County Offices, Courts, and the Landfill will all be closed on Monday, May 30, 2016 for the Memorial Day Holiday. Critical services at Larimer County are not disrupted by closures.
LARIMER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of August 18, 2004
The Larimer County Planning Commission met in a regular session on Wednesday, August 18, 2004, at 6:30 p.m. in the Hearing Room. Commissioners’ Boulter, Huddleston, Korb, Pond, terMeer, Waldo, and Wallace were present. Commissioner Morgan presided as Chairman. Commissioner Nelson was absent. Also present were Frank Lancaster, County Manager, Rob Helmick, Principal Planner, Al Kadera, Senior Planner, David Karan, Planner II, Geniphyr Ponce-Pore, Planner II, Christie Coleman, Engineering Department, Doug Ryan, Environmental Health, and Jill Albracht, Planning Technician and Recording Secretary.
COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC REGARDING THE COUNTY LAND USE CODE: None
COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC REGARDING OTHER RELEVANT LAND USE MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA:
Bob Webb, 9120 N. County Road 27, stated that the rezoning process was lengthy with several fees, and he did not feel that it was fair to the people that were trying to be productive with their land.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE JULY 21, 2004 MEETING: Commissioner Korb stated that he would like the acknowledgement of the Planning Commission’s new member, Nancy Wallace, added to the minutes. MOTION by Commissioner Korb to approve the minutes with the amended statement; seconded by Commissioner Pond. This received unanimous voice approval.
AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA: None
TABLED ITEM: HOFF CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT:
Commissioner Waldo moved that the Hoff Conservation Development be tabled until October 20, 2004. Commissioner Korb seconded the Motion. This received unanimous voice approval.
ITEM #1 COLORADO STATE FOREST SERVICE LOCATION & EXTENT #04-Z1517: Mr. Karan provided background information on the request to construct an office building for the Colorado State Forest Administration on Colorado State University’s Foothills Campus west of Fort Collins.
Commissioner Korb moved that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends to the Board of County Commissioners that the Colorado State Forest Location & Extent for the property described on "Exhibit A" to the minutes be approved subject to the following conditions:
1. County drainage fees should be paid before construction begins.
2. The Larimer County Planning Commission requests the University continue to work with Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins, to reach agreements on how and when a fair and equitable agreement can be reached to address issues and concerns regarding public facilities and infrastructure in the area.
Commissioner Huddleston seconded the Motion.
Commissioners' Boulter, Huddleston, Korb, Pond, terMeer, Waldo, Wallace, and Chairman Morgan voted in favor of the Motion.
MOTION PASSED: 8-0
ITEM #2 LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS; SPECIAL EVENTS: Mr. Lancaster provided background information on the request to adopt a new Section 7 of the Larimer County Land Use Code to cover temporary special events on private property.
Melanie Patton, resident of Masonville, asked if the special events permit would have a limit on the number of times per year it could be used for an event?
Mr. Lancaster explained that the special event permit could not exceed 30 days in duration consecutively or cumulatively within a calendar year.
Ms. Patton asked how much the permit was?
Mr. Lancaster stated that the cost had not yet been determined, but he expected the application fee to be $100 or less.
Ms. Patton asked what the penalty would be for a person who did not obtain a special events permit?
Mr. Lancaster stated that the person without a permit would have to cease the activity taking place. He also remarked that Larimer County would do its best to inform the community about the permit. .
Bob Webb, 9120 N. County Road 27, explained that for 20 years he had allowed the community to use his land to hold special events. In spite of this, last year the Zoning Code Enforcement Officer informed him that it was not permitted to have functions in the O-Open zoning district.
Commissioner Wallace asked how many events Mr. Webb held in a year?
Mr. Webb stated between six and eight with no events during the winter.
Commissioner terMeer asked if the events typically consisted of more than 300 people?
Mr. Webb replied no. The highest number of people had been 350 for a wedding. Most of the events were community events.
Commissioner Morgan asked how the special events regulation could be enforced before it was proposed and/or approved?
Rob Helmick, Principal Planner, stated that he did not know the specifics of the action taken by the Zoning Code Enforcement Officer, but any use of a property in breach of its zoning was a violation. The “special events” that Mr. Webb was cited for was a generic category, and he was not in violation of the Special Events section of the Larimer County Land Use Code. He was in violation of the zoning.
Al Kadera, Senior Planner, explained how to discern the difference between a commercial event and a special event. He stated that if an event was tied directly to a commercial enterprise it would need to obtain proper zoning and not a special events permit.
James Groover, 1620 W. County Road 60E, asked what the current zoning regulations were?
Mr. Helmick stated that there were no current regulations regarding special events on private property.
Commissioner Boulter stated the need for the public to be informed of the Special Events permit.
Commissioner Wallace stated that the Special Events section of the Larimer County Land Use Code, if passed, needed to clarify the definition for what was acceptable for commercial and noncommercial properties.
Commissioner Korb suggested that the Special Events language be amended to clarify that special events would not include ongoing commercial activity; which was not permitted by the zoning of the affected property.
Mr. Lancaster stated that he felt that if a sporadic, commercial event occurred it would be considered a special event.
Commissioner Korb and Wallace felt that the suggested amended language was unnecessary after hearing Mr. Lancaster’s clarification on commercial events.
Commissioner Boulter stated that he would approve the Special Events section to the Larimer County Land Use Code.
Chairman Morgan stated that the regulation was balanced and fit the needs of the communities.
Commissioner Pond moved that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that the Larimer County Land Use Code: Special Events, be approved.
Commissioner Waldo seconded the Motion.
Commissioners' Boulter, Huddleston, Korb, Pond, terMeer, Waldo, Wallace and Chairman Morgan voted in favor of the Motion.
MOTION PASSED: 8-0
The Hearing recessed for five minutes.
ITEM #3 RIDGE VIEW NORTH SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY PLAT #03-S2225: Ms. Ponce-Pore provided background information on the request for a preliminary plat for a three lot subdivision on 29.92 acres. She explained that in 1998 the Sander MLD (#98-EX1229) was approved, which created Lot A and B. The applicant requested to further divide Lot A of the Sander MLD into 3 lots for a single-family residential uses. In February 2004, the Board of Adjustment approved the Triece Lot Size Variance allowing for the proposed Lot 3 to be 7.59 acres. She also stated that the point of access was a concern for a neighbor; specifically, the shared access. To resolve the issue, staff proposed an additional condition of approval 7: The Final Plat materials shall demonstrate that the shared access will be constructed to 40 feet in width for the first 50 feet of depth from County Road 60E, and the plat shall indicate an easement that will be of adequate width to accommodate the road.
Christie Coleman, Engineering Department, explained that the intent of condition 7 was to have a 50 foot clear zone after the right-of-way. This would allow vehicles to pull completely off of the right-of-way before entering into a lot.
Chairman Morgan asked what the County right-of-way standard was?
Ms. Coleman stated that Larimer County Road 60E was classified as a local road, which required a 60 foot total right-of-way.
Commissioner Huddleston asked about a traffic count analysis?
Ms. Coleman stated that Larimer County Road 60E in 2001 had an Average Daily Trip (ADT) of 433. The pavement threshold for county roads was 400 ADT. The Larimer County Road Manuel indicated that developments that generated 20 or less additional trips would create an insignificant impact onto the county road system and would be exempt from traffic studies and pavement threshold requirements. Since only two additional lots were being proposed, it met the criteria of Insignificant Impact.
Tom Honn, Planning Consultant for the applicant, stated that the way the property had been divided did not allow for easy access, and was the only issue regarding the development of the property. He explained that the property owner to the north had a special needs child; therefore, the previous property owner, Mr. Sander, had provided them with an access easement across the eastern half of the property. At Sketch Plan, he proposed to have separate driveways, but the Engineering Department asked for the consolidation of the access points on the property. Consequently, for the Preliminary Plat, a draft was submitted that created a joint access easement for the first 50 feet off of the right-of-way that would be used by both properties. The access to Lot 1 would then veer off of that particular common area, and a private drive would continue to the north to the rear of the property. He stated the applicant agreed with the proposed conditions, and believed the added condition 7 was a viable solution.
Terry Stark, 1126 W. County Road 60E, stated that she owned the 40.4 acres directly north of the Triece property. She explained that she had asked the past owners if the access easement could be shared if she helped to maintain it. The owners’ said no, too much traffic was already on the
drive because of at least two other properties accessing it by the furthest East easement. She went on to explain her situation with the property, road, and the problems with the joint access driveway. She suggested for the new lot to have its own driveway, but was willing to work with the added condition 7 presented.
Mr. Honn reiterated that the new condition 7 would solve the access agreement problems. He had no objections with having a separate drive to Lot 1 and felt it would solve some of Ms. Stark’s concerns.
Commissioner Korb commented on the letter from Mr. and Mrs. Napier, neighbors to the property, which was presented by staff.
Mr. Honn stated he had tried to negotiate boundaries and eliminate the irregular shape; however, the owners of the property felt that the land to the west was good pasture land compared to the land to the rear of the property.
David Napier, 1318 W. County Road 60E, stated that the only option he was given was to give up the pasture land and take the hill side land, which he did not want to do.
Commissioner Wallace remarked that the variance that was approved prior to the Preliminary Plat application was inappropriate because the variance allowed for a subdivision of smaller acreages. The land was zoned for ten acre minimum lot sizes, and it should not be any less than that.
Commissioner terMeer concurred with Commissioner Wallace’s comment. She stated that she would not vote in favor of the subdivision.
Commissioner Korb acknowledged that an unsuitable judgment was made in the past regarding the area that could not be corrected now. He stated he was willing to pass the application.
Commissioner Morgan stated that he was uncomfortable with the Board of Adjustment making critical land use decisions.
Commissioner Pond moved that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that the Ridgeview North Subdivision Preliminary Plat (file #03-S2225) for the property described on "Exhibit B" to the minutes be approved subject to the following conditions:
1. The Final Plat of the Ridge View North is to be completed in strict compliance with the conditionally approved preliminary plat and other information submitted by the applicant and contained in the File #03-S2225, unless modified by the conditions of this approval.
2. The applicant shall execute a Final Development Agreement and Disclosure Notice for approval by the County to be recorded with the Final Plat. The Notice will provide
information to all lot owners of the conditions of approval and special costs or fees associated with the approval of this project. The notice shall include, but is not limited to: the need for engineered septic systems and foundations, the shared access, fire department requirements for sprinklering homes, rural area issues, and the need for passive radon mitigation.
3. The following fees shall be collected at building permit for new single family dwellings: Poudre R-1 school fees in lieu of dedication, Larimer County fees for County and Regional Transportation, and the Larimer County Park Fee in lieu of dedication. The fee amount that is current at the time building permit application shall apply. Prior to construction, the applicant must contact the County Engineering Department and obtain a Development Construction Permit.
4. Passive radon mitigation measures shall be included in the construction of all new residential structures in this development. Radon detection tests are required in all new residential structures on this site. The results of these tests shall be submitted to the Planning Department once the structure is enclosed but prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. As an alternative, a builder may present a prepaid receipt for a radon tester that specifies that a test will be done within 30 days. A permanent certificate of occupancy can be issued when the prepaid receipt is submitted.
5. All residential structures shall be equipped with residential fire sprinkler systems, per Poudre Fire Authority.
6. At the time of building permit, grading for each structure shall indicate positive drainage away from the structure, and site specific engineering foundation investigations and engineered footings and foundations shall be required for all habitable structures to be built within this subdivision, per Colorado Geological Survey letter, dated June 4, 2004.
7. The Final Plat materials shall demonstrate that the shared access will be constructed to 40 feet in width for the first 50 feet of depth from County Road 60E, and the plat shall indicate as easement that will be of adequate width to accommodate the road.
Commissioner Huddleston seconded the Motion.
Commissioner terMeer voted against the Motion.
Commissioners' Boulter, Huddleston, Korb, Pond, Waldo, Wallace and Chairman Morgan voted in favor of the Motion.
MOTION PASSED: 7-1
REPORT FROM STAFF: Mr. Helmick reminded the Commission of their upcoming meetings.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the hearing adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
These minutes constitute the Resolution of the Larimer County Planning Commission for the recommendations contained herein which are hereby certified to the Larimer County Board of Commissioners.
Roger Morgan, Chairman Jason Waldo, Secretary