Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners accept lower CU Farms estimate, ask for clearer cost breakdown for permit fee
Summary
The board accepted CU Farms' revised project estimate to calculate the conditional-use permit fee but directed staff to clarify whether equipment and contingency costs should influence the fee base; commissioners also discussed payment timing after construction activity began.
County staff and commissioners reviewed documentation tied to a CU Farms conditional-use permit after the applicant submitted a revised project cost estimate.
Planning staff noted the company originally listed roughly $17 million in total project costs, including contingency and equipment, and later submitted a reduced figure near $14.9 million for the fee calculation. Commissioners debated whether the permit fee should be based on construction-only costs or on the broader operational estimate, noting that including removable equipment increases the permit fee substantially.
One commissioner asked for an engineer's breakdown and said, "10% on a $5,000 project is not a big deal. 10% on a $5,000,000 project is," arguing the county should clarify a definition of building cost versus operating cost before accepting future permits. After discussion, the board moved to accept the revised estimate as the basis for calculating the permit fee for this application, with one commissioner abstaining due to a conflict of interest. Commissioners also directed staff to require clearer itemized cost submissions with future conditional-use-permit applications and to collect the agreed percentage down payment per the contract terms.
The board noted the company has begun dirt work while final payment status remained unclear; commissioners instructed staff to track payments and ensure the permit conditions are met.
