Loveland Bike Trail
 

MINUTES OF THE LARIMER COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT

 

July 24, 2007

 

            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., July 24, 2007.  Members Jean Christman, Evelyn King, Larry Chisesi, Eric Berglund and Greg Christensen were present.  Also in attendance were County Planning Staff members Matt Lafferty and Samantha Mott, and Assistant County Attorney Jeannine S. Haag.

 

            By Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the reading of the Minutes of the meeting of June 26, 2007 was dispensed with and such Minutes were approved.

 

File No:           #07-BOA0664  (Ryan Setback Variance)

 

            A request to table the Ryan Setback Variance was made.

 

            Evelyn King moved and Greg Christensen seconded the motion that the Board table this matter August 28, 2007 at 7:00 p.m.

 

            The question was called and members, Jean Christman, Evelyn King, Larry Chisesi, Eric Berglund and Greg Christensen voted in favor of the motion.

 

File No:           #07-BOA0662  (Millard Setback Variance)

Owner:            Kathleen Millard

Applicant:       Douglas Case

Property Description:

 

LOT 20, GLACIER VIEW MEADOWS SUBDIVISION, 8TH FILING P.U.D. COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO

 

            The Application of Douglas Case, requesting a variance was presented to the Board.  The Application requested a setback variance upon the above-described property to allow a detached garage to be located 30 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 NE 24-9-72; 23 East Quandary Court, Livermore; located at the intersection of Quandary Court and Culebra Drive in the Glacier View Meadows Subdivision 8th Filing.

 

3.         Site data is as follows:

 

a.         Land Area:                               0.85 Acres

b.    Proposed Use:                          Single Family Residence

c.    Existing Zoning:             E-Estate

d.    Surrounding Zoning:                  E-Estate

e.    Existing Land Use:                    Single Family Residence

f.    Surrounding Land Uses:            Residential

g.    Access:                                    E. Quandary Court

 

4.         The applicant proposes to construct a detached garage on the property.  The proposed structure would be located 30 feet from the edge of a road easement.  The E-Estate zoning district requires a 45 foot setback from the edge of a road easement, as indicated in Section 4.1.7.B.2 of the Larimer County Land Use Code.

 

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

 

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

 

7.         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 lot is 0.85 acres in size.  The property has significant site constraints such as steep slopes and numerous rock outcroppings which severely restrict the area where the proposed building could be located.   The steep topography and location of the existing house are physical conditions that limit the area in which a garage could be placed.

           

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

 

            The above circumstances are not the result of action or inaction of the applicant.  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.

           

            Because of the topography of the lot, strict interpretation and enforcement of the provisions of the Code would cause an unnecessary and undue hardship. 

 

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

 

            Granting the requested variance is the minimum action that will allow the applicant to construct and use the proposed detached garage.

 

            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 would adversely affect any neighbors or their property.  No objections have been received by 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 variance is consistent with the purpose of the Land Use Code and the 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 were considered.  No objections were offered from other agencies or departments.

 

8.         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 Jean Christman 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 must go through the proper county review and planning process prior to construction.

 

3.         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 Jean Christman, Evelyn King, Larry Chisesi, Eric Berglund 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:           #07-BOA0663  (Quinby Setback Variance)

Owner:            Jesse and Rebecca Quinby

Applicant:       Ellen O’Connell/Van Horn Engineering

Property Description:

 

LOT 17, RETREAT FILING 1, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO

 

            The Application of Van Horn Engineering, Lonnie Sheldon appearing, requesting a variance was presented to the Board.  The Application requested a setback variance upon the above-described property to allow a new single family dwelling to be located 10 feet from the edge of the road easement rather than the required minimum of 25 feet, and to be located 40 feet from the centerline of Miller Fork Creek rather than the required minimum of 100 feet in the FO-Forestry 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 SE 23-6-72; 773 Streamside Drive, Glen Haven; located approximately ¾ mile northwest of the intersection of Streamside Drive and County Road 43.

 

3.         Site data is as follows:

 

a.         Land Area:                               2.06 Acres

b.         Proposed Use:                          Single Family Residence

c.         Existing Zoning:             FO-Forestry

d.         Surrounding Zoning:                  FO-Forestry

e.         Existing Land Use:                    Vacant

f.          Surrounding Land Uses:            Residential

g.         Access:                                    Streamside Drive

 

4.         The applicant requests a setback variance to locate a new single family dwelling on the property.  The single family dwelling would be 10 feet from the edge of a road rather than the required 25 feet and 40 feet from the centerline of Miller Fork Creek rather than the 100 feet as required in Sections 4.1.3.B.2 of the Larimer County Land Use Code.

 

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

 

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

 

7.         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 lot is 2.06 acres in size.  The property has significant site constraints.  The setback requirement from the stream restricts building anywhere on the property north and east of the stream without obtaining a variance.  The portion of the property to the south and west of the stream has significant slopes.  There is one flat area on the south side of the stream, but that area is within the setback requirement from the stream as well.  The steep topography and setback requirements form the stream prevent the applicant from building on the lot without obtaining a variance.

 

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

 

The above circumstances are not the result of action or inaction of the applicant.  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.

 

Because of the topography of the lot and the required setbacks from the stream and the road easement, strict interpretation and enforcement of the provisions of the Code would cause on unnecessary and undue hardship. 

 

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

 

Granting the requested variance is the minimum action that will allow the applicant to construct and use the proposed single family dwelling.

 

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 would adversely affect any neighbors or their property.  No objections have been received by 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 variance is consistent with the purpose of the Land Use Code and the 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 have been considered.  No objections were offered from other agencies or departments.

 

8.         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 Jean Christman 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 must go through the proper county review and planning process prior to construction.

 

3.         Prior to building permit issuance, a foundation plan and final floodplain study, prepared and signed by a Professional Engineer, that specifies the required lowest opening elevation of the structure, will need to be submitted.

 

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 Jean Christman, Evelyn King, Larry Chisesi, Eric Berglund 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.

 

                                                            Other Business

 

Evelyn King moved and Jean Christman seconded the motion that Eric Berglund be appointed chair of the Board of Adjustment.  The question was called and members Evelyn King, Jean Christman, Larry Chisesi and Greg Christensen voted in favor of the Motion. Eric Berglund abstained from voting.  The motion passed.

 

                                                            ***

 

By Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting was adjourned at 7:10 p.m.

 

 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

 

            By Motion duly made, seconded and carried the above and foregoing minutes were approved on the _____ day of __________________, 2007.

 

                                                            LARIMER COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT

 

 

                                                By:       __________________________________________

 

 

 

ATTEST:

 

 

________________________________

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