Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 BOCC Staff Report 01.03.2005Exhibits for Emily Griffith Center Public Hearing held on January 3, 2005 h s gbh�. E 1� P :.:� owsizoA'> `ir,,,$i 5RY�.c&''T.w%`o"�` Ltw�"m`'�� �fF���:i ,.+ 1111})it.oe 3! "" of •xw o ��d . ,.o.g n ? M. ..i.. - A Mail Receipts Proof of Publication B C Garfield County Zoning Regulations D Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000 E Application , F Staff Memorandum G Analysis from Church & Associates dated July 6, 2004 H Letter from Schmeuser Gordon Meyer dated 7/7/97 I Letter from the City of Rifle dated July 7, 2004 J Email from the State of Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Water Quality Division dated July 14, 2004 New Exhibits K Letter from the City of Rifle L Minutes from public hearing on July 19, 2004 M Supplemental Information submitted by the Applicant N PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS REQUEST APPLICANT (OWNER) LOCATION SITE DATA ACCESS WATER SEWER EXISTING ZONING ti BOCC 01/03/05 FJ Special Use Permit to expand permitted uses for a "Group Residential Facility" Bill Evans, property owner, represented by Susan Garcia (EGC Program Director) 1252 County Road 294, east of Rifle, CO 5 acres (+/-) CR 294 ("South Graham Road") City of Rifle ISDS-- A/R/RD I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL A. Proposed Request /bw The Applicant requests approval of a Special Use Permit for a Group Residential Facilityi\which includes the internal expansion of facilities and services for an additional 7 students for a maximum of 35 students at the Emily Griffith Center Western Campus building. This will also require an additional Staff of 8 which includes teachers and therapists over a 24-hour period. This expansion will include increasing the number of beds in the Treatment Learning and Containment Unit (TLC) which also allows for additional day -treatment students. A Group Residential Facility is contemplated as a Special Use in the ARRD zone district and defined as: "A residence and other necessary building spaces that provide a community living environment and services for individuals requiring custodial care, medical treatment, or } specialized social services. This term includes, but is not limited to: specialized group child f care home, facility or center; residential child care facility; residential treatment center or facility; shelters from domestic violence; and/or residential treatment services for children and adolescents as ordered by the courts." he existing use on the property is characterized as a Residential Treatment Center and School operated by the Emily Griffith Center for emotionally disturbed males ages 9 to 18 years old. This use has been in place on the same property for at least the last decade. At present, the capacity of the facility has been capped at 28 residents. The facility is supervised 24 hours a day by staff that does not reside on the premises. Various departments of social service agencies 1 throughout the State of Colorado -Child Welfare Division refer the residents. The residents have a significant mental health and abuse history. This present proposal is to increase the student capacity from 28 to 35 students. This expansion will include increasing the beds in TLC from 7 to 14 beds. There will be no change from the existing/current use of the facility. The profile of our students will not change. The purpose of increasing the capacity is to provide more evaluation and crisis beds to the TLG staff secure unit. The program philosophy of the Emily Griffith Center as stated in the application is as follows: Each child placed at Emily Griffith Center arrives with extremely diverse and individualized treatment and education needs. To provide each child the proper level of treatment and containment, and to prevent placement disruptions, as his/her needs change, the Center offers an intensive treatment unit, and education, which offers a high level of containment within a staffed secure setting. The TLC program provides innovative clinical and educational interventions for children in crisis, while maintaining continuity of staff relationships. Frequently during critical periods in the treatment process, children become unsafe to themselves or others. During such_critical_phases of care,-effective-outcomas can best -be -achieved if the child -can -be safely maintained within the comfort of the familiar relationships he has developed, and within the program he knows. Following an assessment by our clinical staff, a child in crisis is placed into the TLC unit for any period of time ranging from a few to hours to several weeks, to achieve specific safety and treatment objectives. Educational services, meals, recreation, and therapy are provided on the unit by staff specifically trained to assist children in crisis. The child is retuned to his open program as quickly as he is assessed to be safe, and has achieved the placement objectives. The TLC program is also effective as a preventive tool, and as an assessment and observation unit. As a preventive tool, children may be placed into the program to prevent elopement, or to assist the child through an especially stressful anniversary, season, or treatment phase. As an assessment unit, TLC is effective as an entry point into the program. If unanswered questions exist as to the precise treatment needs of the child, medication stabilization, or a comprehensive psychosocial assessment is needed; a TLC placement is advised. Once the assessment/stabilization phase is completed and the treatment plan is developed, the child can be transferred into the open unit, or referred to a more appropriate treatment program. The proposal is to expand the capacity of the existing TLC units from 7 to 14 single rooms constructed of concrete block. The unit is connected to an indoor gym, and a secured outdoor recreation area with 10 -feet high fence. The unit has delay egress doors, 3 bathrooms, group/education space, storage for personal items, and additional safety features. Children in the TLC unit may be contacted by phone or in person. 2 There is currently and will be approximately 12 staff vehicles parked in front of the Emily Griffith Center. Emily Griffith Center owns a 12 -passenger van and a suburban. Those vehicles are also parked in front of the center. There is one food delivery to the front of the building one time per week, and two trash pick-ups per week. There will be no vehicles entering or exiting near or at the location of the TLC units. B. Background / History As a matter of background, the Board originally approved a CUP request for a "school" known at the time as "Western Academy" on the subject property in 1986 which was subsequently amended in 1997 to include an expansion to the original school building. A school is defined in the zoning code as "a public or private pre-school, elementary or secondary school or college." It is understood by Staff that the primary function of the Emily Griffith Center is to educate up to a maximum of 28 students at the facility. It should also be noted that the County Department of Social Services will refer students to the Center from time to time. Most recently in December 2003, the Board approved the placement of two modular classroom / storage structures on the property as well as the construction of four horse paddocks, a riding arena, and -a -round -pen -to -support the -equine -program. 1980: CUP to locate the First Baptist Church on the property; 1986: CUP to change uses from the church to a School for "Western Academy" which conducted a residential training and education program for up to 24 students (ages 12 — 18) for 12 months of the year with a staff of 12; 1997: 1st Amendment to the School CUP by "Western Academy" to add an addition to the existing school building to relieve crowding in the dorms but no additional students. Maximum remained at 28. Applicant demonstrated via an analysis by SGM that the actual septic use was 1950 gpd; 2003: 2nd Amendment to the School CUP by the "Emily Griffith Center" to place two modular classroom / storage structures on the property as well as the construction of four horse paddocks, a riding arena, and a round pen to support the equine program. No increase to student enrollment; and 2004: Withdrew a Conditional Use Permit application for a School to increase the student capacity adding 7 students and submitted a new Special Use Permit application for a Group Residential Facility which is a special use in the ARRD zone district recently approved by the Board on July 19`h, 2004. As you will recall, the Applicant presented this request to the Board on July_ 19, 2004 and Staff recommended the Board open and continue the public hearing regarding the request to expand the services and facilities of the Emily Griffith Center so that a more detailed analysis of handling wastewater could be presented to and verified by the County regarding the adequacy of the septic 3 system. The Board also requested the Applicant form a "Residential Advisory Group" which would serve as a venue for neighbors to meet with agents of the Emily Griffith Center to address issues that may arise from time to time. This has been accomplished and is discussed in supplemental information submitted by the Applicant and included here as an exhibit to the memorandum. Lastly, regarding the septic system issue, the Applicant has bee given permission to connect to the City of Rifle's wastewater collection system. More specifically, the Applicant will be required to fund all improvements which will include the installation of a lift station. The City did provide "in -town" tap fees rather than out-of-town fees. Should the Board approve the request, Staff suggests this be considered as a condition of approval. B. Site Description The property is located on the mesa adjacent to and east of the Highlands East subdivision in Rifle on CR 294. The property is flat and currently contains a two story school structure (14,256 sq. ft.) with—an—attached—single-story—addition containing approximately 2,392 sq. ft. The Applicant has placed two additional modular structures (12 x 40) on the east and rear side of the school building. As mentioned earlier, the proposal for the additional 7 students will only require internal modification of the existing structure. No additional external modifications are contemplated to the structure or site design. II. REFERRAL AGENCIES / DEPARTMENTS A. City of Rifle: Will provide wastewater service to school. (new Exhibit K) B. Rifle Fire Protection District: No Comments Received C. Colorado Division of Water Resources: No Comments Received D. Garfield County Department of Social Services: No Comments Received E. Garfield County Road and Bridge Department: No Comments Received F. Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Water Quality Control Division III.REVIEW STANDARDS Special Uses are subject to the standards in Section 5.03 of the Zoning Resolution. Staff has provided the standards in bold italics below followed by a Staff Response. A. Section 5.03 Review Standards 4 I) Utilities adequate to provide water and sanitation service based on accepted engineering standards and approved by the Board of County Commissioners shall either be in place or shall be constructed in conjunction with the proposed use; Staff Finding The facility's domestic water is presently served by the City of Rifle. Wastewater is presently handled by an existing septic system. Initially, the application materials state the Applicant proposes to handle increased wastewater generated from the additional students either by an additional ISDS or by connecting to the City of Rifle's wastewater treatment facility. The City recently approved the request to connect the school to the City's wastewater collection system. However, as stated above, should the Board approve the request, Staff suggests this be considered as a condition of approval. This standard has been met. 2) Street improvements adequate to accommodate traffic volume generated by the proposed use and to provide safe, convenient access to the use shall either be in place or shall be constructed in conjunction with the proposed use; Staff Finding The school has a parking lot with a separate entrance and exit onto CR 294. The Applicant states that daily trips occur from theTC} =1-2 staffvehicles and a passenger van and suburban which are all accommodated in the existing parking lot. The Applicant states that the increase of 7 students to the center will require a maximum of 2 additional staff members. Staff referred the application to the Road and Bridge Department however no comments were received. The Emily Griffith Center also receives a food delivery approximately once or twice a week. Staff finds that the traffic patterns that occur as a result of the school are generally characterized by morning staff arriving and evening staff leaving with a few delivery trips which do not represent a significant measurable impact to the general traffic flow and negative impact to the County's road system. This standard is met. 3) Design of the proposed use is organized to minimize impact on and from adjacent uses of land through installation of screen fences or landscape materials on the periphery of the lot and by location of intensively utilized areas, access points, lighting and signs in such a manner as to protect established neighborhood character; Staff Finding No exterior physical changes will occur to the present site as a result of the expansion in the number of students in the program. Staff finds that due to the small size of the structures, their placement on the site in close proximity to the two story school building, the existing landscaping and trees around the property, the structures effectively blend in with the existing buildings and surrounding environment and are not easily seen from CR 294. No new lighting or signage has been installed with the structures and therefore does not deter from the established character of the neighborhood. This standard is met. IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board approve the request for a Special Use Permit for a Group Residential Facility with the following conditions: 5 1) That all representations by the Applicant made in the application and during the public \ �.(I hearings before the Board of County Commissioners be considered conditions of approval 1 unless specifically modified by the Board. 2) That the Applicant shall provide a letter to the County from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) which states that a lift station has been approved and a letter from the City of Rifle that indicates that the Applicant has successfully connected \ to the City's wastewater Collection system. 3) That the Applicant continues to meet with the Residential Advisory Committee at a schedule to be approved by the Board of County Commissioners. V. RECOMMENDED MOTION "I move to approve the request for a Special Use Permit for a property owned by Bill Evans and located at 1252 County Ro Emily Griffith Center with the conditions proposed by Staff.' 1 0 1 1/d /7111 Residential Facility for a east of Rifle, CO dba the 3 I, o /J ty 771-1' 6 12/29/2004 04:26 9709636046 John Hier ihier@yifleco.org FRED JARMAN (970) 625-6236 Phone (970) 625-3210 Fax PAGE 01 December 17, 2004 Mr. Mark Bean Garfield County Planning Dept, 108 8'h Street, #201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Mr. Bean: The Rifle City Council considered a request from the Emily Griffith School at their December 15`h meeting to allow the school to connect their sanitary sewer to the City's sewer collection system. The Council has approved the connection. We anticipate this will involve the school's construction of a lift station and extension of a force main from the school site, within East 7th Street to a point in Dogwood Avenue where the connection will be possible, The school will be responsible for construction of the lift station and main, and responsible for maintenance, If you require any additional information, please contact our Public Works Director, Bill Sappington, at 625-6223. Sincerely, John Hier City Manager CITY OF RIFLE 202 RAILROAD AVENUE • P.O. BOX 1908 • RIFLE, CO 81650 w W W. R I F L E C O. O R G PUBLIC HEARINGS: CONSIDER A TEXT AMENDMENT REQUEST TO THE ZONING RESOLUTION TO ADD "GROUP RESIDENTIAL FACILITY" AS A SPECIAL USE IN THE AGRICULTURAL/RESIDENTIAL/RURAL DENSITY ZONE DISTRICT. APPLICANT IS BILL EVANS. - FRED JARMAN Mark Bean, Carolyn Dahlgren, Beth Miller, Howard Shipman, Susan Garcia and Bill Evans were present. Carolyn reviewed the noticing requirements for the public hearing and determined they were timely and accurate. She advised the Board they were entitled to proceed. Chairman Martin swore in the speakers. Mark submitted the following exhibits: Exhibit A - Proof of Publication; Exhibit B - Garfield County Zoning Regulations of 1978 as amended; Exhibit C - Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000; Exhibit D - application; Exhibit E - Staff memorandum; and Exhibit F - Letter from Colorado Department of Human Services dated 7-14-04. Chairman Martin entered Exhibits A - F into the record. The Applicant, Bill Evans, owns a 5 -acre property in the ARRD zone district. Since 1986, the Applicant has owned and operated a school / residential treatment facility (known as Western Academy) on the property under the approval of a conditional use permit. At the time, a school was the use that closest fit what was being proposed, in that, education remained the primary focus of the students. Over time, the property has served as a location for Western Academy (now the Emily Griffith Center as a relatively newer tenant) which has evolved into what can be classified as a "residential treatment facility" where education remains a strong component; however, recently, the Emily Griffith Center administration testified to the Board of County Commissioners the facility also accepts students who have been placed via a court order under the Colorado Children's Code. Children may be placed-by-a-eourt-under-thprovisions-o the-Dependeney-and Neglect Statutes -or -the Colorado Juvenile -Justice System. Children under the jurisdiction of the juvenile delinquency court may be in social services custody but are not "committed" (sentenced) to the State Department of Human Services Division of Youth Corrections (DYC). The Emily.Griffith Center, at the time of the hearing before the Board, was negotiating a contract with the DYC for "staff secure" beds. The Applicant recently came before the Board to request certain amendments to the Conditional Use Permit for a School on the property. In reviewing the use that the facility has evolved into as well as considering definitional changes in the land use code in 1997, Staff believes this type of court ordered placement component of the Emily Griffith Center operations moves the use further away from the definition of "school" to be more similar to a "corrections facility" although that is not a good fit either. It appears the Emily Griffith Center operation and mission falls somewhere between these two uses for which there is no exact fit or use in the ARRD zone district. In Summary From a zoning perspective, the land use code only provides uses such as "school" or "corrections facility" that do not accurately or adequately characterize and properly address the use and need discussed above. Staff believes the land use code should address the issue by providing a use that 1) not only more accurately and appropriately fits the need of the community 2) but is also handled with an informed public process as a Special Use Permit process that provides discretionary authority the Board of County Commissioners and notice and opportunity to the public to comment on specific proposals in a meaningful way. Staff finds that the proposed use should require a special use permit which provides the Board authority to deny the request as opposed to a conditional use which can only be conditioned and not denied. At present, Staff finds that based on the programs offered and types of individuals placed at the Emily Griffith Center, it clearly does not fit the definition of a school and should be differentiated from a corrections facility. This is very important because of the "risk / threat" issues that are related to a facility such as Emily Griffith because of the types of individuals that may be placed there and whether or not they pose a risk for the area in which the faculty is located. In any event, the Emily Griffith Center cannot and should not be considered just a "school" which only requires a condition use permit based on the issues raised above. I. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission unanimously recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve the proposed text amendment to the Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended by adding the following sections to the Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended: 1) Add the following definition to Section 2.00: 2.02.283 GROUP RESIDENTIAL FACILITY FOR CHILDREN AND YOUTH: A residence and other necessary building spaces providing a community living environment and services for minor children and youth, seventeen (17) and younger (unless Court-ordered for continued placement between the ages of 18 and 21), who require custodial care, clinical treatment, or specialized out -of -home and educational services, whether court-ordered or privately placed. This term includes, but is not limited to specialized group child care home excluding family foster care, emergency shelter care facility, residential child care facility ("RCCF"), and residential treatment center ("RTC"). Such a facility may be staff - d .0 D EXHIBIT ; 2 '�` 2004 Mark Bean December 2004 Garfield County 108 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81610 Dear Mark, The 2004 holiday season is here and I wanted to take this opportunity to tell you how much I appreciate your involvement with Emily Griffith Center. Providing treatment and education services to Colorado's most troubled children is a difficult mission. Your support, be it professional, financial, or volunteer helps us to reach the success we seek for children and their families. This year we are especially proud of our accomplishments. We have touched the lives of more children and families than ever in our history. With three geographic locations and a full continuum of services including adoption, foster-eareTfamily preservation, day treatment, residential care and independent living, we have become an organization that our communities depend on to help heal child abuse and neglect. Excellent treatment requires a staff comprised of experienced professionals dedicated to the children and families they serve. Our reputation helps us to attract individuals capable of meeting the many treatment challenges present at Emily Griffith Center. With 240 great staff we have become a major private employer of treatment and education professionals. Despite inadequate funding from government sources, we continue to provide high quality, result -oriented programs. This is only possible because of community donations. More than $550,000 was contributed to our operations in 2004 to help meet our treatment goals. Over the past several years, we have sought endowment gifts to strengthen our financial future. This year we received a million dollar gift from the estate of a wonderful supporter, Helen McLoraine. This gift brings our endowment to 1.7 million and helps to insure that our organization will live into the future to provide hope for all those children in need of our programs. As the New Year approaches, we respectfully ask you to continue supporting Emily Griffith Center. We desperately need your continued involvement to bring healing and hope to children and families in our communities. May the coming year bring you and your loved ones excellent health, many blessings, happipess and prosperity. LA Ho and Shiffman CEO Fred Jarman From: Matt Sturgeon [msturgeon@rifleco.org] Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 10:47 AM To: Fred Jarman; markbean@garfield-county.com Subject: Emily Griffith Center Wastewater Rifle staff (Public Works Director, City Manager, and Planning Director) met w/ State Health Dept staff regarding Emily Griffith Center wastewater service issues. City staff agreed to recommend Council accept wastewater via a force service line. The big issue for applicant is 11 We charge/twice in -City rates for out -of -city service or $80k in their case. On Dec. 15 Council will consider request to accept wastewater and request to pay in -City rate ($40k). Council may continue hearing to Jan 3 so that staff can review engineering of system. We understand that Emily Griffith comes back to BOCC Jan. 1. Will BOCC consider approval with condition that documentation from Rifle must be received by County prior to expansion occurring? Do you need a formal letter from Rifle staff saying it looks like municipal wastewater service is feasible? Thanks, Matt Sturgeon 74/1 n'\11`/.2 /61 December 17, 2004 Mr. Mark Bean Garfield County Planning Dept. 108 8th Street, #201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Mr. Bean: (970) 625-6236 Phone (970) 625-3210 Fax The Rifle City Council considered a request from the Emily Griffith School at their December 15th meeting to allow the school to connect their sanitary sewer to the City's sewer collection system. The Council has approved the connection. We anticipate this will involve the school's construction of a lift station and extension of a force main from the school site, within East 7th Street to a point in Dogwood Avenue where the connection will be possible. The school will be responsible for construction of the lift station and main, and responsible for maintenance. If you require any additional information, please contact our Public Works Director, Bill Sappington, at 625-6223. Sincerely, John Hier City Manager CITY OF RIFLE 202 RAILROAD AVENUE • P.O. Box 1908 • RIFLE, CO 81650 WWW . R I F L E C O. O R G FAX TO: Beth Miller FROM: Fred Jarman RE: Zoning Issues PAGES: jb (including cover) DATE: November 8, 2004 As promised, here are the minutes from the hearing where the BOCC continued the matter to January 3, 2005. I'll call you tomorrow on the million dollar question. Fred PUBLIC HEARINGS: CONSIDER A TEXT AMENDMENT REQUEST TO THE ZONING RESOLUTION TO ADD "GROUP RESIDENTIAL FACILITY" AS A SPECIAL USE IN THE AGRICULTURAL/RESIDENTIAL/RURAL DENSITY ZONE DISTRICT. APPLICANT IS BILL EVANS. - FRED JARMAN Mark Bean, Carolyn Dahlgren, Beth Miller, Howard Shipman, Susan Garcia and Bill Evans were present. Carolyn reviewed the noticing requirements for the public hearing and determined they were timely and accurate. She advised the Board they were entitled to proceed. Chairman Martin swore in the speakers. Mark submitted the following exhibits: Exhibit A - Proof of Publication; Exhibit B - Garfield County Zoning Regulations of 1978 as amended; Exhibit C - Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000; Exhibit D - application; Exhibit E - Staff memorandum; and Exhibit F - Letter from Colorado Department of Human Services dated 7-14-04. Chairman Martin entered Exhibits A - F into the record. The Applicant, Bill Evans, owns a 5 -acre property in the ARRD zone district. Since 1986, the Applicant has owned and operated a school / residential treatment facility (known as Western Academy) on the property under the approval of a conditional use permit. At the time, a school was the use that closest fit what was being proposed, in that, education remained the primary focus of the students. Over time, the property has served as a location for Western Academy (now the Emily Griffith Center as a relatively newer tenant) which has evolved into what can be classified as a "residential treatment facility" where education remains a strong component; however, recently, the Emily Griffith Center administration testified to the Board of County Commissioners the facility also accepts students who have been placed via a court order under the Colorado Children's Code. Children may be placed -by -a -court -under -the -provisions -of -the -Dependency -and -Neglect Statutes-or-the-Eolorado Juvenile Justice -System. Children under the jurisdiction of the juvenile delinquency court may be in social services custody but are not "committed" (sentenced) to the State Department of Human Services Division of Youth Corrections (DYC). The Emily Griffith Center, at the time of the hearing before the Board, was negotiating a contract with the DYC for "staff secure" beds. The Applicant recently came before the Board to request certain amendments to the Conditional Use Permit for a School on the property. In reviewing the use that the facility has evolved into as well as considering definitional changes in the land use code in 1997, Staff believes this type of court ordered placement component of the Emily Griffith Center operations moves the use further away from the definition of "school" to be more similar to a "corrections facility" although that is not a good fit either. It appears the Emily Griffith Center operation and mission falls somewhere between these two uses for which there is no exact fit or use in the ARRD zone district. In Summary From a zoning perspective, the land use code only provides uses such as "school" or "corrections facility" that do not accurately or adequately characterize and properly address the use and need discussed above. Staff believes the land use code should address the issue by providing a use that 1) not only more accurately and appropriately fits the need of the community 2) but is also handled with an informed public process as a Special Use Permit process that provides discretionary authority the Board of County Commissioners and notice and opportunity to the public to comment on specific proposals in a meaningful way. Staff finds that the proposed use should require a special use permit which provides the Board authority to deny the request as opposed to a conditional use which can only be conditioned and not denied. At present, Staff finds that based on the programs offered and types of individuals placed at the Emily Griffith Center, it clearly does not fit the definition of a school and should be differentiated from a corrections facility. This is very important because of the "risk / threat" issues that are related to a facility such as Emily Griffith because of the types of individuals that may be placed there and whether or not they pose a risk for the area in which the faculty is located. In any event, the Emily Griffith Center cannot and should not be considered just a "school" which only requires a condition use permit based on the issues raised above. I. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission unanimously recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve the proposed text amendment to the Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended by adding the following sections to the Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended: 1) Add the following definition to Section 2.00: 2.02.283 GROUP RESIDENTIAL FACILITY FOR CHILDREN AND YOUTH: A residence and other necessary building spaces providing a community living environment and services for minor children and youth, seventeen (17) and younger (unless Court-ordered for continued placement between the ages of 18 and 21), who require custodial care, clinical treatment, or specialized out -of -home and educational services, whether court-ordered or privately placed. This term includes, but is not limited to specialized group child care home excluding family foster care, emergency shelter care facility, residential child care facility ("RCCF"), and residential treatment center ("RTC"). Such a facility may be staff- secure for placement of youth, but may not be a locked facility. A Group Residential Facility for Children and Youth shall not be considered a corrections facility as defined in Section 2.02.156 of the Zoning Resolution. 2) Add "Group Residential Facility for Children and Youth" as a special use as listed in Section 3.02.03. 3) Add the following section to Section 5.03 (Supplemental Regulations) 5.03.023 GROUP RESIDENTIAL FACILITY FOR CHILDREN AND YOUTH: Before approval is granted for any group residential facility for children and youth, the Applicant shall provide proof of any required local, state and/or federal licenses, as applicable to the services provided and population served by the facility. Carolyn Dahlgren commented that such a facility as this not only serves DYC kids, not just DDS kids but it can also serve privately placed kids. Robert Haggerty — Contract Manager for the Division of Youth Services, Region Office commented that DYC has been contracting with service providers in Garfield County since 1991 serving detention youth kids and kids that have been committed to the Department of Youth Corrections, a Division of Human Services which is also a Department of Social Services. All are serving the same kids and some kids fit into different spectrum on the continuum of kids with needs throughout that whole system. Social Services kids are frequently on probation type status when they are placed in some of these contracted facilities. Due to overcrowding and cost of new construction of state institutions, years ago State legislature authorized DYC to contract with private providers to provide services through a continuum of ranges from everything from institutional secure settings to staff secure settings, community settings, foster families and eventually parole. When a young man or lady is committed to the Division they're subjected to thousands of dollars of testing everything from physicals, vocational, educational, psychological, and some pre -natal in some cases. Based on those assessment, kids are assigned to risk and also identified by a group of needs and the service plan is developed and based on that risk instrument and the needs to be provided, the youth is identified somewhere on the spectrum of services. Before they come to anything other than a state secure facility they will spend the assessment period in a locked secure facility, possible several months to stabilize medication, assess how they will do in any placement and once they do show progress referral is made to a contracting agency, hopefully the family, parents other interested parties agree with this treatment plan and if the contracting agency agrees, they take the youth for services. Typically, in Garfield County kids went from services provided -here -right -to parole -and -parole is not granted. Staff secure by definition means line-of-site-supervisiow24 hours -a -day. Historically kids from Colorado West used a service population at numerous community projects and Restorative Justice is one of the County's frameworks for DYC's mission statement. Bill noted that Mark Bean has been involved in the process since 1986 when they started and everyone wants to make the facility work including the City of Rifle and the County Commissioners and the only thing available then was to call it a school for the Conditional Use Permit. It wasn't a perfect fit but there was a school that was 12 months a year. In terms of the services that have been provided, they haven't changed; the same things have occurred since the very beginning. When the county added the Corrections Facility designation, the staff rightfully questioned whether of not now with this new classification, the Emily Griffith should fit under that classification. However, it wasn't a Correctional Facility so, somewhere in-between as in the staff reports, this new zone, "Group Residential Facility" — this fits the current need in the community and the entire western slope. A motion was made by Commissioner McCown and seconded by Commissioner Houpt to close the public hearing; motion carried. Commissioner McCown made a motion to approve the Zone text amendment allowing for the addition of a Group Residential Facility as a Special Use as presented by staff in Section 2.02.282 (sub 2 & 3) AND 5.03.023 as shown. Commissioner Houpt seconded; motion carried. CONSIDER A SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST TO CONVERT A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING TO A "GROUP RESIDENTIAL FACILITY" EAST OF RIFLE. APPLICANT IS BOB LAY. — FRED JARMAN Carolyn Dahlgren, Mark Bean, and Bob Lay were present. Carolyn reviewed the noticing requirements for the public hearing and determined they were timely and accurate. She advised the Board they were entitled to proceed. Chairman Martin swore in the speakers. The Applicant requests approval of a Special Use Permit for a Group Residential Facility which consists of converting an existing single-family dwelling to a "residential treatment center and special education school" for up to 14 emotionally disturbed females between the ages of 9 and 18 that are enrolled in the Emily Griffith Center program. A Group Residential Facility is contemplated as a Special Use in the ARRD zone district and defined as: "A residence and other necessary building spaces that provide a community living environment and services for individuals requiring custodial care, medical treatment, or specialized social services. This term includes, but is not limited to: specialized group child care home, facility or center; residential child care facility; residential treatment center or facility; shelters from domestic violence; and/or residential treatment services for children and adolescents as ordered by the courts." The Applicant states this program / facility will only serve female students from Garfield County and other western slope counties. This operation would be closely connected with the activities of the Emily Griffith Center Western Campus located nearby. This facility, if approved, would allow the Emily Griffith Center to provide treatment and education services to emotionally disturbed females that will be housed separately from the facility at the Western Campus at 1252 CR 294. More specifically, the facility will be dedicated to serving females who have been abused, neglected, and have significant mental health issues and special education needs. All residential treatment and education services will occur at this site. The plan involved significantly remodeling the single-family dwelling into the following spaces: 1) Convert the garage into 2 sleeping areas for 3 students each; 2) Kitchen and dining area; 3) Recreation room administrative office / private counseling room; 4) Convert a half bath to a full bathroom; 5) 2 larger sleeping areas for 4 students each; and 6) Convert separate garage building into classroom, office, and bathroom space. The Applicant supplied floor plans in the application showing the physical breakdown of these spaces. The proposed facility will require 3 staff members and the facility will be staffed 24 hours a day. The program at the facility will offer individual, family, and group therapy and special education needs as well as equine therapy and wilderness programming. While the residence will serve as a treatment / learning facility for females only, they will also be able to take advantage of the well established facilities in the Western Campus a few properties away. The application states that meals for these students will be prepared at the same facility. Regarding the education component of the proposal, the application states that the Colorado Department of Education and North Central Accreditation will accredit the school. All of the teachers will be certified by the State of Colorado. Students will be able to obtain credits that can be transferred to their home schools. The students will be able to graduate from the school and/or staff will assist students in receiving their GED. The majority of the students will have a special education designation. The focus of the education program is to meet the student's education, social, and emotional needs. A. Background / History As you wil rt eca1l; t tt a Applicant presented -the same request to the Boa�tcr on May lb`However, at that -time, the Applicant sought a Conditional Use Permit for a "School." Staff recommended the Board deny the Application ultimately finding the proposed use 1) does not fit the definition of a school, 2) is functionally and operationally dependent upon another separate use on a separate property, and 3) has not demonstrated that adequate utilities exist to handle wastewater generated from the use. The Board agreed to open and continue the hearing to allow the Applicant to resolve issues raised by Staff. As a result of subsequent discussions between the Applicant and Staff, the Applicant decided to withdraw the application and re -apply to the County for a Special Use Permit for a "Group Residential Facility" which was to be a text amendment to the Zoning Resolution proposed to the Board at the same meeting. Therefore, a text amendment to the Zoning Resolution will be proposed to the Board just prior to the Board's consideration of this Special Use Permit. In this way, should the Board approve the definition of a "Group Residential Facility", it would appear to be an appropriate use under which the applicant could apply rather than a "school" which is not an appropriate fit in the zoning code. B. Site Description The property is located on the mesa just east of Rifle on CR 294 (South Graham Road). The property is flat and currently contains a single-family dwelling and is across the road and walking distance to the Emily Griffith Center as shown in the illustration to the right. The dwelling is a single -story 3 -bedroom 1- lbath residence with a two car garage. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve the request for a Special Use Permit for a "Group Residential Facility" on a property located at 1359 County Road 294, Garfield County with the following conditions: 1. All representations of the applicant, either within the application or stated at the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners, shall be considered conditions of approval. 2. All uses shall continually be consistent with the definition of a Group Residential Facility as defined by the Board of County Commissioners. 3. The Applicant shall be obligated to connect to the City of Rifle's central sewer system when service becomes available. 4. The Applicant shall provide the Planning Staff with an activated augmentation contract from the West Divide Water Conservancy District and amended well permit from the Division of Water Resources prior to the issuance of a Special Use Permit. 5. The Applicant shall obtain a septic permit from the Garfield County Building and Planning Department prior to the issuance of a Special use Permit. This system shall be installed by a licensed contractor. 6. The Applicant shall complete the following improvements prior to the release of any building permit for the property. The Applicant shall provide the Planning Staff with an approval from the Road and Bridge Department indicating the following has been completed to their satisfaction: A. Relocate the existing driveway 220 feet to the west to reduce safety hazards presented by the sharp curve in the County Road; B. Install a 40' long culvert that is of 18" diameter to go under the driveway entrance to allow road ditch drainage to pass; C. The driveway entrance shall be a paved apron that is 30 feet wide by 10 feet deep and 4 inches thick; D. The remainder of the driveway shall consist of a gravel surface at least 100 feet back into the property; and E. The existing driveway has been abandoned and reseeded to be incorporated into the lawn of the property. 7. The Applicant shall submit proof of all required state and/or federal licenses, as applicable to the services provided and population served by the facility prior to the issuance of a Special Use Permit. 8. The residential structure shall be obligated to connect to the City of Rifle's central sewer system when service becomes available. Public comments: Steve Hauquitz borders Emily Griffith on both sides of his property and the Lay property would be on his north east corner. Some of his concerns are it that currently he doesn't feel they manage the kids as well as possible, several incidents where they've called and couldn't get anyone to answer. There's been kids on the roof for 45 minutes at a time, the other things are the kids in the middle of the road, cussing at people as they drive back and forth and it's flat out profanity. Part of the time there's an administrator and part of the time there's not. He saw a kid pick up a beer bottle and threaten one of the staff. There are some good programs such as the horse program, but their management of the kids is what it could be. There's no city services and you depend on a well and septic system. He has a concern about more septic systems in that area. He relies on springs that are underneath the hill for domestic water and irrigation water. This also devalues his property values. Beth Miller with Emily Griffith commented that the staff does intervene and provide supervision — the children sometimes need to cool off. The child on the roof — in a situation like this you don't want to escalate the child, instead you talk to the child and they -will -eventually -come down. Howard Shipman with Emily Griffith stated it was highly upsetting to hear a resident say these things. This facility is dealing with kids with emotional problems; their track record is good for the amount of disturbances — it's a price to pay with kids in our own community but everything needs to be done that bothers our neighbors. Girls are tough to deal with but not like boys. If we were to go to another location that is not in the same location for filling the need for girls, it would defeat the purpose. He proposed to monitor the impact into the community as much as possible. Not minimizing Steve's comments but work with him and assure him his concerns are met. Sonja Morgan — directly across the road in a residence and property directly adjoins. She echoed Steve's concerns. When it went from a church to Western Academy it was bad enough, now to change a home and combine the current facility with girls is not the best. They have experienced a lot of problems with that facility. She has two teenage girls and the boys made comments toward her girls. She has had some kids at her house on freedoms and this is part of the biggest problem; two times kids in the street who were very distraught using profanity and as the autos passed by they were daring them to hit them. Quite a spectacle. This is residential, if they could perform in a regular residential neighborhood that would be okay, this facility does not provide 100% supervision. Oftentimes the Sheriff and fire department are called; kids are breaking glass, etc. The last thing the neighborhood needs to for this facility to get larger and definitely against the school for girls next to her property. Kids have been tackled in the yard; point is these kids can only stay in the school for a certain time. With increasing more kids, they will have more problems. Real different from the Western Academy. They have been at the school and have not found anyone readily available. Once she had to go get her dog and she saw a kid restrained and no adult. Not a good use of this property; it was originally built as a Church. The volume of traffic driving by and the constant use of profanity is the highest type of offense. There was a kid in the street behaving suicidal. This whole area will become residential and not the type of setting to mix these kids. The corner is horrible. She relayed another incident when she called the police when it was Western Academy; kids were hitting golf balls aimed at staff. She later found out it was staff hitting balls at kids. She called the police. A kid got hit in the head and came crying in. The kids in the street, the kid on the roof, breaking glass — the Sheriff seems to be there often. These issues are happening. Linda Shoupt — lives across from Bob Lay and reiterated the concerns already stated. Kids have thrown things over in the hayfields. Flower picked, planters kicked and having more kids right across the road creates a concern for her horses; what will keep a stone from hitting her horses; kids aren't supervised well enough. Traffic at the corner is bad. Haven't called the police; it is a residential community. Now they will be totally surrounded by kids. Shouldn't be there. Howard Shipman — the kids they treat need a residential area; the goal is to get them into a more home -like situation. Being in a neighborhood has drawbacks and there are good things. During the Hyman fire, Emily Griffith kids helped evacuate the neighbors. The kids that slip out — the driveway issue — changing the access — not to make light, but suggested if the Board passes this and they'll like to develop a neighborhood committee for complains and see what is happening. We've been operating on a no news is good news. This committee would meet with Susan and willing to make this as part of the SUP. Board of Directors was suggested — getting to know who they are. This is purely for helping the kids in the community and will work with the neighbors on these concerns. A motion was made by Commissioner Houpt and seconded by Commissioner McCown to close the public hearing; motion carried. A motion was made by Commissioner Houpt to approve the request for a SUP on property at 1359 CR 294 with conditions deleting No. 8 due to duplication and adding a new No. 8 that would require the Emily Griffith School to initiation a neighborhood advisory committee. Commissioner McCown seconded for the purpose of discussion. Would you entertain in your Condition No. 8 to include a review in 6 -months by staff regarding any complaints filed to the law enforcement agencies or by the neighborhood. Commissioner Houpt agreed. This would be 6 -months staff reviews after they open; if there is a problem then a special review would be called in. Commissioner Houpt amended her motion; Commissioner McCown amended his second; motion carried. After the hearing was closed, the Baurers, adjacent property owners came forward stating they were adjacent to Lay's property on the back — on the Lay property. Someone called them telling them about the hearing. Carolyn Dahlgren stated she did not see them on the list and they are in the audience and would be willing to testify. Chairman Martin — asked the Bauer's to come forward. Carolyn Dahlgren suggested a waiver since they did actually get noticed and are present or the Board can consider an imperfection in notice. Mrs. Baurers said their property is adjacent to Robert Lay's property; the back property line, the fence line is our fence line. The Board stated the public hearing was closed. CONSIDER A SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST TO CONVERT FOR A "GROUP RESIDENTIAL FACILITY" EAST OF RIFLE THAT WILL BE OPERATED BY THE EMILY GRIFFITH CENTER. APPLICANT IS BILL EVANS. — FRED JARMAN Mark Bean, Carolyn Dahlgren, Beth Miller, Howard Shipman, Susan Garcia and Bill Evans were present. Carolyn reviewed the noticing requirements for the public hearing and determined they were timely and accurate. She advised the Board they were entitled to proceed. Chairman Martin swore in the speakers. Mark submitted the following exhibits: Exhibit A — Mail receipts; Exhibit B — Proof of Publication; Exhibit C — Garfield County Zoning Regulations of 1978 as amended; Exhibit D — Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000; Exhibit E — application; Exhibit F — Staff memorandum; Exhibit G — Analysis from Church and Associates dated July 6, 2004; Exhibit H — Letter from Schmueser Gordon Mayer dated 7-7-04; Exhibit I — Letter from the City of Rifle dated 7-7-04; and Exhibit J — email from the State of Colorado Department of Public Health and Environmental Water Quality Division dated 7-14-04. and Exhibit K — all the testimony in the previous hearings were admitted. Chairman Martin entered Exhibits A — J into the record. The Applicant requests approval of a Special Use Permit for a Group Residential Facility which includes the internal expansion of facilities and services for an additional 7 students for a maximum of 35 students at the Emily Griffith Center Western Campus building. This expansion will include increasing the beds in the Treatment Learning and Containment Unit (TLC) which also allows for additional day -treatment students. A Group Residential Facility is contemplated as a Special Use in the ARRD zone district and defined as: "A residence and other necessary building spaces that provide a community living environment and services for individuals requiring custodial care, medical treatment, or specialized social services." This term includes, but is not limited to: specialized group child care home, facility or center; residential child care facility; residential treatment center or facility; shelters from domestic violence; and/or residential treatment services for children and adolescents as ordered by the courts." The existing use on the property is characterized as a Residential Treatment Center and School operated by the Emily Griffith Center for emotionally disturbed male's ages 9 to 18 years old. This use has been in place on the same property for at least the last decade. At present, the capacity of the facility has been capped at 28 residents. The facility is supervised 24 hours a day by staff that does not reside on the premises. Various departments of social service agencies throughout the State of Colorado -Child Welfare Division refer the residents. The residents have a significant mental health and abuse history. This present proposal is to increase the student capacity from 28 to 35 students. This expansion will include increasing the beds in TLC from 7 to 14 beds. There will be no change from the existing/current use of the facility. The profile of our students will not change. The purpose of increasing the capacity is to provide more evaluation and crisis beds to the TLG staff secure unit. The proposal is to expand the capacity of the existing TLC units from 7 to 14 single rooms constructed of concrete block. The unit is connected to an indoor gym, and a secured outdoor recreation area with 10 -feet high fence. The unit has delay egress doors, 3 bathrooms, group/education space, storage for personal items, and additional safety features. Children in the TLC unit may be contacted by phone or in person. There is currently and will be approximately 12 staff vehicles parked in front of the Emily Griffith Center. Emily Griffith Center owns a 12 -passenger van and a suburban. Those vehicles are also parked in front of the center. There is one food delivery to the front of the building one time per week, and two trash pick-ups per week. There will be no vehicles entering or exiting near or at the location of the TLC units. As you will recall, the Applicant presented the same request to the Board on May 10'h of this year. However, at that time, the Applicant sought a Conditional Use Permit for a "School." Staffs recommended the Board open and continue the public hearing regarding the request to expand the services and facilities of the Emily Griffith Center for a "school" so that a more detailed analysis can be presented to and verified by the County regarding the adequacy of the septic system. The Board agreed to open and continue the hearing to allow the Applicant to resolve issues raised by Staff. As a result of subsequent discussions between the Applicant and Staff, the Applicant decided to withdraw the application and re -apply to the County for a Special Use Permit for a "Group Residential Facility" which was to be a text amendment to the Zoning Resolution proposed to the Board at the same meeting. Therefore, a text amendment to the Zoning Resolution will be proposed to the Board just prior to the Board's consideration of this Special Use Permit. In this way, should the Board approve the definition of a "Group Residential Facility", it would appear to be an appropriate use under which the applicant could apply rather than a "school" which is not an appropriate fit in the zoning code. Staff Finding The facility's domestic water is presently served by the City of Rifle. Wastewater is presently handled by an existing septic system. The application materials state the Applicant proposes to handle increased wastewater generated from the additional students either by an additional ISDS or by connecting to the City of Rifle's wastewater treatment facility. The Applicant has applied to the City for this service but no line or service is presently in place. Instead, the applicant proposes to handle additional waste water generation with the existing system as well as reducing water usage by eliminating the "in-house" laundry service. Waste water generation has been an issue for the present use for many years; it ultimately controls the number of students that can reside at the facility. The Applicant states that they have been monitoring water use on a daily basis and sending data weekly to Church and Associates for their review. This data reflects the fact that the facility is sending out the laundry to 4th Street Cleaners in Rifle on a daily basis. Since the laundry has been sent out, the water usage has decreased. Church and Associates and The Emily Griffith Center are confident that the center and this addition will meet the [waste, sic] water requirements. [It should be noted that the original proposal to locate the Emily Griffith Center in the present facility included much discussion on how to handle wastewater. The Applicant was required to prove that a septic system (of 2000 gallons or less) could handle wastewater generated. Otherwise, a site application approval from the State would have been required.] The City of Rifle indicated that the most likely would approve an extension and tap if funded by the Applicant and if the engineering plans were approved for the line. However, the Applicant has not been approved for a tap / extension from the City of Rifle at this time. Instead, the Applicant hired an engineering firm, Church & Associates, to complete an analysis of the existing septic system to determine if additional flow could be handled. The consultants indicate (see Exhibit G) that the additional waste water flow from the 7 students could be handled by the existing system if all laundry was handled off site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION At this time, Staff in unable to recommend the Board of County Commissioners approve the request because the existing septic system cannot handle the increase in students and staff. Applicant: Bill Evans — owner of the property at 1252 County Road 294, originally started as Western Academy in 1986, changed tenants in 1998 to a facility called Youth Track out of Denver and subsequently changed tenants to the Emily Griffith in 2002. This proposal is primary that of the tenant and signed off by Bill Evans as the property owner. The review, because of their addition internally, not externally, in the building of 7 additional beds and that's what prompts this review. What we would ask is that the previous hearing the residential care facility that was added to the text in your zoning be applied to this particular situation. It would be better since the details of this proposal are the tenants that they speak to this issue. Beth Miller — we have asked that our engineer Ed Church speak to his calculations and his procedures in making his recommendations regarding the septic. Ed Church — summarized some things on the system design and what's being asked for today. Copy of the title page cover of the State Guidelines that specifically allow designs to be based on meter flows was submitted. Chairman Martin admitted Exhibit L into the record. Ed detailed the information in the report addressing the addition of more students, the gallons per day of water usage and the plan to provide a daily meter reading. Additionally he is proposing to reduce the water usage by the laundry being outsourced, some old fixtures that are the old style high water use left and they will be replaced; more water conservation into the program, a couple shower heads and high water use toilets that still can be retrofit. Emily Griffith in general is very used to regulation and this is not something new for them, it's another item that will be added to their list, if they need assistance from us, we will get the Commissioners water usage records. We've looked at connection to the city of Rifle; it's estimated that this will be $80,000 to $100,000. It's approximately 1,000 feet up hill to the current sewer line. If in fact, Emily Griffith were to do it themselves, they would $35.00 per foot x 1000 feet = $35,000. In discussions with the City of Rifle, they say the taps are $5,000 each and estimated it will take 6 taps and another $30,000. Plus right of way and legal considerations estimated between $20,000 to $30,000 so there is $80,000 to $100,000 cost. The question is, do we wait for Rifle or does Emily Griffith put a private line to extend up there. Ed would much prefer it to be an extension by Rifle and he understands that Rifle is not excited about lift stations. He understands that and would rather have it done to their specification because a private line would only serve Emily Griffith and would not anticipate future considerations that the City of Rifle may want if they do it. In response to Dwain Watson's memo, part of this is in the ISDS guidelines that allows specifically use of metered flows. We don't use it for residential but for commercial situation, many times the actual flows are considerable less then the guideline flows and that's what we find here and that's why they are using those numbers. There are some statements in here that appears that the residents live in this facility with no supervision; Ed wasn't sure where Dwain came up with that, and is obviously not correct. No inclusion for staff, but that is not true, the numbers seen in '86, '97 included the staff in the student's number. Commissioner McCown — this is in essence is a commercial facility according to what Ed was saying. Ed Church — it is not a residential. Commissioner McCown — non residential/commercial — most commercial facilities when they reach 80% capacity have to start a planning process for upgrading or upsizing the facility. Would you say this is to that? Ed — I think it would be and talked to Emily Griffith Center about that and I believe the wording from the prior case is applicable that future expansion, anything else will include connection to Rifle. In a site application you spend a lot of money getting your permit and he wouldratherspend moneyin treating the waste water -than getting permits. Also, that Emily Griffith does not want to be owners and operators of a major waste water treatment family, they would rather help kids, so let's connect to Rifle and with the plan of Rifle to have included in their plan if they bring it out, and you have to connect. The condition of that is acceptable. If they want to expand beyond this, they will now understand what that connection requires and should be required to connect to Rifle beyond this. Commissioner McCown — you did the design for the care facility that we heard previously for the girls and in that you were looking at 75 gal per day per person; m this one you're looking at 50, is that because of the laundry? Ed Church — no, that's because at 1252 we have actual records and at the new one we don't; he could have extended that at the 1359, but he did not. Commissioner McCown — so you feel comfortable enough with these records as a condition of approval, we put a flow monitoring on these waste water and it exceeds 2000 they're shut down. Ed Church — as long as it's what the state criteria is which the average is 30 days. Commissioner McCown — so acknowledged. Ed said they understand that too and are going to make that effort to keep that number correct. There will be peak flows over 2000 but the 30 day average will be less than that. Beth Miller — one other clarification on this staff report, paragraph 1 on page 2 regarding — the word is the "profile of our students will not change" that's absolutely accurate, the profile as we've talked about is a mental health child who has academic needs as well, and wanted to clarify that given the new category, the category includes children from expanded referral sources, committed kids and whatnot that Bob Haggerty had talked about but not to confuse the word "profile" with the category of children where they're being referred from. With the proposed expansion, it is an internal expansion of our staff secure unit to be able to provide other assessment and containment for some of the kids who are either at risk or in need of additional supervision. Commissioner Houpt — so staff will expand with that? Beth Miller — absolutely. Commissioner McCown — at what rate of supervision? Beth Miller — the staff secure unit is a unit that has a single room per child and all the children are contained behind egress doors so that they're not able to just runaway, although they're not locked as talked about, not being a locked facility. Commissioner McCown - given these additional 7 students, how many additional staff can we expect? Beth Miller — it's 2 staff per shift plus a teacher and a therapist so approximately an additional 8 staff would come along with those 7 boys. Bill Evans — clarified, it's not 8 staff at all times, you're talking about a total of 8 staff to cover 24 hours, 7 days a week. Of those 8, only a limited number are there at one time. Beth Miller — 2 per shift. Howard Shipman, CO with Emily Griffith Center, about the water and tapping into the City, we're outsourcing our laundry now and it's an expensive endeavor and we're making every effort even if we can cut a deal with the City of Rifle; the opportunity to actually sit down and say what can we do if we try to work together on this, but it's to our benefit at Emily Griffith Center given our budget as to try and tap into that as soon as we possibly can because the laundry facility if very expensive. Commissioner McCown — given the geographical area where you're located, he cannot imagine the City of Rifle designing a sewer system that doesn't involve a lift station there. Their treatment center is the wrong way from this location. Steve Hauquitz — in the last endeavor he said they had a good track record; what do you consider a good track record but when you have a sheriff's van that appears 2 — 4 times a week to pick up a kid from the back of the building in handcuffs, how is that a good track record. It's been better in the last 2 -3 weeks but at one time you had the Sheriff's department there every day. The fire department was there three times in one day. Regarding the septic tank it is pumped twice a month. If it was capable, you wouldn't have to pump it twice a month. To add 7 more kids and 8 more staff, how will the septic and leach field work. His eyes tell him what's going on. Still reiterates his concerns about 7 more kids, the problems now with 28 kids, not in favor of adding 7 more kids. We've called Emily Griffith when there are problems, kids in the middle of the road when they're trying to be run over, when they're screaming at cars, when they're eon the roof, you never get an answer. You call, you leave a message you don't get a call back. Until the other day when he went down to cut a horse our of a fence that belonged to Emily Griffith I finally got a person who said to call extension 20 but until that time, he's seen Susan one time, she told me to call her if he has problems, but you call down there, you leave a message with Susan, you don't get any answer. We have called the police when the kids were on the roof; my wife called the dispatch center and left a message about a kid on the roof at the Emily Griffith Center. When we did talk to the staff another time it was like, well we wait for them to come down — why are they on the roof in the first place? Why do they have access to a roof that's 30 feet high? If that's a track record, I don't know where we're going. I heard him say they had 32 kids and doesn't know if the engineer was saying 32 staff or 32 kids, if they have 32 kids, they are over right now. What wound youhinkif they were to put one of -these systems in your backyard? How woultlyuu feel? We do have some major concerns; I think they have some major problems. We have been a good neighbor, kids have climbed on our fence, I have a 7 foot fence to keep the deer out because I have a nursery, and we have kids that climb that 7 foot fence. There is a gate 100 feet down the road, she stood and watched the kid climb the fence. One of those kids gets hurt, who's liable? He's on my fence. It's crazy and a staff member stands and watches him. If it's going to come to — fine — I'll get your ball and hand it back to you. I don't want you climbing my fence. I've worked with your staff members and said come over, fine, we did have problems like Sonja said with the golf ball incident; we've had a lot of incidences that, fine, we didn't call the police; I've had more incidences with the staff members than I ever had with kids. I do have some major concerns and if you enlarge this septic system or whatever, my springs are 200 foot right down the hill; they've had their horse program, said it was going to be 2 horses, it's up to 5. Where they keep their horses is right over the top of my springs. I do have concerns, they may have fallen on deaf ears, I don't know. Sonja Morgan — in the last proceeding you had asked for an addition to be made that they establish a residential advisory group and she would think this needs some time to play out before we allow them to increase the numbers that they have there. They've made some very genuine offers to work out some problems that there has been in the past, but I think we need some time to see if those are actually going to play and if any advice that we offer or concerns that we bring to their attention make any changes in what's going on. She would feel very unfortunate if we allow them to now have more students under their supervision when you've heard today that there are definitely concerns with the students they already have. They've made some generous opportunities to work with them and she wants more time to see if this is going to work. Beth Miller — justified the Sheriff's transportation vans saying whether a child is a delinquent or whether or not he has minor or major kinds of problem, he is transported in handcuffs and that just means he's being brought to us that and not necessarily that he's had such a serious incident at our facility that it would require handcuffs. The concerns of the neighbors are serious and they do want to address those. Some kids are taken to a hearing and brought back the same day; she understands how this would look. The issue of the fire trucks coming, we have addressed that, there was a day where the boys had pulled the fire alarms and now they have this worked out a system so that we contact the fire department for better communication and have also built some protective measures around the pull stations to try to prevent the boys from doing that. With regard to this proposal and the additional beds in the staff secure unit, clearly these kids do have a day or an hour when their escalated and having a difficult time, they do need an area where they can be secure and where they can continue to do the work. These staff secure beds will add additional security and allow staff to provide better care for them. She asked the Board to consider the additional security this would add with these 7 beds. Howard Shipman - The Homeowners Association would address some of the issues that were brought up like as an example, the horses. If there's a concern that the horses are on the back of our property and we need to clean those corrals more often to Steve's satisfaction. He reiterated that the goal is for these neighbors to come in here and say, we feel good, we're pleased, we're working with the Emily Griffith Center and we understand now. It never occurred to him that kids being transported in handcuffs would be perceived the way it was to the neighbors. Howard reiterated his concern of damaging water sources was committed to doing whatever necessary to eliminate the impact. Commissioner McCown asked how long can public hearings be continued? Carolyn responded that the Board could continue it to a date certain; the subdivision is one where we have time limits. Mark Bean commented on the testimony regarding the waste water treatment: 1) he was taken back on the statement that the system was designed for 4800 gallons per day without a site application. He questioned how that came about because we would have and the State also, cited this as a site requirement so he doesn't think it was approved in that manner. If it's built in that manner then somehow it got approved incorrectly or it was built incorrectly, not sure which. We have a difference of opinion in terms of the calculations and how the calculations occur. We have technical advisors and the State Health Department to, at this point, disagree with the calculations and method of calculating future use even through there's an existing metered system. Mark acknowledged that the language given to us in the ISDS regulations that we also use, is correct language. In a conversation with Mr. Watson's supervisor today he indicated that generally that language is used for repairs and maintenance; not used as a general rule for expansion. Since Mr. Watson was not there he couldn't speak to the other details and the issues that Dwain had in his comments. Mark suggested at a minimum, Mr. Church, Mr, Watkins and staff involved in a conservation to discuss these calculations. Commissioner McCown — personally is having bigger problems than that. I think there is a problem with the sizing of the system, I would like to try a motion to continue this hearing until the first meeting in January at 1:15 p.m. to allow the formation of this neighborhood and come back to us with your input and that group comes back to us with their input. I don't feel comfortable granting this expansion with what I've heard here today to be candid. I have also heard from the Sheriff that he was concerned about the number of calls that were taking place at this location. I think there needs to be a better grip on this and would like to see the input from the neighbors and like to see you come back with an answer to those problems and the wastewater treatment problems the first meeting in January. Mark clarified -that -would -be -January 3-2005-a--1:15-p.m. Commissioner Houpt - Chairman Martin — we will take recommendation from the State Engineer on calculations as well as the citizens. Mark suggested that the applicant should send return receipt notice to the adjoining property owners to remind them also. Commissioner Houpt seconded but has some discussion. I think that it's important to look at the positive things that Emily Griffith is doing for kids; there is a nitch that's being filled in this county that is desperately needed and I think you'll find with any teenager there are moments of trauma and emotion and I have spent some time at Emily Griffith and I appreciate the program that's been put together and I also see the need, there are many children in crisis regardless of how they get there. I'm concerned about septic and I want staff to be able to come forward with a recommendation to approval and feel confident that the system is going to be a reliable system that's put into place. I just hopeful that everyone goes into this with the desire to make it work. Now the problem with putting a caveat on approval of this type is that people want to really make it work and I hope that happens because I think this service is critical to the kids in our county. Chairman Martin — not unlike the discussion we've had with the placement of jail, community corrections, special needs students, etc. this is an issue where the community is also affected, it always affects the immediate neighborhood and we always go through that, but I think the point has been taken that we need to go ahead and clarify calculations, the use, the meters, etc. on the system itself, is it capable or not, is the calculation of 55 gallons what we're after; is it 150 per student based upon what we do as fair and equal treatment of everyone else that comes before us and have to design that system. Motion carried.