the$500,000,study of growth ter petitioning the readers to join me in get- in southwest,Weld County, that is to ting the city to put up a crosswalk from the of land develop a program of land?!reservation. Greeley Medical Clinic to the hospital. Serious land preservation,not just the 10 There are many wonderful doctors, med- percent or so that developer's leave in a ical assistants and personnel working in the development.Rather than have a future area across the street from the hospital. area the size of Los Angeles in southwest They do not have time to walk the block to Weld,we need to develop ways to preserve and from the crossover;their time is valu- farming, save wildlife,keep land buffers able and a precious commodity to the peo- ' li 1 c 1 'o G v [ 3 4 3x3 m c/� I �1/ 6 a �8 3 d c sa, �.'Nt , ' CIi!Uit11&tiEff y 0 = 't 0 r' � ^ bO tC ce. �.`�. �c�y\IJ �.S M 3 °pp°a:y -'oy{. t/4 2 r ! i „. :Qt_ ct , Fa o4' Gw. "� _:: r r ,. Al ) 'd m c3 �rg "'.c''S 53ari °' yy N.��^. co f �L/ Q� ii ,X PE E _ I �1 t0v � 8a, �oMa,Goo�3R' • .0 ._..a.Q �'il m v 6:; ❑ ^ � �, aim`. Soy 3,. .• ;-02.,' U eimi! 1) �, 0 C W'G � C ,' U CJ A mo a`"i 0 tE -aii 2E •dm yak t &e ' Mark Schell I'A��r1�T� ' o stands on hisLF�'LL1J1�Ja „A-N 93 acres el1-i Q1 41,1f land off Weld Continued from Al fin, " m `� .; County Road N rr , t4: a . Mead um sells for$12,000 to$12,500 an ±-, s d�� ¢ " , ° r officials have h 'ere. .a.. �' j cjjjj It r 1 always said But looking realistically at the ; �x they'd like to 1 'tom ,':' reserve the remendous growth in southwest ,,u. P Weld County,Schell doesn't want agricultural a ig prices; he wants the kind of feel of the money he thinks his land is s " community j worth to a developer — around and dedicate $22,000 an acre: more 'arid to I Schell described for the Daily open space. Times-call his repeated offers to Mead officials: Here's your Times Can photo l chance.Let's say my property is by Eon McCracken worth $2 million. If you can't come up with the money, buy what you can afford,--and I have the right to sell the rest for devel- �w opment." x. But Schell has two problems: Mead has only about half a mil- I lion dollars in the bank, and on ahead with high density (devel- seek development. space to be given to it for free," Feb. 3, a Boulder County land opment)makes him a good guy," "Open space is the right av- Friesen said. "They know they , consultant told him that unless Acker said. enue for the property, but the have to pay for it.The question is , he's annexed into Mead or Weld Though he says it's too early landowners must be paid ac- how and how much. County changes its zoning map, in negotiations to discuss the cordingly, or we have no choice "We have half a million dollars his farmland's appraised value Schell property specifically, but to develop," Schell told the in the bank,but we don't have$2 wouldn't reflect its development Acker believes conservation Times-Call. million. And it took a bunch of potential. easements, if handled correctly, At this point,Schell could pro- growth to get the half-million," "It's like if you're going to buy may prove beneficial for every- ceed with the subdivision plans he said. a house that's a fixer-upper, one around Mead. and annex into Mead; pursue an ' get more money, we have you're not going to pay what you "In general, Mead would like open space option with either the to have more development." would for a house that's already to keep its old-time, rural ieem- county or Mead while seeking been fixed up," explained Ariel .munity,open space feel," Acker grant funding; apply for resi- Ben Ready can be reached ac Steele, a Boulder C ty Parks said. 'How canyou achieve that dential development in the coon- 3oa saa-sate,or by a a; an Open Space land officer bready@tiines cao.chrn i?a and not hurt the landowner?The ty instead of in the town; annex 'On Feb. 2, Steele met with trick is to let the farmers here into Mead and keep his land Schell and two members of the get the best of both possible zoned for agriculture; or contin- Mead Open Space Committee: worlds: Keep the land for farm- ue leasing his land for farming. town Trustee Bob Acker and nag and sell the development According to Mead town man- committee chairman Jamie rights to a land trust so land ager Mike Friesen,if Schell is in Lang. stays as open space. a quandary,so is the town. Though Boulder County If these deals fall into place, "Mead does not expect open wouldn't contribute much finan- the farmers, the town and resi- cially to any open space deal like dents will be happy," he added. Schell's so far from County Line "some of these farmers have Road, Steele came to the been here for 100 years, and Schell-Mead meeting as a cow- maybe they want to be here for tesy between counties to offer 100 more.But they don't want to her expertise on conservation feel cheated, either. We're look- easements and open space grant ing for a win-win here for every- , opportunities,she said. body." Steele says Great Outdoors Though Schell,an accountant, Colorado, the Farm and Ranch comes from a family of farmers Land Protection Program or the and says he'd be happiest keep- town of Mead itself could buy ing his land as open space, he Schell's development rights leaves little doubt he's out for I through a conservation ease- top dollar. ment. That way, Schell could He and his developer have met keep his land with a promise with Mead planners on several never to build on it, and Mead occasions to discuss his plans for would save money. Organza- 's9 houses and a 12-acre com- tions that offer open space mercial shopping center on his grants rarely pay more than the and St. Vrain Properties' com- appraised value of the land, bined 202 acres. Steele said. From an economic and busi- But if Schell tried to increase ness standpoint, Schell said, a ' his property value by seeking lower agricultural appraisal of residential zoning status, it his land basically forces him to would look very suspicious to an open space granting organiza- tion. "It's a really competitive pro- . . ......a.. ��, i��cb ( 177 � Call - �' /(), nh Weld to hear. plank p for St. Vr airy lakes Proposal calls for 5,000-home project By Ben Ready The Daily rimes-call s DEL CAMINO—Weld County iI you planning officials have set aside �� o-tt, an entire hearing today to con- `meld attar a}ttone+ . shier a proposal for a 5,000-home hearing on th rra to+,fd st. subdivision just north of Fire- `V'� su P ., stone. do meats are w fo ,�l3tth ' CARMA Colorado's St. Vram :10 a,m,to{ay Lakes proposed community coy- ers 1,313 acres and, if approved, Deentm✓nt eountjr h St., - could become the place that Greeley enx,918 10M;St, 12,000 to 15,000 residents in unin- ' corporated Weld County call home. today but not allow developers to Plans for the massive subdivi- build narrower roads than coun- sion—bordered by Interstate 25 ty Multiple Use District guide- on the west, Weld County Road lines require. 13 on the east, Firestone Boule- Ogle says he has received one yard on the south and Colo. letter of opposition to the project Highway 66 on the north — also from a Frederick resident who call for 63 acres of commercial believes all urban-density property, two elementary growth should be developed schools and a middle school, within a municipality, not in the while leaving 335 acres of open MUD. space. On Jan. 17, the Weld County Ogle also said that CARMA Commission, theWeld would need 20 years to finish Planning ann what could oe been st-t- building all the homes in St. much shorter change-of-zoning Vra estimatesLa only o 11,520 that some hearing for the project. Plan- the. Thosefi res would. stye ning commissioner Michael make. CARMA's project would the Miller insisted that considering fomake getcommunity the plans for a neighborhood that Weld erth largest a in - could support a population to County. residents,Today, s the make it the fourth biggest com- ton, with 7,rth largtcity. is the munity in Weld County—small- county's fourth largest city. er only than Greeley,Evans and The planning commission will Windsor — merited an entire hold the public hearing at 10 day of analysis, a.m. today at the Greeley Plan- Due to a math glitch,St.Vrain Wing Office, 918 10th St. in Gree- takes project managers now say ley he average lot size in the neigh- The commission will make a Jorhood is about 7,750 square recommendation that the Weld feet, not the 3,700 square feet County Commissioners either they had previously reported to approve or deny CARMA's the county. change-of-zone application at a Weld County planner Kim later date. Ogle said he will recommend that the Planning Commission Ben Ready can be reached at 303 approve CARMA's application brready@tm3scrollbomma'iat "1 Hello