Larimer County Offices, Courts, District Attorney, Landfill, Household Hazardous Waste, and Recycle Center are all closed on Thanksgiving Day, November 26, 2015.
County Offices are also closed on Friday, November 27 while the Courts, District Attorney, Landfill, Household Hazardous Waste, and Recycle Center are open. Critical services at Larimer County will not be disrupted by this closure.
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Monday, August 18, 2008
Land Use Hearing
The Board of County Commissioners met at 3:00 p.m. with Matt Lafferty, Principal Planner. Chair Pro-Tem Eubanks presided and Commissioner Rennels was present. Also present were: Toby Stauffer, Sean Wheeler and Michael Whitley, Planning Department; Eric Tracy, Engineering Department; Dave Shirk, Estes Valley Planning Department; Gael Cookman, Clerk and Recorder’s Office; Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney; and Melissa Lohry, Deputy Clerk.
Commissioner Eubanks opened the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance and asked for public comment on the County Budget and Land Use Code. No one from the audience addressed the Board regarding these topics.
Mr. Lafferty noted that the following item was withdrawn; therefore, required no action from the Board:
1. Cricket communications tower special review, tabled from june 16, 2008: Withdrawn
Mr. Lafferty explained to the Board that staff and the applicant were in agreement on the Roderick Minor Land Division and Lot Size Appeal, File #08-S2810 and suggested that the Board move this item to the consent agenda. Commissioner Eubanks asked if there was anyone present to speak against this item and no one came forward to discuss this matter.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners place the Roderick Minor Land Division and Lot Size Appeal, File #08-S2810 on the consent agenda.
Motion carried 2-0.
Commissioner Eubanks noted that the following items were on consent and would not be discussed unless requested by the Board, staff, or members of the audience:
2. chamboard amended condominium map: This is a request for an amended condominium map, with two purposes. first, to finalize two new units in an area intended for three units and, second, to correct discrepancies in the general common elements and Limited Common Elements.
A. The Chambord Condominium Map, originally platted in the 1970s, allowed for five total units in two buildings, and a duplex was built at that time. This left three potential units in a second building. The current developer purchased the development rights a couple of years ago, and opted to build two units instead of the allowed three, which lowers the overall density of the project by 20%.
In accordance with State law, one cannot map condominium unit airspace until drywall is in place. Therefore, the applicant proposes to map the airspace for these two units, and forego development rights for a fifth unit.
B. In researching the plat map, the surveyor discovered a portion of an existing deck was built in “general common element” instead of “limited common element” where it was intended to be located. This means that a portion of the deck is actually property of the condominium association, meaning any member of the association had a right to use that deck. The developer volunteered to correct this error with the amended condominium map. Staff likes to use the term “corrective plat” for this type of situation, where old errors are discovered, and encourages these corrections whenever possible.
Staff recommends approval of the requested Amended Condominium Map, Chambord Condominiums Number One.
3. horsecreek ranch subdivision lot 1 amended plat: This is a request to amend the limits of disturbance (LOD) as platted with the original plat of the Horse Creek Ranch Subdivision. Specifically, this request is to adjust the building location for Lot 1. The adjustment is small in relation to the overall lot size of the LOD, with approximately 2/3 of the proposed dwelling located within existing the existing LOD.
Section 3.7 of the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) allows Staff to grant minor modifications of approved final plans, including up to a 10% increase in LOD. Therefore, this proposal falls within the staff level minor modification parameters set forth in the EVDC. However, due to the time since initial approval, and the degree of change from the original building site, staff did not feel comfortable granting the change without a formal public hearing, thus the need for a Planning Commission hearing (please note the requirement of a planning commission hearing did not “trigger” the need to formally amend the plat, only required an “extra step”).
On Tuesday, July 15, 2008, the Estes Valley Planning Commission found:
1. Pursuant to C.R.S. 30-28-110, sub-section 4(a), “no plat for subdivided land shall be approved by the Board of County Commissioners unless at the time of the approval of platting the subdivider provides the certification of the county treasurer’s office that all ad valorem taxes applicable to such subdivided land, for years prior to that year in which approval is granted, have been paid.”
2. The request to modify the platted limits of disturbance does not fall within staff level review parameters set forth in Section 3.7 of the Estes Valley Development Code, and is therefore subject to Planning Commission review.
3. The proposed changes to the limits of disturbance comply with standards set forth in Section 7.2.D “Limits of Disturbance” of the Estes Valley Development Code.
4. This proposal complies with applicable sections of the Estes Valley Development Code.
5. This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing agency staff for consideration and comment. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to code compliance or the provision of public services.
6. Within sixty days of the Board’s approval of the amended plat, the developer shall submit the final plat for recording. If the amended plat is not submitted for recording within this sixty-day time period, the approval shall automatically lapse and be null and void.
The Planning Commission recommends approval of the proposed Amended Plat of Lot 1 Horse Creek Ranch.
4. reed’s subdivision lots 39 and 40 amended plat: This is a request to re-align the boundary between Lots 39 and 40 of the Reed’s subdivision. Staff recommends approval of the requested Amended Plat of Lots 39 and 40 Reeds Subdivision.
5. Ramona heights lot 5AB, 6AB and 17 lot consolidation, file #08-s2813: This request is to combine adjacent lots, Lots 5A, 5B, 6A, 6B, 7A, 7B, Block 18 Ramona Heights Amended and Lot 17 of the Amended plat of Block 17 of Ramona Heights, into one lot. No neighbors have voiced any objections to this proposal.
The proposed lot consolidation of Lots 5A, 5B, 6A, 6B, 7A, 7B, Block 18 Ramona Heights Amended and Lot 17 of the Amended plat of Block 17 of the Ramona Heights subdivision will not adversely affect any neighboring properties or any County agency, nor will the lot consolidation result in any additional lots. Therefore, staff finds that the request meets the requirements of the Larimer County Land Use Code.
The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Lot Consolidation of Lots 5A, 5B, 6A, 6B, 7A, 7B, Block 18 Ramona Heights Amended and Lot 17 of the Amended plat of Block 17 of Ramona Heights Subdivision, File #08-S2813, subject to the following conditions:
A. All conditions of approval shall be met and the final resolution of the County Commissioners recorded by February 18, 2009, or this approval shall be null and void.
B. The resultant lot is subject to any and all covenants, deed restrictions or other conditions that apply to the original lots.
6. vista grande lot 63 easement vacation: This is a request for the vacation of a portion of a 10 foot utility and drainage easement on the rear property line of Lot 63 in the Vista Grande subdivision. The easement vacation will accommodate construction of an in-ground swimming pool. Existing utilities in the easement are a Qwest phone line and a US Cable TV line; those utilities will be rerouted around the structure into an existing adjacent utility and drainage easement.
This application was forwarded to the appropriate departments and agencies for comment. The responses from these groups indicate that there are no other issues of concern. Therefore, the Development Review Team recommends approval of the Vista Grande Lot 63 Utility and Drainage Easement Vacation, File # 08-S2814, a request to vacate a portion of a 10 foot utility and drainage easement along the rear property line of Lot 63 in the Vista Grande subdivision.
7. sierra vista terraces lot 1 and lot 3 amended plat, file #08-s2815: This is a request to amend the plat of Sierra Vista Terraces, Lots 1 & 3, to adjust the common lot line to allow a retaining wall to be entirely on Lot 3.
No neighbors have voiced any objections to this proposal. Additionally, the Department of Health and Environment and the Engineering Department Development Review Team have stated that they have no objections to this proposal. Comments received from the Land Surveyor of the Larimer County Engineering Department identify several required corrections to the plat. Corrections were made to the plat as of July 29, 2008. Those corrections were found to be acceptable as of July 31, 2008, and comments from the Code Compliance Section indicate further action is necessary, on behalf of both properties, related to building permits and a previously approved variance.
The proposed plat amendment to adjust lot lines between Lots 1 and 3 of Sierra Vista Terraces will not adversely affect any neighboring properties or any County agency and the Amended Plat will not result in any additional lots. Therefore, staff finds that the request meets the requirements of the Larimer County Land Use Code.
The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Amended Plat of Lots 1 & 3 Sierra Vista Terraces, File # 08-S2815, subject to the following conditions and authorization for the chair to sign the plat when the conditions are met and the plat is presented for signature:
A. The Final Plat shall be recorded by February 18, 2009, or this approval shall be null and void.
B. Comments from the Code Compliance section shall be addressed by the owners of both properties by October 24, 2008.
8. skogerboe minor special review, file #08-z1703: This is a request for approval of a minor special review to construct an accessory living area behind an existing garage. The subject property is located on the north side of County Road #48 (W. Vine Drive) east of Taft Hill Road, and between Prey Drive and North Bryan Avenue. The applicant plans to construct an accessory living unit, totaling 576 square feet in size, that will be attached to a garage. It will consist of a kitchen, living room, bedroom and bathroom. The structure will be located north of the existing garage, not visible from Vine Drive, and it will be for the use of a family member of the applicant.
Planning Staff supports the minor special review use for the accessory living area, based on the reasons described above. The applicants held the required neighborhood meeting for this request on May 28, 2008. Two neighbors attended and did not raise any objections to the request. One other neighbor contacted Planning Staff to support approval of the minor special review.
Staff from the County Engineering and Health Departments reviewed the proposed minor special review and provided comments. The Engineering Department noted the applicant will need to pay the transportation capital expansion fee, but did not indicate any other concerns with the request. The comments from the Health Department state the applicants will have to meet the requirements of the city for water and sewer, but otherwise did not object to the use being proposed.
Staff also referred the application to outside reviewing agencies including the Poudre Fire Authority (PFA) and the affected utility companies. None of the outside agencies or individuals responded with concerns or objections to this minor special review being approved. PFA provided information on hydrant and water flow requirements, and indicated that a sprinkler system may be required at time of building permit if these standards can not be met. Please note, Section 8.1.4 of the Land Use Code, which sets the standard for hydrant placement and water flow requirements for development in the county. District standards that exceed these standards are not enforced by the county. In this instance, the county requires a hydrant within 1000 feet of the structure, whereas PFA states a hydrant must be within 400 feet of the new structure.
The Land Use Code states that accessory uses are intended to allow property owners the full use of their property, while maintaining the integrity and character of the neighborhood. To meet these goals, accessory uses and buildings must be erected and used only for purposes that are clearly secondary and incidental to the principal use of the property. They must be located on the same lot with the principal use as well. Finally, no other individuals or agencies contacted staff with objections or concerns about this request. The Development Services Team concludes this request meets these standards, and supports approval of the Skogerboe Minor Special Review, File #08-Z1703, subject to the following conditions:
A. The site shall be developed consistent with the approved plan and with the information contained in the Skogerboe Minor Special Review (File #08-Z1703), except as modified by the conditions of approval or agreement of the county and applicant. The applicant shall be subject to all other verbal or written representations and commitments of record for the Skogerboe Minor Special Review.
B. This application is approved without the requirement for a development agreement. In the event the applicant fails to comply with any conditions of approval, or otherwise fails to use the property consistent with the approved minor special review, the applicant agrees that in addition to all other remedies available to the county, the county may withhold building permits, issue a written notice to the applicant to appear and show cause why the minor special review approval should not be revoked, and/or bring a court action for enforcement of the terms of the minor special review. All remedies are cumulative and the county’s election to use one shall not preclude use of another. In the event the county must retain legal counsel and/or pursue a court action to enforce the terms of this minor special review approval, the applicant agrees to pay all expenses incurred by the county including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney’s fees. The county may conduct periodic inspections to the property and reviews of the status of the minor special review as appropriate to monitor and enforce the terms of the minor special review approval.
C. The findings and resolution shall be a servitude running with the property. Those owners of the property or any portion of the property who obtain title subsequent to the date of recording of the findings and resolution, their heirs, successors, assigns or transferees, and persons holding under applicants shall comply with the terms and conditions of the special review approval.
D. The applicant shall obtain any outstanding building permits for residential additions and pay all applicable fees including the transportation capital expansion fee no later than February 20, 2009.
E. The habitable space of the structure shall not exceed 800 square feet total.
F. The applicant shall sign a disclosure notice no later than February 20, 2009, to advise potential lot buyers of the restrictions placed on the accessory dwelling unit.
9. Roderick minor land division and lot size appeal, file #08-s2810: This is a request for a minor land division, and appeal to the minimum lot size, to create two single family lots from a 0.738 acre (32,145.71 square foot) parcel with two existing legal residential units with separate utilities.
The property is located at 3627 & 3629 Anvil Lane which is approximately 2,000 feet northwest of the intersection of Overland Trail and CR 54G in the Laporte area. The property currently contains two separate, legal single-family homes and two detached accessory buildings. One home was constructed in 1960 and one was built in 1965. The applicants have requested a minor land division to divide the property in order to create two separate lots, one for each residential unit.
Section 4.1.5.B.1.a of the Larimer County Land Use Code requires a minimum lot size of 10 acres in the O-Open zoning district. The existing lot is 0.74 acres and the new lot sizes are proposed to be approximately 0.57 acres (24,649.96 square feet) and 0.17 acres (7,495.75 square feet). Each residential unit has separate utilities, water taps, sewer taps and other services.
The minimum lot size appeal and Roderick Minor Land Division comply with the review criteria of Sections 22.2.4 and 5.4.3 of the Larimer County Land Use Code and should not present any compatibility issues with the surrounding properties and uses.
Regarding the minimum lot size appeal, the development services team finds: the lot sizes being proposed are consistent with the pattern of existing lots in the neighborhood; the proposed lots have sufficient area to support the intended use of the lots; there are special circumstances that support the proposed lot size; and granting the lot size appeal is consistent with the intent and purpose of this code.
Regarding the minor land division, the Development Services Team finds that the property within the proposed Roderick Minor Land Division is not part of an approved or recorded subdivision plat, nor is it part of an exemption or minor residential development approved under the previous subdivision resolution or a minor land division and, it is therefore, eligible for this minor land division. The Development Services Team also finds that access to the property will not change and that access to the property complies with current standards as set forth by the County Engineering Department and the land division will not result in impacts greater than those of existing uses.
A. The Development Services Team recommends approval of the appeal to the minimum lot size requirement of 10 acres in the O-Open zoning district found in Section 4.1.5.B.1.a of the Land Use Code to allow Lot 1 to be 0.57 acres and to allow Lot 2 to be 0.17 acres.
B. The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Roderick Minor Land Division, File 08-S2810 subject to the following conditions and authorization for the chair to sign the plat when the conditions are met and the plat is presented for signature:
1. All conditions of approval shall be met and the final plat recorded by February 18, 2009, or this approval shall be null and void.
2. Prior to the recordation of the final plat the applicant shall make the corrections required by the County Addressing Coordinator and Planning Division staff.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Consent Agenda items for August 18, 2008.
Motion carried 2-0.
There being no further business, the hearing adjourned at 3:05 p.m.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 a.m. with Frank Lancaster, County Manager. Chair Gibson presided and Commissioners Eubanks and Rennels were present. Also present were Gael Cookman and Tamara Slusher, Clerk and Recorder’s Office; and Melissa Lohry Deputy Clerk.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment.
2. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE WEEK OF AUGUST 11, 2008:
M O T I O N
Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the minutes for the week of August 11, 2008.
Motion carried 3-0.
3. CONSENT AGENDA:
M O T I O N
Commissioner Rennels moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the following items as presented on the Consent Agenda for August 19, 2008:
PETITIONS FOR ABATEMENT: As recommended by the County Assessor, the following Petitions for Abatement are presented for approval: Jane A. Dellabetta and Kyle A. Dedecker; Margin LLC; and Astride A Starship LLC.
08192008A001 AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE SERVICES BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND FOOD BANK OF LARIMER COUNTY
08192008A002 MASTER LICENSE, SERVICES, AND SUPPORT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN LARIMER COUNTY AND COLORADO CUSTOMWARE, INC.
08192008A003 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR STORMWATER COOPERATION AND MANAGAMENT BY AND AMONG THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, AND THE TOWN OF WELLINGTON
08192008R001 RESOLUTION APPROVING LOAN FROM SOLID WASTE FUND TO PARKS FUND
08192008R002 RESOLUTION AMENDING BUILDING PERMIT FEES AND BUILDING INSPECTION SPECIAL REVIEW FUND
08192008R003 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE RIEDLINGER MINOR SPECIAL REVIEW
08192008R004 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE OWL CANYON STORAGE SPECIAL EXCEPTION
08192008R005 FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REZONING OF LOT 6, BLOCK 5 IN THE CEDAR SPRINGS SUBDIVISION, THIRD FILING
MISCELLANEOUS: Finding of Exemption of Categorical Excluded Activities Not Subject to CFR 58.5.
LIQUOR LICENSES: Loveland Sertoma Club, Inc. – Special Event 6% – Loveland; Namaqua Center / Larimer Center for Health – Special Event 6% – Loveland.
Motion carried 3-0.
4. REVIEW OF THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK OF AUGUST 25, 2008: Mr. Lancaster reviewed the upcoming schedule with the Board.
5. Worksession: Mr. Lancaster noted that the Sheriff’s Department has recommended lifting fire restrictions in Larimer County due to recent precipitation.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Eubanks moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the request to rescind Resolution #07292008R008, “a Resolution Declaring Fire Restrictions in Larimer County,” and thereby lifting fire restrictions in Larimer County.
Motion carried 3-0.
6. Commissioner Activity Reports: The Board noted their attendance at events during the past week.
Commissioner Rennels called the Board’s attention to the way in which Boulder County is handling their security system false alarms. Commissioner Rennels informed the Board that Boulder County is issuing fines for false alarms on their own, instead of contracting the duties to an outside company. Most counties in the State of Colorado contract through the same company as Larimer County does, many counties have had problems with that company. Therefore, Commissioner Rennels asked that Mr. Lancaster schedule a worksession for the commissioners to discuss the pros and cons of issuing their own fees.
7. Legal Matters: There were no legal matters on this day.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m.
GLENN W. GIBSON, CHAIR
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
CLERK AND RECORDER
Melissa E. Lohry, Deputy Clerk