MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
LAND USE HEARING
The Board of County Commissioners met at 3:00 p.m. with Matt Lafferty, Principal Planner. Chair Donnelly presided and Commissioners Johnson and Gaiter were present. Also present were: Brenda Gimeson and Savanah Benedick, Planning Department; Clint Jones, Engineering Department; Doug Ryan, Health and Environment Department; Jeannine Haag, County Attorney’s Office; and Denise Ruybal, Deputy Clerk.
Chair Donnelly opened the hearing with the Pledge of Allegiance. Mr. Lafferty asked that the London LLC Appeals, File #14-G0271, be moved to the consent agenda. There was no opposition to the request from the Board of Commissioners, staff or members of the audience. Chair Donnelly noted that the following items were on the consent agenda and would not be discussed unless requested to do so by the Board, staff, or members of the audience:
1. MEADOWLARK RIDGE CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT LOTS 3 & 4 AMENDED PLAT/EASEMENT VACATION, FILE #14-S3245: When the Meadowlark Ridge Conservation Development was approved in 2004, a condition of approval required fire sprinklers as recommended by Romeo P. Gervais, Deputy Fire Marshal, in his memo dated October 8, 2004. The requirement for fire sprinklers was later incorporated into the Development Agreement.
At this time, the current owners of lots 3 and 4 would like to change the sprinkler requirement to allow them to install a fire hydrant instead. The hydrant would be close enough to the planned dwellings on these lots so that they would not need to install fire sprinkler systems. The applicant is also requesting that the access easement shown for Lot 4 on the plat be vacated. That area currently contains utilities and would be difficult to use as an access. The north portion of the shared access easement was previously vacated on Lot 3. The easement vacation would allow them to place their access in an alternate location.
Loveland Fire and Rescue Authority (LFRA) provided comments from Carie Dann, dated June 22, 2014, indicating the previous condition was required due to (1) no hydrant within 600 feet of the proposed structures, and (2) the lots were located on a cul-de-sac. LFRA supports the property owners’ application and will allow the construction of the 2 southern most homes to be built without fire sprinklers provided the hydrant is installed within 600 feet of each structure and it flows at a minimum of 500gpm at 20psi residual. LFRA will need to review and approve the construction drawings for the hydrant.
Mike Cook, District Engineer with the Little Thompson Water District, commented that he will support the change to allow a hydrant rather than requiring residential sprinklers.
As proposed, the change of condition meets the requirements of the County and the referral agencies. Follow-up construction plans will be needed and those will be required to be approved by both the Little Thompson Water District and the Loveland Fire and Rescue Authority. The Development Agreement will also need to be changed to reflect the change of condition. Although this is being processed as an amended plat, there is no requirement for a plat.
The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Meadowlark Ridge Conservation Development Lots 3 & 4 amended plat and vacation of the 20’ x 50’ access easement on lot 4, subject to the following condition(s) :
1. All conditions of approval shall be met by February 25, 2015, or this approval shall be null and void.
2. The vacation of the access easement shall be finalized at such time as the findings and resolution of the County Commissioners are recorded.
3. Prior to construction of the fire hydrant the Development Agreement for the Meadowlark Ridge Conservation Development shall be amended to reflect the revised condition.
4. Prior to construction of the fire hydrant the applicant shall provide construction plans for review and approval by Larimer County, the Loveland Fire and Rescue Authority and the Little Thompson Water District.
2. LOT 1 WAVERLY RIDGE CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT AMENDED PLAT, FILE #14-S3246: This request is to amend the platted building envelope for lot 1 of the Waverly Ridge Conservation Development, to expand it to the north towards the residual land. The envelope is at 30 feet from the line and the request is to allow this to be modified to 25 feet. This will allow for a garage addition to the north. There is no specific rationale in the file for the building envelopes on this lot. The change is consistent with the underlying zoning. The expansion does not block access to any area nor does it impair visibility to the road.
This amended plat to increase the area of the building envelope allows the owner to provide additional garage space on the lot. This change does not affect the intent of the original platting or the purpose of the original building envelopes.
The Development Services Team recommends approval of lot 1 Waverly Ridge Conservation Development amended plat file #14-S3246. To be completed by resolution of the Board of County Commissioners with an exhibit depicting the revised Building Envelope.
3. GLACIER VIEW MEADOWS 12TH FILING, LOTS 183 AND 184 LOT CONSOLIDATION AND EASEMENT VACATION, FILE #14-S3217: This request is to combine two adjacent lots, Lots 183 and 184, Glacier View Meadows 12th Filing, into one lot and to vacate the 20’ utility easement along the common lot line. The lots currently access Mount Audubon Way and that access point will be maintained. Both lots are owned by the same people. There is currently one existing single-family residence and outbuilding on Lot 183. Lot 184 is vacant.
The proposed Glacier View Meadows 12th Filing Lot Consolidation for Lots 183 and 184 and Easement Vacation 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 for the Glacier View Meadows 12th Filing Lots 183 and 184 and easement vacation (File # 14-S3247) subject to the following conditions:
1. All conditions shall be met and the final resolution of the County Commissioners recorded by February 25, 2015, or this approval shall be null and void.
2. The resultant lot is subject to any and all covenants, deed restrictions or other conditions that apply to the original lots.
3. The reconfiguration of the lots lines shall be finalized at such time when the Findings and Resolution of the County Commissioners is recorded.
4. LONDON LLC APPEALS, FILE #14-G0271: This appeal request is to allow an exemption from the Land Division requirements (Section 5) of the Land Use Code to recognize two lots created by deed as legal lots, and an appeal from the minimum lot size required in the O-Open zoning district.
The first subject property, 9929 N. County Road 7, referred to as “Tract B” in this report, is a 5.17-acre vacant parcel and is located just north of the Town of Wellington. In 2013, the owner requested a legal lot determination, and on April 2, 2013, a letter was completed by the Larimer County Planning Department stating that Tract B is not a legal lot. The letter states that Tract B “has not been through a land division process approved by the County Commissioners. It appears that the earliest deed matching the legal description of the subject parcel was recorded on April 4, 1986, which split the parcel from the 29-acre parcel directly to the north.”
The legal lot letter described above also states the following: “It also appears that there was a variance granted for the subject parcel on February 25, 1986, to allow for a third dwelling on the property to the east (Tract A) with the condition that the subject parcel and the east parcel be combined through an add-on agreement process. It appears, however, that the add-on agreement was never processed and a third house was not built.”
The letter provides two options for the owner to bring the lot into compliance: 1) Pursue an add-on agreement to combine the subject parcel and the east parcel, or 2) Combine the subject parcel with the parcel directly to the north and pursue a land transfer. Following the date of the letter, Planning staff has found that an add-on agreement is not feasible for Tract A and Tract B due to the fact that these parcels are separated by a railroad right-of-way. A letter was sent to the property owner to the north on February 18, 2014, stating that this lot and the subject property are not considered to be legal lots. The property owner to the north was given the option to contact the Planning staff to discuss options for remediation; however, this owner has not yet contacted staff or the owner.
The owner of the subject lot also owns the lot directly to the east, addressed as 9933 N. County Road 7, and referred to as “Tract A” in this report. This property has not been through a land division process and was first described on August 2, 1973. The lot contains several dwellings, one of which has been issued a building permit, and another that was built before building permits were required. The property has been cited for containing a junkyard, of which was cleaned up in 2012. The property has also been cited for having more than the allowable number of dwellings on the property. A zoning certification was written on July 11, 2014, identifying whether the use of two dwellings on the property is a legal nonconforming use. The letter cites the variance granted by the Board of Adjustment in 1986 allowing two dwellings on Tract A and one dwelling on Tract B. Due to this approval, staff has verified that two single-family homes are allowed on Tract A. If this appeal is granted, one single-family dwelling would be permitted to be built on Tract B. Any dwellings currently located on Tract A, beyond the two that are considered legally nonconforming, will need to be removed.
In order to solve the legal lot issue described above, the owner is pursuing an appeal from Section 5 of the Land Use Code to recognize 9933 N. County Road 7 (Tract A), and 9929 N. County Road 7 (Tract B), as legal lots. A lot size appeal is also required for both lots, as neither lot meets the minimum lot size of 10 acres as required in the O-Open zoning district.
The following Larimer County agencies have the following comments:
· The Health Department has stated that the applicant will need to properly demonstrate that any future uses will be served by the proper utilities for water and sewer. A septic permit will be required for any new dwellings or additions. Based on the type of soil present on the west property, “an engineer designed system such as a septic tank and mounted absorption field” would typically be required.
· The Engineering Department has stated the following: 1) Transportation capital expansion fees will be required for any new dwellings; 2) Any improvements that may affect site drainage would require a drainage report for staff review; 3) The applicant will need to demonstrate the legal right to use any and all portion of the access route; and 4) A portion of the tract to the east is in the FEMA designated floodplain. Any improvements in this area must meet floodplain regulations.
· The Code Compliance Department indicates that “File No. 12-CC0240 was initiated to resolve unpermitted structures on the property to the east as well as a nonconforming junkyard. Code Compliance Inspector Chad Gray will continue to work with the property owners to obtain required building permits and inspection approval once all land use applications are completed. Staff notes a nonconforming determination through the Planning Department does not exempt structures from building permit and inspection requirements.”
The Development Services Team recommends approval of the London LLC Land Division Appeal, to allow an exemption from the Land Division requirements (Section 5) of the Land Use Code to allow two lots created by deed, with the following condition:
1. The applicant must pursue a Minor Land Division through the Community Development Department within 1 year of this approval, or this appeal will be null and void.
The Development Services Team recommends approval of the London LLC Lot Size Appeal, to allow two parcels to be 5.17 and 7.4 acres rather than the required 10 acres as required by the O-Open zoning district.
M O T I O N:
Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the consent agenda as proposed above.
Motion carried 3-0.
4. WILD PRELIMINARY RURAL LAND PLAN TIME EXTENSION, FILE #03-S2203: Ms. Gimeson reviewed this request is for authorization to extend the previously granted preliminary approval of the Wild Rural Land Plan for twenty (20) years. On December 6, 2004, preliminary approval was granted by the Board of County Commissioners for the Wild Rural Land Plan (Findings and Resolution recorded January 31, 2005, at Reception No. 20050007754). On August 24, 2009, the Board of County Commissioners granted an extension of that approval until August 31, 2014 (Findings and Resolution recorded October 8, 2009, at Reception No. 20090068717 and re-recorded on August 14, 2012, to correct a scriveners’ error at Reception No. 20120055019).
Prior to the previous extension request, the applicant had submitted materials to pursue final plat approval and t he draft version of a final plat was circulated to referral agencies and comments returned to the applicant. However, the applicant was reluctant to move forward with revising and finalizing the documents given the housing market, and requested an extension which was granted until August 31, 2014. The applicant is now requesting a further extension of the preliminary approval for an additional 20 years.
The preliminary approval allows 177 +/- acres to be divided into ten (10) single-family residential lots on about 45 acres. The bulk of the property, about 130.5 acres, will be protected from further development in perpetuity by either a covenant or conservation easement, as required by the RLUP. The applicant has indicated the intended uses of the land have not changed and remain as approved.
The request for extension is on property that consists of two non-contiguous parcels of land referred to as the Development Parcel and the Non-Development Parcel and is on the property described below (Development Parcel is generally located ¾ mile north of Highway 34, immediately north of the Hidden Valley Estates I and Hidden Valley Estates II RLUP projects and the Non-Development Parcel is generally located about 3/8 of a mile north of Highway 34, immediately west of the Devil’s Backbone).
Staff has received a comment from a neighbor expressing concerns about how the integrity of the neighborhood will be preserved over time with an extension of approval.
During the original approval, the applicant did commit to providing appropriate architectural guidelines for this project to mitigate the visual impact of the new residences and associated structures and committed to preparing homeowners’ association covenants that address internal private road access maintenance, use restrictions of the residential sites, utilities, restrictions on outdoor lighting, outdoor storage of vehicles, and management of large animals. Condition # 1 in the original approval states “The Final Plat shall be consistent with the approved preliminary plan and with the information contained in File #03-S2203, except as modified by the conditions of approval or agreement of the County and applicant. Applicant shall be subject to all other verbal or written representations and commitments of record for the Wild Preliminary Rural Land Use Plan.” Although there were not specific requirements for these controls, this condition would continue to apply and commit the applicant to considering the impact to the neighborhood at the time of development.
In the preliminary approval, the applicant received approval to transfer two units from a non-contiguous 35-acre parcel which allows more density to be placed on the development parcel. The 35-acre parcel was created by the Linda Wild Minor Land Division. The applicant has indicated that in the process of settling an estate, the family may need to change the configuration of that 35-acre parcel but still maintain the ability to transfer the units. Staff is concerned that if the configuration is modified and staff changes occur before the expiration date that the ability to transfer those will somehow get lost. Staff is proposing to add an additional condition to be included in the approval to clarify how it can be used to protect both the applicant and the County into the future. See Condition # 1.
An additional twenty (20) year extension would result in the preliminary approval enduring for nearly thirty (30) years. In that time frame, development patterns, standards and development processes will likely change. Some examples of concerns include:
· The developer is using the Rural Land Use Process which allows a transfer of density units from one non-contiguous parcel to another. In 20 years, that option may not be available.
· As referral agencies commented about this extension request, some were already requesting additional items to meet current standards adopted, such as with the Fire District.
· Property ownerships change over time in an area. Some of these new owners may not even be aware there is an approval for a project in the area and may feel as though they should have input into property being developed in the area. New owners in the neighborhood now have concerns about how the integrity of the neighborhood will be preserved in the future without input.
Staff believes these concerns justify placing limits on how long to extend the previous approval. Because Rural Land Plan development standards have not changed significantly since the original approval and because the Rural Land Use Process is still an available development process, staff believes an extension of an extra five (5) years would give the applicant additional time to pursue final approval in recognition of the current unfavorable economic climate and housing market. If economic conditions persist or worsen, additional review and action by the Board of County Commissioners could be requested at that time. A five year extension would allow the County to consider changes in development standards or surrounding conditions that may evolve.
The request for extension was reviewed by the Rural Land Use Advisory Board on Monday, August 11, 2014. The Board recommended approval of a time extension for a period of 5 years. Discussion included comments that a request for a 20 year extension is unreasonable and that an outsider would not think that to be a reasonable time extension. There was also discussion that economic conditions should not be the deciding factor in determining a time frame.
Approval of the time extension for five (5) years, until August 31, 2019. All conditions of approval as stated in the Findings and Resolution dated January 25, 2005, and in the previous extension dated October 8, 2009, and re-recorded on August 14, 2012, to correct a scriveners’ error at Reception No. 20120055019 will continue to apply with one additional condition as listed below:
1. Applicant has approval to transfer two (2) density units from an existing 35-acre parcel created by the Linda Wild Minor Land Division File # 04-S2358. The final plat for the 35-acre parcel is recorded in the Larimer County Records at Reception No. 20050074289 on September 1, 2005. If the configuration of that 35-acre parcel changes as a result of an amended plat of the Minor Land Division, (which could result in the original lot being combined with other lots), the applicant/owners may still transfer the two units as long the Amended Minor Land Division and the resulting development is consistent with the intent of the original approval.
Kitty Wild, the applicant, address the Board of Commissioners stating that the extension is in the best interest of everyone. She has no plans to move forward with the final plat and would like to continue to use the land as pasture land. Ms. Wild also stated that the extension would make the settling of the estate easier.
There was some discussion between the Board of Commissioners and staff regarding the RLUP and if withdrawing from the RLUP would be in the best interest of the applicant. The RLUP is a voluntary process and it would be up to Ms. Wild to withdraw if she thought it was in her best interest.
Chair Donnelly then opened up the hearing for public comment.
Michael Ralph addressed the Board of Commissioners stating that the neighborhood does support the extension. His only concern was the hunting that took place on the property and asked that if the extension was approved, could be a condition pertaining the hunting.
With no one else present for public comment, Chair Donnelly closed the hearing to public comment.
Ms. Gimeson stated that hunting is a private property right and could not be added as a condition of the extension. The staff and Board of Commissioners were concerned with a 20 year extension and the possible issues that could arise. Changes in the land use codes, what the future requirements may be if Ms. Wild withdraws from the RLUP now and reapplies at a later date and the amount of work already put into the project were all discussed.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Wild Preliminary Rural Land Plan Time Extension, File 03-S2203 for a period of five years, until August 31, 2019, subject to the condition(s) as stated in the Findings and Resolution dated January 25, 2005, and in the previous extension dated October 8, 2009, and re-recorded on August 14.2012, to correct a scrivener’s error at reception #20120055019.
Motion carried 3-0.
The hearing adjourned at 3:40 p.m.
TUESDAY, AUGUST 26 , 2014
ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS MEETING
The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 a.m. with Neil Gluckman, Assistant County Manager. Chair Donnelly presided and Commissioners Johnson and Gaiter were present. Also present were: Lori Hodges, Donna Hart, and Deni LaRue, Commissioners’ Office; Jeff Green, Risk Management Department; Steve Balderson, Felicia Lozano, and Jennifer Johnson, Facilities and Information Technologies Department; and Denise Ruybal, Deputy Clerk.
Chair Donnelly opened the meeting up to public comment giving citizens the opportunity to address the Commissioners regarding events and issues pertaining to Larimer County. Glenn Gibson and Eric Sutherland were present to address the Board.
Chair Donnelly then led everyone in the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE WEEKS OF AUGUST 11, 2014, AND AUGUST 18, 2014.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the minutes for the weeks of August 11, 2014, and August 18, 2014, as presented.
Motion carried 3-0.
2. REVIEW OF THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK OF SEPTEMBER 1, 2014: Ms. Hart reviewed the upcoming schedule with the Board.
3. CONSENT AGENDA:
M O T I O N
Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the consent agenda as outlined below:
08262014A001 – AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BUCKHORN MEADOWS CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT
08262014A002 – FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR LANDSCAPE INPROVEMENTS FOR LOT 7, MOUNTAIN RIVER RANCH ESTATES CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT
08262014A003 - CHANGE ORDER TO CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING PROJECT 2014 STREET RESURFACING PROGRAM – CHIP SEAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
08262014A004 – BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS LARIMER COUNTY COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT BY AND BETWEEN LARIMER COUNTY AND WALSH CONSTRUCTION INC.
08262014A005 – BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT REFERENCE: B#14-18, RECYCLE CENTER SCALE REPLACEMENT PROJECT BY AND BETWEEN LARIMER COUNTY AND WALSH CONSTRUCTION INC.
08262014D001 – DEED OF DEDICATION: THOMAS G. HAYNIE III, AND BARBARA JO HAYNIE
08262014D002 – DEED OF DEDICATION: MARKUS JAN VERSCHOOR AND LIZA MARIE VERSCHOOR
MISCELLANEOUS: Expenditure authorization and signature page for the PY14 WIA/Wagner Peyser funding; Estes Valley Board of Adjustment By-Laws; Public Trustee 2nd quarter report, 2014; Recommended appointment of Anjanette Mosebar to the Workforce Investment Board; Recommended appointment of Eric Lea to the Workforce Investment Board
LIQUOR LICENSES: The following license was approved and/or issued: Colorado State University – 3.2% Special Event Permit – Fort Collins.
Motion carried 3-0.
4. EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS MONTH PROCLAMATION: Ms. Hodges presented the Board of Commissioners with the proclamation declaring September ‘Emergency Preparedness Month,’ which is a nationwide coordinated effort sponsored by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security each September to encourage Americans to prepare for emergencies in their homes, and schools. There will be an expo on September 6, 2014, at The Ranch to educate the public on the need for emergency preparedness.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners proclaim the month of September as Emergency Preparedness Month.
Motion carried 3 – 0.
5. CRYSTAL LAKES HAZARD MITIGATION: Ms. Hodges reviewed with the Board of Commissioners that the Crystal Lake Fire Department is not a 501C3 organization, precluding them from being able to apply on their own for Hazard Mitigation grant funding through FEMA. The Fire Department has a grant proposal that they are able to fund and manage but they need the County to provide the administrative oversight with the State of Colorado in order to apply for the grant funding. The Fire Department has $60,000.00 approved as a match for the grant funds. Ms. Poage, representing the Crystal Lakes HOA, provided a brief overview of the Crystal Lakes area having 661 acres of open space with 112.8 of those acres to be used as a better fire break for the area. Commissioners Johnson noticed that information on page 2 of the application, specifically questions 5-7, were incorrect and asked that the information be updated.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Johnson moved that Board of Commissioners approve the Crystal Lakes Hazard Mitigation grant application and agrees to act as the fiscal agent for the project with Crystal Lakes providing all matching grant funding needed for the project.
Motion carried 3-0.
6. WORKSESSION: Mr. Gluckman had no items for discussion.
7. COMMISSIONER ACTIVITY REPORTS: The Board reviewed their activities during the previous week.
8. LEGAL MATTERS: Ms. Haag reviewed with the Board of Commissioners a lawsuit filed by an inmate and the County’s position in the defense of county employees named in the lawsuit.
M O T I O N
Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the defense of Justin Smith, Tim Palmer, Staci Shaffer, and Cassondra Windwalker by Larimer County and the Larimer County Attorney’s Office, in the U.S. District Court case #14CV1435 filed by Benjamin Kole, and to pay any judgments that may be entered against them in their official individual capacities.
Motion carried 3-0.
The meeting adjourned at 9:45 a.m.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
CLERK AND RECORDER
Denise M. Ruybal, Deputy Clerk