Group opposes Boxelder Authority fees, boundaries

By Cherry Sokoloski
North Forty News

Some folks in northern Larimer County do not believe they should be included in the fee area for the Boxelder Basin Stormwater Authority, and they've organized to voice their complaints.

The group of about 30 property owners, calling themselves the Boxelder Coalition, include residents of the Waverly and Wellington areas, as well as some who live east of Interstate 25.

"We're not anti-growth or anti-development," said spokesman Larry Newman, "but we think the whole project has been pushed to favor developers."

The Boxelder Authority was formed last year by Wellington, Larimer County and Fort Collins to construct stormwater facilities in the Boxelder Basin. The basin is large, extending from southern Wyoming to south of Timnath. When complete, the project will change the Boxelder Creek's 100-year floodplain so that 642 properties are no longer included.

Newman said the group has four major complaints. They claim that all properties west of County Road 11 should be out of the fee area, contending that floodwaters west of there would be contained by Reservoir 8. They also question why the fee area's northern boundary is County Road 70, instead of extending all the way to the state line.

In addition, Newman said, the authority partners should have allowed property owners to vote on the plan, instead of imposing fees without a vote. And finally, the group believes that property owners and developers along I-25 are the main beneficiaries of the Boxelder stormwater plan.

Rex Burns, who until recently was a county engineer charged with developing the Boxelder plan, is now manager of the Boxelder Authority. He said Reservoir 8, according to a review by county staff, does not have sufficient volume to store an entire 100-year storm, so some runoff from neighborhoods west of CR 11 would impact the Boxelder drainage. Therefore, those properties should be included in the fee area, he said.

The Boxelder Coalition, according to Newman, has not hired anyone to do an independent study of Reservoir 8 and its flood-storage capacity.

Regarding the CR 70 boundary, Burns said there is very little stormwater influence north of that road because of flood-control structures built there in the 1970s. He said if more development occurs there, which would increase impervious surface area, that boundary issue could be revisited.

A review process for those who think they should be excluded from the fee area has been set up, Burns explained. The requests will be reviewed by county staff and sent on to the authority, which will issue responses to the requesting parties.

Newman said his group doesn't have a specific plan of action at this time. "We want to establish a dialogue and keep it going," he said.