> Meetings & Minutes > Commissioners' Minutes > BCC Minutes for 02/08/10  

MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

 

 

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2010

 

LAND USE HEARING

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 3:00 p.m. with Matt Lafferty, Principal Planner. Chair Johnson presided and Commissioners Donnelly and Gaiter were present. Also present were: Jeff Goodell, Engineering Department; Doug Ryan, Environmental Health Department; Rob Helmick, Sean Wheeler, Samantha Mott, and Toby Stauffer, Planning Department; Jeannine Haag, County Attorney’s Office; and Tamara Slusher, Deputy Clerk.

 

Chair Johnson opened the hearing with the Pledge of Allegiance and asked for public comment on the Land Use Code and County Budget. No one from the audience addressed the Board regarding these topics.

 

Chair Johnson noted that the following items were on the consent agenda and would not be discussed unless requested by the Board, staff, or a member of the audience:

 

1.         SIEGMUND MINOR SPECIAL REVIEW AND APPEAL, FILE #09-Z1773:   This Minor Special Review application is a request to allow an accessory living area on the applicant’s property.  The owners applied for a building permit to construct a single family dwelling on the property in 2008, and that building is currently under construction.  The owners applied for a permit for a garage/storage building to be constructed on the property in 2009.  They would like to convert a portion of the storage building to an accessory living area.  The owners have signed a Use Affidavit preventing the use of the storage building as an accessory living area unless and until proper County approval is granted for such use.  The owners are requesting an appeal to exceed the size limit of 800 square feet for the accessory living area for a total square footage of 1198 square feet.  The main home will be approximately 5700 square feet making the proposed building only 21% of the area of the main home.  The Land Use Code restricts the size of an accessory living area to 800 square feet or 40% of the square footage of the single family dwelling, whichever is less.  In this case, although the accessory living area will only be 21% of the square footage of the single family dwelling it does exceed the 800 square feet limit.

 

The subject property is Lot 1 of the Maitland Minor Residential Development.  The lot is 9.25 acres in size and is of sufficient size to accommodate any additional off-street parking.  The structure will be used solely for guests of the occupants of the single-family dwelling or those providing a service on site in exchange for their residence.   The accessory living area cannot be rented or leased separately from the single-family dwelling.  Water will be provided by the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District and sewer will be provided by the South Fort Collins Sanitation District.

 

The detached accessory living area will be connected to the main house by a covered walkway giving the visual appearance of one home.  The Land Use Code allows attached accessory living areas as a use by right.  In order for an accessory living area to be considered attached, an addition to a single-family dwelling to accommodate an accessory living area must be architecturally compatible with the existing structure and at least 12 feet along one wall of the accessory living area must be contiguous to a wall of the single-family dwelling with a doorway that allows passage between the single-family dwelling and the accessory living area (Section Section 4.3.10.F.1.B.).  This proposed accessory living area does not meet the requirements of an attached accessory living and, because it is considered a detached accessory living area, it is subject to review and approval through the Minor Special Review process.

 

Accessory Living Areas are intended to allow property owners full use of their property while maintaining the integrity and character of residential neighborhoods.  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.  No individuals or agencies have contacted Staff with objections to this request.  Approval of the use, and the appeal, should have no impact on adjacent properties.  The applicants are advised that approval will require the owners to obtain a building permit and that other fees (such as the transportation capital expansion fee) apply.  The Development Services Team concludes this request meets the requirements of the Land Use Code, and supports the appeals to Section 4.3.10.F.2.c and Section 4.3.10.F.2.b of the Land Use Code as described along with the following findings:

 

1.   The proposed use is compatible with existing and allowed uses in the surrounding area and in harmony with the neighborhood.

 

2.   The proposed use is consistent with the County Master Plan and the recommendations of referral agencies have been considered.

 

3.   There are no known or evident conflicts with the requirements of the Land Use Code. Approval of the appeals will not subvert the purpose of the standard or requirements for the Land Use Code and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or property values in the neighborhood.  Approval of the appeal is also the minimum action necessary, and approval will not result in increased costs to the general public.

 

4.   The proposed use is not anticipated to have any impacts on other property.

 

5.   The recommendations of referral agencies have been considered.

 

6.   Approval of the appeal will not subvert the purpose of the standards or requirements.  There is no public benefit to be derived by denial of the request to convert an interior portion of the permitted building to an accessory living area.

 

7.   Approval of the appeals will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or property values in the neighborhood.

 

8.   Approval of the appeals is the minimum action necessary.  The request will not need any subsequent approvals by the County other than building permit requirements. 

 

9.   Approval of the appeals will not result in increased costs to the general public.

 

10.   Approval of the appeal is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Code.

 

The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Siegmund Minor Special Review and Appeal, File #09-Z1773, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.   The Site shall be developed consistent with the approved plan and with the information contained in the Siegmund Minor Special Review and Appeal, File #07-Z1773, 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 Siegmund Minor Special Review and Appeal, File #07-Z1773.

 

2.   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 fails to use the property consistent with the approved Minor Special Review, the applicant agrees that in addition to all other remedies available to County, County may withhold building permits, issue a written notice to 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 County must retain legal counsel and/or pursue a court action to enforce the terms of this Minor Special Review approval, applicant agrees to pay all expenses incurred by County including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney’s fees.  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.

 

3.   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 Minor Special Review approval.

 

4.   The owner is responsible for obtaining all required building permits for the Accessory Living Area.  All applicable fees, including permit fees and Transportation Capital Expansion Fees, shall apply to this use. 

 

5.   The square footage in the Accessory Living Area shall not exceed 1198 square feet.  The habitable space of the current structure shall not be further expanded beyond the proposed 1198 square feet.

 

6.   The single-family character of the property must be maintained.  The entrance to the accessory living area must not be visible from any road.

 

7.   The accessory living area is to be used solely for guests of the occupants of the single-family dwelling or those providing a service on site in exchange for their residency.

 

8.   The accessory living area must not be rented or leased separately from the single-family dwelling.

 

9.   This Minor Special Review approval will automatically expire without a public hearing if the use is not commenced within three years of the date of approval.

 

10.   If this use is approved, the owner will have to apply for a new building permit to convert the portion of the originally permitted building to convert it to an accessory living area.  The accessory living area will have to comply with all the conditions of approval for the Maitland Minor Residential Development.

 

2.         JACKSON PLACE SUBDIVISION LOTS 1-5 AMENDED PLAT, FILE #10-S2932:  This is a request to amend the Jackson Place Subdivision plat to amend the boundary lines of 5 lots to place residences and structures within the correct property boundaries. The Amended plat will provide a private access easement, Big Pine Lane, for all lots.

 

The proposed plat amendment to the Jackson Place Subdivision, to realign property boundaries to place structures on the correct lots and add a private access easement, will not adversely affect any neighboring properties or any County agency.  The Amended Plat will not result in any additional lots. The staff finds that with the conditions as listed below, the request meets the requirements of the Larimer County Land Use Code.

 

The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Amended Plat of Lots 1-5, Jackson Place Subdivision, File # 10-S2932, 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.   The Final Plat shall be recorded by August 22, 2010, or this approval shall be null and void.

 

2.   Prior to the recordation of the Final Plat the applicant shall make the technical corrections requested by the Land Surveyor of the Larimer County Engineering Department.

 

3.   The reconfiguration of the lots lines shall be finalized at such time when the plat and findings and resolution of the County Commissioners are recorded. 

 

4.   Prior to the recordation of the Final Plat the applicant shall add a note to the plat indicating that “The structures on the lot line between lots 2 and 3 are non-conforming with respect to setbacks and current codes. The structures cannot be replaced or improved to extend the non-conformity. Should the structures collapse or be otherwise unusable, any replacement or repair shall conform with all applicable codes in effect at the time of the change.”

 

3.         COTTONWOOD FARMS/COUNTY ROAD 9 RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION, FILE #10-S2934:  The applicants seek approval to vacate an abandoned section of right-of-way for County Road 9 (Ziegler Road).  The right-of-way in question is located on the east side of what is now Ziegler Road, between Drake and Harmony Roads in southeast Fort Collins.  The right-of-way was abandoned with the development of the Rigden Farm Subdivision in Fort Collins, when Ziegler Road was reconfigured and moved to the west.  At that time, Ziegler Road was also improved from a local road to an arterial road standard.  Land on both sides of the abandoned portion of County Road 9 is owned by the Cottonwood Land and Farms LLC, represented by the applicant.  It is no longer open to or used by the public.

 

The Development Services Team recommends approval of County Road 9 Right-of-Way Vacation, File #10-S2934, on recordation of the Findings and Resolution with Exhibit A, being a legal description of the right-of-way, subject to the following condition:

 

  1. All existing utility company easements and facilities shall not be altered by approval of the Right-of-way vacation.

 

4.         PARADISE VALLEY ESTATES LOTS 1 AND 2 AMENDED PLAT, FILE #10-S2935:   The applicant’s seek approval to change the existing boundary line between Lot 1 and Lot 2 in the Paradise Valley Estates Subdivision.  As currently configured, Lot 1 is split by Paradise Valley Drive.  A reconfiguration of the Plat will place all of Lot 1 on the north side of Paradise Valley Drive.  Lot 2, on the south side, will increase in size from 13.73 acres to 52.17 acres.  The site is located on the west side of County Road 23, southwest of Berthoud.  Both lots have existing residential uses, served by the Little Thompson Water District and septic systems.  Other than a reconfiguration of shared boundary between Lot 1 and Lot 2, the amended plat will have no other impacts.  The site is in the FA-1 Farming zone district, and the reconfigured lots will significantly exceed the minimum lot size allowed by zoning, which is 2.3 acres.

 

The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Amended Plat of Lot 1 and Lot 2 of the Paradise Valley Estates Subdivision, as described in File #10-S2935, 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 August 23, 2010, or this approval shall be null and void.

 

2.   Prior to the recordation of the Final Plat the applicant shall make the technical corrections required by Dale Greer, Land Surveyor of the Larimer County Engineering Department.

 

Ms. Mott addressed the Board detailing two typographical errors in Item 1:  the file number should be consistent throughout as File #09-Z1773; condition 5 should be corrected to read 1198 square feet.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the consent agenda, as corrected above.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

5.         HIAWATHA HEIGHTS LOTS 15 AND 16, BLOCK 31, LOT 5, BLOCK 30 LOT CONSOLIDATION AND FEE APPEAL, FILE #10-S2936:  This request is to combine three adjacent lots, Lots 15 & 16 Block 31 and Lot 5 Block 30, Hiawatha Heights, into one lot. One residential structure will be located on the lot, it will be a replacement of a cabin that was lost to fire. The new cabin will be in the same location as the previous structure. 

 

The applicant also requests relief from the application fees for the lot consolidation due to the fact that the request is related to a rebuild of a cabin. The cabin on the property was destroyed by fire in March of 2009. The cabin was built prior to building permit requirements and across the lot line of two lots.

 

The Planning Department recognizes the hardship of the owner given that this process is a result of a fire and had the fire not occurred, no actions would be necessary on the property. The Planning Department can support a process fee of $150 instead of $600 for this application. The $150 fee will cover the direct costs of processing, review, publishing and public hearing.

 

The proposed Lot Consolidation of Lots 15 & 16 Block 31 and Lot 5 Block 30, Hiawatha Heights will not adversely affect any neighboring properties or any County agency.  The Lot Consolidation will not result in any additional lots and no other services will be affected.  The 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 15 & 16 Block 31 and Lot 5 Block 30, Hiawatha Heights, File #10-S2936 and Fee appeal subject to the following conditions:

 

1.   The applicant shall pay the direct costs of application processing, copying, postage, notices, and public hearings.  The direct costs are estimated to be $150.00.

 

2.   All conditions of approval shall be met and the final resolution of the County Commissioners recorded by August 22, 2010, or this approval shall be null and void.

 

3.   The resultant lot is subject to any and all covenants, deed restrictions or other conditions that apply to the original lots.

 

Chair Johnson opened the hearing to the applicant and Byron Richard addressed the Board. Mr. Richard stated that he is not opposed to staff’s recommendations regarding a reduction in permit fees as well as the conditions as proposed above.

 

Chair Johnson opened the hearing for public comment of which there was none.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Lot Consolidation of Lots 15 & 16 Block 31 and Lot 5 Block 30, Hiawatha Heights , File #10-S2936, and Fee appeal, as recommended by the staff and subject to the conditions as listed above.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

6.         BECKERS ANNEXATION APPEAL, FILE #10-G0186:   The applicant owns and operates a horse boarding operation.  It has been determined that it was not started with the appropriate approvals, and has been cited as being in violation of the Larimer County Land Use Code.  In the course of this review it was determined that the parcel is within the City of Fort Collins Growth Management Area, therefore, it must be annexed rather than process a special review application in the County. 

 

Section 4.2.1.D.2.d. allows for the City of Fort Collins to defer annexation and require the applicant to proceed with an application in the County, however, the Board of County Commissioners must concur with the determination of the City of Fort Collins. 

 

In this case the property in question is in violation of the Land Use Code, City policy, and regulations which prevent them from accepting or processing an annexation petition.  The City of Fort Collins has determined that it is appropriate to have the applicant proceed through the County Special Review Process and then submit a petition for annexation within 30 days of final Board of County Commissioners’ decision.  The applicant has agreed with this proposal by the City of Fort Collins and is now requesting the Board of County Commissioners accept the determination which would allow the applicant to proceed with the Special Review process in the County.

 

The Development Services Team review revealed that this request was consistent with the Land Use Code and will not have any adverse or negative impact to the public or surrounding neighbors.  The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Beckers Annexation Appeal, File# 10-G0186, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.   The applicant must submit a complete Special Review application within 45 days of Board of County Commissioners action on this appeal.

 

2.   The applicant must submit a petition for annexation to the City of Fort Collins no later than 30 days from the completion of a successful approved Special Review.

 

Chair Johnson opened the hearing to the applicant and Shane Beckers addressed the Board. Mr. Beckers noted that he is in agreement with the staff report and intends to comply with all conditions as stated above.

 

Chair Johnson opened the hearing for public comment of which there was none.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Beckers Annexation Appeal, File #10-G0186, subject to the conditions outlined above.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

7.         W.O.L.F. SPECIAL REVIEW TEMPORARY MODIFICATION, FILE #96-ZR0943:   This proposal is to allow a temporary increase in the approved number of animals, and the area of use to the existing Special Review approval (96-Z0943).  Staff reviewed materials provided by the owner/operator which outlined both the background for the emergency and the specifics of their proposal to address this issue.  Up to three animals are proposed to be added with no time frame and attrition being the leveler, additionally due to “personality” issues a pen constructed in anticipation of an approval of the 2007 application would need to be used. 

 

The applicant received Special Review approval in December 1999 from the Board of County Commissioners to operate an animal sanctuary/rescue facility for no more than 30 animals.  Subsequent modifications occurred and were related to a revised legal description, time extension for reducing number of animals to 30, and time extension for a site survey.  The property is currently used for a shelter/rescue of 30 animals and residence for the property owner/operator.

 

The property is located in an area about 2.5 miles south of the Rist Canyon Road (County Road 52E) off of Fire Route 11 (now Spring Valley Road).  A single family residence is located on the site at the base of a steep, heavily wooded slope.  Dog runs basically surround the dwelling, primarily running upslope.  One isolation run was located across the access drive from the dwelling and the other runs.  Other uses in the area are rural residential acreages and agricultural grazing land.  There is large lot residential development in the Davis Ranch Road area located to the east, north-east of this site.

 

The Development Services Team has no specific recommendation with respect to this proposal by the operators, beyond insuring that any changes are temporary and the decision points with respect to compliance are clear and enforceable.

 

Chair Johnson opened the hearing to the applicant and Bonnie Mandell-Rice, director if W.O.L.F., addressed the Board.  Ms. Mandell-Rice confirmed that the organization is still in compliance with their prior Special Review and only 30 animals are on-site in the appropriate enclosures.  Ms. Mandell-Rice explained the urgency of the current situation, citing the health of the animal in question (Tonka) as well as the condition of other animals currently house at the property.  Discussion ensued amongst Ms. Mandell-Rice and the Board regarding the details of this request and the details of returning to the 30 animal limit through natural attrition.

 

Frank Wendland, the property owner/operator, addressed the Board and discussed previous situations where the organization has needed to apply for emergency requests and have historically complied with the restrictions imposed.  Mr. Wendland further detailed husbandry issues as well as the desire to allow natural attrition to reduce the number of animals.

 

Chair Johnson opened the hearing for public comment and Glenn Johnson stated that he is against approval of this Special Review noting that the W.O.L.F. organization creates a nuisance to the neighborhood through excessive noise and property damages.  Bonnie Hebbert also addressed the Board at this time to discuss the property damages but did not cite the noise as a problem.

 

Steve Shaffer and Pat Piscani, volunteers for W.O.L.F., were in support of this Special Review and explained that volunteers who are a nuisance to either the neighbors or the animals housed at the property are not asked to come back as volunteers.  Mr. Shaffer stated that the treatment of the surrounding property owners is one of the main priorities for the organization along with the well-being of the animals.

 

Discussion ensued regarding husbandry issues and how to handle future emergency requests.  The Board further discussed imposing a time limit or allowing natural attrition to take place to bring the number of animals back down to 30.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners grant the proposed temporary increase of animals subject to the following limitations, specifically understanding that this is a temporary change and in no way alters the original conditions of approval or stipulated changes to those conditions:

 

·   The number of animals can be increased by only 1-3 animals

 

·   The number of animals will return to 30 by allowing natural attrition to occur without time limit

 

·   The site will return to the original approved 5-acre Special Review area when attrition occurs and the number of animals returns to 30.  In no case may other animals be relocated to the site before those in the new area are moved into the approved area.

 

·   A new application for Special Review is not required

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

There being no further business, the hearing adjourned at 4:45 p.m.

 

 

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2010

 

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS MEETING

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 a.m. with Neil Gluckman, Assistant County Manager. Chair Johnson presided and Commissioners Donnelly and Gaiter were present. Also present were:  Mark Peterson, and Martina Wilkinson, Engineering Department; Bob Herrfeldt, Fairgrounds and Events Center Director; Matt Lafferty, Planning Department; Jeannine Haag and Linda Connors, County Attorney’s Office; and Tamara Slusher, Deputy Clerk.

 

1.         PUBLIC COMMENT:   Sherry Mooers addressed the Board and encouraged them to look into the current Board of Directors for the Red Feather Library District, specifically noting that although this is a public library, this facility is being catered towards only a portion of the community (mainly retired residents, specifically excluding the youth community).  Ms. Mooers requested that the Board look closely at the board members, the programs offered at the facility, and the desires of the surrounding community.

 

Ken Ecton addressed the Board to discuss the procedure for requesting information from the Board and staff, stating that on two previous occasions he had presented topics at the Administrative Matters public comment and has not yet received a response.

 

Discussion ensued amongst the Board and Mr. Lafferty, clarifying that a response to Mr. Ecton’s request is currently being drafted and reviewed by the County Attorney.  Chair Johnson specifically stated that Mr. Ecton was following the correct procedure and reassured him that he will see a response as soon as it is available.

 

2.         APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE WEEK OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010 AND FEBRUARY 15, 2010:

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the minutes for the week of February 8, 2010 and February 15, 2010.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

3.         REVIEW OF THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK OF MARCH 1, 2010:  Ms. Hart reviewed the upcoming schedule with the Board.

 

4.         CONSENT AGENDA

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the consent agenda as follows:

 

02232010R001           FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ROGERS MINOR SPECIAL REVIEW AND APPEAL TO SECTION 4.3.10.F.2C OF THE LARIMER COUNTY LAND USE CODE

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

5.         RENEGOTIATION OF LOAN FROM SOLID WASTE:   Mr. Herrfeldt addressed the Board regarding the resolution containing amendments to an existing loan agreement between the Ranch and the Solid Waste departments.  The Board expressed concerns regarding this agreement, specifically condition 3 outlining procedures for future instances where difficulty making loan payments could arise.  The Board requested that Carol Block and Stephen Gillette be present for this discussion and asked that this item be tabled until Administrative Matters on Tuesday, March 2, 2010.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that this item be tabled until Administrative Matters on Tuesday, March 2, 2010.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

6.         BOXELDER BASIN STORMWATER FEES:   Mr. Peterson explained the history of the Boxelder Basin Stormwater project, detailing the moratorium on fee collection, and billing procedures for 2009.

 

Much discussion ensued regarding the most efficient method of billing and how to proceed in the future so as to reduce the cost to the citizens living within the Authority’s boundaries.  The Board advised Mr. Peterson and Ms. Wilkinson to proceed as planned for the 2009 billing, but to schedule a worksession to discuss the fees, costs, and possible alternative billing methods.

 

7.         LEGISLATIVE UPDATE:   Mr. Gluckman mentioned two upcoming bills for the Board to be aware of (the U.R.A. bill, and the Alcohol Sales in Suites bill).  Mr. Gluckman also noted details of the legislators meeting occurring on Friday, March 5, 2010, which the Board will be attending.

 

8.         COUNTY MANAGER WORKSESSION:   There were no items discussed.

 

10.       COMMISSIONER ACTIVITY REPORTS:   The Board reviewed their attendance at activities over the last week.

 

11.       LEGAL MATTERS:   Ms. Haag and Ms. Connors requested that the Board go into executive session to receive legal advice on specific legal questions with no decision to follow (affidavit provided). 

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners go into executive session for the purpose of conferencing with an attorney to receive legal advice on specific legal questions as outlined in C.R.S. 24-6-402(4)(b).

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

There being no further business, the Board adjourned at 11:00 a.m.

 

 

 

 

 

__________________________________________

                        STEVE JOHNSON, CHAIR

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

 

 

SCOTT DOYLE

CLERK AND RECORDER

 

ATTEST:

 

­­­_________________________________________

Tamara Slusher, Deputy Clerk