Loveland Bike Trail
 

MINUTES OF THE LARIMER COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT

 

February 24, 2009

 

            The regular meeting of the Larimer County Board of Adjustment was held in the County Board Hearing Room in the Larimer County Courthouse, Fort Collins, Colorado at 7:00 p.m., February 24, 2009.  Members Peter Bohling, Eric Berglund, Evelyn King, Alan Cram and Greg Christensen were present.  Also in attendance were County Planning Staff member Samantha Mott and Assistant County Attorney William Ressue.

 

            By Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the reading of the Minutes of the meeting of November 25, 2008 was dispensed with and such Minutes were approved.

 

File No:           #09-BOA0742  (LaFlam Setback Variance)

Owner:           Scott & Susan LaFlam

Applicant:      Wyatt Knutson / CTL1 Thompson, Inc.

Property Description:

 

LOT 20, CRYSTAL LAKES 9TH, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO

 

            The Application of Wyatt Knutson and CTL1 Thompson, Inc., requesting a setback variance was presented to the Board.  The Application requested a setback variance upon the above-described property to allow an addition to an existing single family residence to be 55 feet from the front property line and 5 feet from the edge of the road easement rather than the required minimum of 45 feet in the E-Estate zone.

 

            The Board having heard the testimony and arguments concerning the Application, and having reviewed the record and being fully advised in the premises adopted the following findings:

 

Findings

 

1.         This hearing has been duly advertised in a newspaper of general circulation as required by law.

 

2.         The property location is SW 19-10-73; 89 Erie Court, Red Feather Lakes; located approximately 400 feet northeast of the intersection of Erie Court and County Road 73C on Lot 20 of Crystal Lakes 9th Filing.

 

3.         Site data is as follows:

 

a.         Land Area:                              2.68 Acres

b.    Proposed Use:                         Residential

c.    Existing Zoning:                     E-Estate

d.    Surrounding Zoning:               E-Estate and O-Open

e.    Existing Land Use:                 Residential

            f.          Surrounding Land Uses:         Residential

g.                                                                                                         g.         Access:                                    Erie Court

 

4.         The applicant requests a setback variance to allow an addition to an existing single family residence to be 55 feet from the front property line and 5 feet from the edge of the road easement in the E-Estate zoning district. 

 

5.         The lot currently has a single family residence built in 1977 and a garage built in 1990.  Both buildings are located within the required setbacks for the E-Estate zoning district.  In 1990, the Board of Adjustment granted a previous variance for the garage to be in its current location (William Smythe Setback Variance File #59-90).  The garage is 50.8 feet from the center of Erie Court.  The house is currently 63.8 feet from the center of Erie Court, and the proposed addition to the house would be 55.6 feet from the center of Erie Court.  The proposed addition to the home will not come any closer to the property line or the road easement than the existing garage. 

 

6.         Erie Court is a cul-de-sac which was designed to provide access to three lots, and there is no vehicular traffic beyond Lot 20, the subject lot.

 

7.         The recorded plat for the Crystal Lakes Subdivision 9th Filing shows a 20 foot utility easement that follows the arc of the road easement for Erie Court.  That 20 foot utility easement was vacated by the Board of County Commissioners in November of 1990, File #S-99-90.  A condition of approval for the garage variance was that the utility easement vacation had to be approved.         

 

8.         There are no major issues or concerns with this request.

 

9.         There were no persons in attendance who objected to the request.

 

10.       The applicable review criteria for the variance have been met as follows:

 

            A.        There are special circumstances or conditions, such as exceptional topographic conditions, narrowness, shallowness or the shape of property, or other extraordinary and exceptional situation or condition of such piece of property, that are peculiar to the land or structure for which the variance is requested.

 

The special circumstances for this property are the existing house and the mountain terrain.  There is an existing single family home on the property that already encroaches into the required setback from the front property line and from the edge of the road easement for Erie Court.  In addition, the natural topography of the lot is typical mountain terrain with fairly heavy tree cover, rock outcrops, and slopes.

 

 

 

 

           

            B.        The special circumstances are not the result of actions or inactions by the applicant or the current owner.

 

The above circumstance is not the result of action or inaction of the applicant.  The location for the single family home existed prior to the current owners owning the property.  The property’s physical characteristics and location were not created or altered by the applicant.

 

            C.        The strict interpretation and enforcement of the Land Use Code provisions listed above would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other land in the area or land with the same zoning designation and would cause an unnecessary and undue hardship.

 

The strict interpretation and enforcement of the provisions of the Code would cause an unnecessary and undue hardship.  The addition could not be built without a variance because the single family home is already within the required setback.

 

            D.        Granting the variance is the minimum action that will allow use of the land or structure.

 

Granting the variance will allow the owner reasonable use of the land will not adversely impact neighboring properties or their owners.

 

            E.        Granting the variance will not result in a substantial adverse impact on other property in the vicinity of the subject land or structure.

 

It is not anticipated that granting the variance for the addition would adversely affect any neighbors or their property.  No objections have been received from any of the neighboring property owners at this time. 

 

                        F.         Granting the variance is consistent with the purpose of the Land Use    Code and the Master Plan.

 

Granting the setback variance requested would not impair the intent and purpose of the Code or Master Plan.  Granting the variance will allow the owner reasonable use of the land and will not adversely impact neighboring properties or their owners.

 

            G.        The recommendations of referral agencies have been considered.

 

Referral agency comments are noted in the next section “Other Review Agency Comments”.  No objections were offered from other agencies or departments.


 

11.       To approve this request would promote the harmonious development of the area, would be in the best interest of the people of Larimer County, would promote the convenience, prosperity and general welfare of the applicant and the immediate inhabitants of the area, and would be in consonance with the intent and purposes of the Larimer County Land Use Code.

 

Evelyn King moved and Peter Bohling seconded the Motion that the Board adopt the following Resolution:

 

Resolution

 

WHEREAS, the Board having adopted its Findings and said Findings being incorporated in this Resolution by this reference as though fully set forth herein;

 

NOW, BE IT RESOLVED that applicants be and they hereby are granted their setback variance as requested subject to the following conditions:

 

1.    Failure to comply with any conditions of the variance approval may result in reconsideration of the use and possible revocation of the approval by the Board of Adjustment.

 

2.    All future additions or buildings on the property shall conform to the required setbacks as defined by the Land Use Code and must obtain approval through the proper county review and planning process.

 

3.    After the applicant applies for a building permit, the Larimer County Building Department must be provided with a written certification by a Colorado Licensed Land Surveyor that the proposed structure is located where shown on the Larimer County approved plot plan for this development.

 

4.         This approval shall automatically expire one year from the date of this Resolution unless prior to expiration the applicants (a) take affirmative action consistent with this approval or (b) submit a written request showing good cause to extend the one year time limit.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that if this action involves approval of a use (or expansion of a use) not otherwise permitted on the subject property, and if in the future the subject property is divided, then this action shall only pertain to one parcel resulting from any such division(s) and the Board of County Commissioners shall in its discretion determine which one of the resulting parcels shall enjoy the benefits of this action.

 

The question was called and members Peter Bohling, Eric Berglund, Evelyn King Alan Cram and Greg Christensen voted in favor of the Resolution.  The Findings and Resolution were duly adopted and the setback variance was granted subject to conditions.


 

File No:           #09-BOA0743  (GBP Partnership Setback Variance)

Owner:           GBP Partnership

Applicant:      George Langel

Property Description:

 

A TR IN NE 35-8-69, BEG AT A PT WH BEARS E 324.76 FT, N40 17' 30" W 10.49 FT FROM SW COR SE OF NE SD SEC, N 4017' 30" W 156.63 FT, N 48 25' E 136.05 FT TO A PT ON   SWRLY R/W LN HWY 287, S 41 35' E 95.92 FT, N 48 25' E  10 FT, S 41 35' E 204.08 FT, N 87 47' 30" W 207.22 FT  TO BEG

 

            The Application of George Langel, requesting a setback variance was presented to the Board.  The Application requested a setback variance upon the above-described property to allow a 45 foot by 85 foot building to be located 10 feet from the rear property line rather than the required minimum of 20 feet in the C-Commercial zone.

 

            The Board having heard the testimony and arguments concerning the Application, and having reviewed the record and being fully advised in the premises adopted the following findings:

 

Findings

 

1.         This hearing has been duly advertised in a newspaper of general circulation as required by law.

 

2.         The property location is NE 35-8-69; 229 North Highway 287, Fort Collins; located approximately ¼ mile northwest of the intersection of Highway 287 and Terry Lake Road.

 

3.         Site data is as follows:

 

a.         Land Area:                              1.0 Acres

b.         Proposed Use:                         Commercial

c.         Existing Zoning:                     C-Commercial

            d.         Surrounding Zoning:               C-Commercial, M1-Multi-Family, and

                                                                        O-Open

e.         Existing Land Use:                 Commercial

f.          Surrounding Land Uses:         Commercial, Multi-Family, Residential

g.         Access:                                    Highway 287

 

4.         The applicant originally submitted a setback variance request for a new 45 foot by 85 foot building to be 5 feet from the rear and side property lines but he has since revised his application to be located 10 feet from both the side and rear property lines.  The C-Commercial zoning district requires 10 feet from the side property line and 20 feet from the rear property line, as stated in Section 4.1.18.B.2 of the Larimer County Land Use Code.  The application is now only a request for a setback variance from the rear property line.

           

5.         The property fronts along Highway 287.  Colorado Department of Transportation has recently completed an Environmental Assessment on the widening of Highway 287.  Gloria Hice-Idler’s e-mail dated January 28, 2009, states that CDOT does have plans to widen the roadway in the future. There are currently plans to begin right-of-way acquisition.

 

6.         This application is for a commercial building for storage purposes only.  The applicant is also going through a concurrent site plan application.  Site Plan review will need to be completed prior to an application for building permits and prior to commencing the use on the property.

 

7.         There are no major issues or concerns with the revised request.

 

8.         There were no persons in attendance who objected to the request.

 

9.         The applicable review criteria for the variance have been met as follows:

 

            A.        There are special circumstances or conditions, such as exceptional topographic conditions, narrowness, shallowness or the shape of property, or other extraordinary and exceptional situation or condition of such piece of property, that are peculiar to the land or structure for which the variance is requested.

 

The special circumstance for this property is the location.  The property fronts along Highway 287.  Colorado Department of Transportation has recently completed an Environmental Assessment on the widening of Highway 287.  Gloria Hice-Idler’s e-mail dated January 28, 2009, states that CDOT does have plans to widen the roadway in the future. There are currently plans to begin right-of-way acquisition.

 

            B.        The special circumstances are not the result of actions or inactions by the applicant or the current owner.

 

The above circumstance is not the result of action or inaction of the applicant.

 

            C.        The strict interpretation and enforcement of the Land Use Code provisions listed above would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other land in the area or land with the same zoning designation and would cause an unnecessary and undue hardship.

 

The strict interpretation and enforcement of the provisions of the Code would not cause an immediate unnecessary and undue hardship, but it could when additional right-of-way is acquired by Colorado Department of Transportation.  The building is being located at the back of the property far away from Highway 287.  There are future plans to expand the road and acquire additional right-of-way.  Because of these plans, staff supports the new building location so that it will not be in conflict with future right-of-way for Highway 287.

 

            D.        Granting the variance is the minimum action that will allow use of the land or structure.

 

Granting the variance will allow the owner reasonable use of the land will not adversely impact neighboring properties or their owners.  This review criterion is inapplicable due to the special circumstance regarding the location of this lot.

 

            E.        Granting the variance will not result in a substantial adverse impact on other property in the vicinity of the subject land or structure.

 

It is not anticipated that granting the variance for the addition would adversely affect any neighbors or their property.  No objections have been received from any of the neighboring property owners at this time. 

 

   F.         Granting the variance is consistent with the purpose of the Land Use Code and the Master Plan.

 

Granting the setback variance requested would not impair the intent and purpose of the Code or Master Plan.  Granting the variance will allow the owner reasonable use of the land and will not adversely impact neighboring properties or their owners.

 

            G.        The recommendations of referral agencies have been considered.

 

Referral agency comments are noted in the next section “Other Review Agency Comments”.  No objections were offered from other agencies or departments.

 

10.       To approve this request would promote the harmonious development of the area, would be in the best interest of the people of Larimer County, would promote the convenience, prosperity and general welfare of the applicant and the immediate inhabitants of the area, and would be in consonance with the intent and purposes of the Larimer County Land Use Code.

 

Evelyn King moved and Peter Bohling seconded the Motion that the Board adopt the following Resolution:

 

Resolution

 

WHEREAS, the Board having adopted its Findings and said Findings being incorporated in this Resolution by this reference as though fully set forth herein;

 

NOW, BE IT RESOLVED that applicant be and he hereby is granted his setback variance as requested subject to the following conditions:

 

            1.         Failure to comply with any conditions of the variance approval may result in reconsideration of the use and possible revocation of the approval by the Board of Adjustment.

 

            2.         All future additions or buildings on the property shall conform to the required setbacks as defined by the Land Use Code and must obtain approval through the proper county review and planning process.

 

            3.         After the applicant applies for a building permit, the Larimer County Building Department must be provided with a written certification by a Colorado Licensed Land Surveyor that the proposed structure is located where shown on the Larimer County approved plot plan for this development.

 

4.         This approval shall automatically expire one year from the date of this Resolution unless prior to expiration the applicants (a) take affirmative action consistent with this approval or (b) submit a written request showing good cause to extend the one year time limit.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that if this action involves approval of a use (or expansion of a use) not otherwise permitted on the subject property, and if in the future the subject property is divided, then this action shall only pertain to one parcel resulting from any such division(s) and the Board of County Commissioners shall in its discretion determine which one of the resulting parcels shall enjoy the benefits of this action.

 

The question was called and members Peter Bohling, Eric Berglund, Evelyn King Alan Cram and Greg Christensen voted in favor of the Resolution.  The Findings and Resolution were duly adopted and the setback variance was granted subject to conditions.

 

                                                     ***

 

By Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting was adjourned at 7:05 p.m.

 

 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

 

            By Motion duly made, seconded and carried the above and foregoing minutes were approved on the _____ day of __________________, 2009.

 

 

                                                            LARIMER COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT

 

 

                                                By:      __________________________________________

 

ATTEST:

 

 

________________________________

Background Image: Loveland Bike Trail by Sharon Veit. All rights reserved.