MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

 

Monday, July 8, 2019

 

    LAND USE HEARING

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 3:00 p.m. with Rob Helmick, Senior Planner. Chair Donnelly presided, and Commissioner Johnson was present. Commissioner Kefalas was excused. Also present were: Jenn Cram, Kathy Eastely, Leslie Ellis, Samantha Mott and Michael Whitley, Community Development; Frank Haug, County Attorney’s Office; Steven Rothwell, Engineering; Lea Schneider, Health Department; Jeannine Haag, County Attorney; and Elizabeth Carter, Deputy Clerk.

 

Chair Donnelly opened the hearing with the Pledge of Allegiance. 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.

 

Members of the audience requested that item number four the MCCOY-MANFREDO MINOR SPECIAL REVIEW, FILE #18-ZONE2478 be removed from the Consent Agenda.  The item was removed for a full public hearing.

 

1.         HAZELHURST MINOR LAND DIVISION AND APPEAL, FILE #19-LAND3896: This is a request to split off 40-acres from a 45-acre lot.  The 40-acre lot will be purchased by the City of Fort Collins Natural Area and will become part of the Coyote Ridge Natural Area.  The remaining 5-acre lot will include the existing residence and outbuildings. 

 

The property is located south of Trilby Road approximately ¾ west of Taft Hill Road.  The lot was originally part of the Fort Collins Loveland Water District Exemption in 1980 that split off 3.62 acres from the remaining 311.61-acre parcel for the purpose of a water tank.  The 311-acre parcel has been split into seven 35 plus acre lots.  Because the lot was originally part of an Exemption Plat, this request includes an appeal to do a Minor Land Division (MLD) on an Exemption lot. (Section 5.4.3.B of the Land Use Code.)

 

The Minor Land Division process can be used to divide off an existing legal use from the remaining vacant property with the condition that the development of the vacant property must be approved through the appropriate land division process and for the division of land for open space.  To approve a Minor Land Division, the Board of County Commissioners must consider the review criteria found in Section 5.4.3 of the Land Use Code and find that each criterion has been met or determined to be inapplicable. These criteria are noted below:

 

            A.        The property is not part of an approved or recorded subdivision plat.

                        The subject property is not currently part of an approved or recorded subdivision plat. 

 

            B.         The property is not part of an Exemption or Minor Residential Development approved under the previous Subdivision Resolution or a Minor Land Division.  The subject property was part of the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District Exemption and therefore incudes an appeal to this review criteria.  See the Review criteria for an appeal below. 

 

            C.         The newly created parcels will meet the minimum lot size required by the applicable zoning district.  The minimum lot size in the FA-1 Farming zoning district is 2.3 acres.  The resultant lots meet the minimum lot size requirement in this zoning district as they will be 5 acres and 40 acres.

 

            D.        The newly created parcels meet minimum access standards required by the County Engineer.  The Larimer County Engineering Department has indicated that the roadway within the new shared access easement will need to meet the standards of the Larimer County Rural Area Road Standards. The existing roadway looks to be sufficient to meet the requirement for an easement serving only one lot.

 

            E.        Approval of the Minor Land Division will not result in impacts greater than those of existing uses.  However, impacts from increased traffic to a public use may be offset by the public benefit derived from such use.  The proposed Minor Land Division should not result in impacts greater than those of existing uses as no new development is proposed.  The resultant 5-acre lot is already developed with a single-family dwelling.  The proposed 40-acre lot is proposed to be added to the existing City of Fort Collins Coyote Ridge Open Space. 

 

When considering whether to approve an appeal to deviate from standards or requirements of this Code, other than minimum lot size requirements, the Board of County Commissioners may grant the appeal subject to safeguards and conditions consistent with their findings concerning the following factors. The Board will consider each of the following factors and make findings pertaining to each one which, in their discretion, applies to the appeal (Section 22.2.3 of the Larimer County Land Use Code):

 

            A.        Approval of the appeal will not subvert the purpose of the standard or requirement.

Approval of the appeal to process a Minor Land Division on an Exemption lot will not subvert the standard as it is not creating a developable lot.  The newly created lot will be added to existing City of Fort Collins open space.

 

            B.         Approval of the appeal will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or property values in the neighborhood. Approval of the appeal will not be detrimental to public health, safety or property values as there is no physical change as a result of the appeal.  This request is to split off a 40-acre piece leaving a 5-acre piece with the existing development.  The 40-acre piece that is created will become part of the Coyote Ridge Natural Area.

 

            C.         Approval of the appeal is the minimum action necessary. Approval of the appeal to do a Minor Land Division is the minimum action necessary to create the new lot for the purpose open space.

 

            D.        Approval of the appeal will not result in increased costs to the public. Approval of the appeal will not result in increased costs to the public as there is no physical change as a result of the appeal.  The 40-acre piece that is being split from the developed 5-acre piece will be purchased by a public entity for the expansion of the existing Coyote Ridge Natural Area.

 

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

Approval of the appeal is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Code as it allows the newly created to be split off from the developed portion lot for the purpose of open space.  A new developable lot is not being created with this appeal.

 

The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Hazelhurst Minor Land Division and Appeal, File #19-LAND3896, subject to the following condition(s) and authorization for the chairman 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 January 8, 2020 or this approval shall be null and void.

 

            2.         Prior to the recordation of the final plat the applicant shall make the correction required by the Land Surveyor of the Larimer County.

 

            3.         Prior to recordation of the Final Plat the following changes shall be made to the plat:

 

                                                a.          Include the entire project number in the title, Certification of Ownership and Dedication, and the Surveyor’s Certificate.

 

                                    b.         Include the lienholder’s name on the signature block.

 

            4.         Prior to recordation of the final plat the applicant shall provide written documentation from Poudre Fire Authority that their comments have been adequately addressed.

 

            5.         Lot 1, the 40-acre lot, cannot be further split without going through a land division process.

 

2.         LAKE SHORE GARDENS, LOTS 2 AND 3 SECOND AMENDED PLAT,

FILE #19-LAND3865: The applicants are requesting the second amendment to the final plat for the Lake Shore Gardens Subdivision to amend the common lot line between Lots 2 and 3.  This request is to allow for more lake frontage and lake views for Lot 2. These properties have been the subject of a prior amendment described as the First Amended Plat for Lake Shore Gardens.  This subdivision originally platted 101 lots in 1963.  The first amendment created the configuration as shown on the sketch, right.  Originally Lot 2 did not have lake frontage. Lot 2 has also been the subject of three variance applications, which allowed for a rear yard setback of 4-feet rather than the required 10-foot setback to accommodate an addition to the single-family home; and a 22-feet 11-inch street side setback rather than the required 25-foot setback to allow for a covered porch.

 

The Larimer County Land Use Code (Section 5.7.3) allows for the approval of an amended plat if the following review criteria are met:

 

A.        No additional lots will be created by the amended plat. No additional lots will be created by the amended plat as the request is solely to amend the common lot line between Lots 2 and 3.

 

B.         The resultant lots will meet the required minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district and the lot dimension ratio required by subsection 8.14.1.H. If any of the lots are nonconforming with respect to the minimum lot size or the lot dimension ratio, the amended plat must not increase the nonconformity. This subdivision was platted in 1963 in the FA – Farming Zone District with Lot 2 at .38-acres and Lot 3 at .6-acres.  The required minimum lot size, when served by public water and sanitation as these lots are, is .5-acres.  Lot 2 does not currently meet the required minimum lot size, however the amended plat will add approximately 2,900 square feet to Lot 2 and, though not enough land is being added to bring it into conformance, the resulting lot of .45-acre will be closer to a conforming lot than the original. Lot 3 will remain in conformance with the minimum lot size at .54-acres.

 

C.         The amended plat will not create a nonconforming setback for any existing building; The submittal documents appear to discuss the location of an existing shed; however, the applicant has stated that the shed will be removed from the site. 

 

D.        The resultant lots will meet the requirements of subsection 8.14.1.I.  Lots cannot be divided by a municipal or county boundary line, road, alley, or another lot. The lot line being amended will not cause the lots to be impacted by any municipal or county boundary line, road, alley, or another lot.

 

E.        The amended plat will not adversely affect access, drainage or utility easements or rights-of-way serving the property or other properties in the area.  No improvements are planned, therefore there should not be any adverse impact to access, drainage or utility easements or rights-of-way. 

 

F.         Any covenants, deed restrictions or other conditions of approval that apply to the original lots must also apply to the resultant lots and be noted on the final plat, except those changes to a condition or note on a plat that are approved with this application. The Board shall consider the original reason or circumstance for a condition or note on a plat when approving a change. A condition of approval is recommended that requires the plat to include a note stating that the lots will be subject to existing restrictions, covenants, and regulations as set forth in the plat of record.  This note currently is located on the plat

 

The following County Departments commented on the amended plat.  Planning: r equested additional information related to improvements on the site, and recommended plat changes.  The items were addressed. Engineering: comments regarding drainage and utilities.  There were no issues.  Code Compliance: research of the subject properties has not been conducted to confirm whether all structures on the property have been properly permitted, inspected and/or are being used for the purpose for which they were originally designed. County Surveyor: noted four items that need to be addressed prior to final submittal. These items were adequately addressed.

 

The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Second Amended Plat for Lake Shores Subdivision, Lots 2 and 3, File Number 19-LAND3865, subject to the following condition(s) and authorization for the chairman 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 December 24, 2019 or this approval shall be null and void.

 

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

 

3.         ERDMAN APPEAL, FILE #17-ZONE2143:  This request is an appeal to Section 4.3.10.H.c of the Land Use Code which limits the size of a detached accessory living area to 40% of the square footage of the single-family dwelling or 800 square feet, whichever is less.

 

The property is a 30.0-acre parcel located at 15335 W. County Road 80, Livermore which is on the east side of County Road 80 approximately 3,500 feet north of the intersection of Highway 287 and County Road 80.

 

The property contains an existing principal single-family residence constructed in 1999. The principal home is 2,704 square feet.  The proposed detached accessory living area is within an existing 1,152 square foot double wide mobile home which exceeds the size limitation of 40% of the size of the principal dwelling (2,704 x 40% = 1,081.6) and exceeds the maximum size limit of 800 square feet for detached accessory living areas. The applicant’s project description indicates that the detached accessory living area is intended to house a future property caregiver.

 

The existing double wide mobile home was placed on the property in 1977.  When the property owners constructed a new single-family home on the property in 1999, there was a condition placed on the permit stating, “The existing mobile home shall be removed from the site within 60 days after the Certificate of Occupancy is released for the new residence.”  The Certificate of Occupancy was issued on July 10, 2006.   The mobile home was never removed.

 

On June 15, 2009 the Board of County Commissioners found that the property owners were in violation of the Larimer County Land Use Code.  The Board gave the property owners 30 days to either remove the Double Wide Manufactured Home or obtain approval for an Extended Family Dwelling.  The Board authorized legal action if the deadline was not met.

 

The property owners applied for an Extended Family Dwelling in August 2008 to house an elderly family member.  The Extended Family Dwelling application was denied because the elderly family member did not reside in Colorado.

 

In February 2017 the property owners submitted a Public Site Plan application and size appeal.  If the size appeal is granted by the Board of County Commissioners, the Public Site Plan can be approved administratively by the Community Development Director and the mobile home can be used for housing guests, family members or those who provide a service on site in exchange for their residency.

 

The single-family home and mobile home share an access point onto County Road 80.

 

When considering whether to approve an appeal to deviate from standards or requirements of this Code, other than minimum lot size requirements, the Board may grant the appeal subject to safeguards and conditions consistent with their findings concerning the following factors. The Board will consider each of the following factors and make findings pertaining to each one which, in their discretion, applies to the appeal:

 

A.        Approval of the appeal will not subvert the purpose of the standard or requirement. The purpose of the section is to allow for Accessory Living Areas that are incidental to the primary use of the property as single-family residential and of an appropriate scale.  The size limitation was included to ensure the accessory use remains accessory and to prevent the use from turning into multi-family residential and/or rentals where it is not permitted.  The proposed detached accessory living area is approximately 42.6% of the size of the principal home which exceeds the standard 40%.  At 1,152 square feet, it is 352 square feet (44%) larger than allowed. Three mitigating factors in this case are the property size, distance of the mobile home from the property lines and the distance from the nearest neighbors. The property is 30 acres in size and is surrounded by similar sized parcels.  The large parcel size lessens the impact of exceeding the maximum Accessory Living Area size because the difference is less visible than it would be on a smaller parcel. The proposed location of the mobile home is 480 feet from the closest property line and 500 feet from the property line adjacent to County Road 80. The mobile home is approximately 1,600 feet, 2,100 feet and 2,800 feet from the closest single-family homes. Given that the unit will not be rented, would not be out of scale for the property, the large setbacks, and the large distances between the mobile home and the closest existing homes, approval of the appeal would not subvert the purpose of the size standard.

 

B.         Approval of the appeal will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or property values in the neighborhood. Notice of the Public Site Plan application and size appeal were sent to surrounding property owners.  Only one neighbor responded.  That neighbor indicated that they “consent” to the application. It is not anticipated that granting the appeal would be detrimental to the public health, safety or property values in the neighborhood. 

 

C.         Approval of the appeal is the minimum action necessary. Approval of the appeal is the minimum action necessary to allow for the retention of the existing double wide mobile home as an Accessory Living Area.

 

D.        Approval of the appeal will not result in increased costs to the public.

It is not anticipated that the project will result in the need for improvements to public facilities or increased costs to the public.

 

E.        Approval of the appeal is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Code. The intent of the detached accessory living area regulations is to allow guest quarters that are secondary to the principal single-family home on the property and compatible with uses in the surrounding area. While the proposed appeal exceeds 40% of the size of the principal home and the maximum size of 800 square feet, no neighboring property owners have objected to the request. Given the size of the mobile home, the size of the property, the restriction on renting the unit, the location of the mobile home relative to the property lines and to the nearest single-family homes, approval of the appeal would be consistent with the intent and purpose of the Code. The application was referred to a variety of agencies. 

 

Comments from the Engineering Department note that Transportation Capital Expansion Fees will be required at the time of building permit and they note that the Engineering Department does not anticipate the request will adversely impact the drainage patterns on the site but if drainage is altered, the property owners will have to submit a drainage report for staff review. Finally, the comments note that only one access point to County Road 80 is allowed.

 

Comments from the Department of Health and Environment note water a sewer service requirement and the need for a permit for the installation of an additional septic system. Comments from the Building Department indicate that a building permit will be required, and they note a number of building code standards that will be applicable. Comments from the Code Compliance office note that two accessory buildings on the property appear to have been built without first obtaining building permits and a permit for a detached garage has expired without all required inspection approvals. The Addressing Coordinator’s comments indicate that if this Public Site Plan and Appeal is approved an address is ready for it. Lastly, the Road and Bridge Department indicated they have no issue with the Public Site Plan or the Appeal. 

 

Additional comments were provided by the Colorado Division of Water Resources indicating the need to amend a well permit to explicitly state that water from an existing well on the property may be used in more than one single-family dwelling. One neighbor also provided comments consenting to the application.

 

The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Erdman Appeal, File #17-ZONE2143 with the following condition:

 

1.         The Accessory Living Area shall be located as shown on the approved site plan. The Development Services Team notes that if the proposed appeal is approved, additional conditions will be placed on the Public Site Plan approval including the need for obtaining all applicable permits and an expiration of the Public Site Plan approval.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Consent Agenda item 1 through 3.

 

Motion carried 2-0

 

4.         MCCOY-MANFREDO MINOR SPECIAL REVIEW, FILE #18-ZONE2478: Jenn Cram, Community Development. This property is located on County Road 5 in Wellington, CO. The property is 12.22 acres in size, is zoned O-Open and contains a single-family residence and barn. The surrounding area is also zoned O-Open. The applicant is proposing to operate a Pet Animal Veterinary Clinic with associated boarding for patients and 200 square feet of outdoor space.

 

The Land Use Code defines a Pet Animal Veterinary Clinic:

 

            “A facility for the diagnosis, treatment and/or hospitalization of pet animals.”

 

Section 4.3.1.P. notes that a Pet Animal Veterinary Clinic with a maximum of 2,500 square feet of indoor space and 200 square feet of outdoor space is allowable in the O-Open zone district with the approval of a Minor Special Review.

 

According to the project description and site plan submitted, the Pet Animal Veterinary Clinic with boarding of canine patients will take place in an existing barn that is 2,500 square feet. The barn/facility will include a reception area, exam acupuncture/acupressure room, rest room, non-cooking kitchen area, rehabilitation room, 12 kennels and no more than 200 square feet of outdoor space. There is currently more than 200 square feet of fenced outdoor space adjacent to the barn.  The applicant has agreed to only use 200 square feet at a time and will rotate the 200-foot areas as needed to keep them clean and vegetated.

 

The facility will focus on traditional and integrative veterinarian rehabilitation methods treating the whole animal.  Treatment methods include acupuncture, acupressure, hydro-therapy, Reiki, cold laser therapy, rehab exercises, treadmill, aromatherapy, massage and stretching as well as diet evaluation. Boarding of animals will be limited to those patients that are waiting for appointments or that require special care/monitoring after normal business hours. The proposed hours of operation proposed are 7:30 am to 7 pm, Monday through Saturday. There will be a minimum of 4 employees and a maximum of 8 employees on site during operation.

 

The project description also notes that the existing residence may be used as an office for the proposed Pet Animal Veterinary Clinic in the future. At such time that the applicant proposes to change the use of the existing residence, a Special Review approval may be required, as the square footage of the use would then be greater than 2,500 square feet indoors in the O-Open zone district.

 

To approve a Minor Special Review application the County Commissioners must consider the following review criteria and find that each criterion has been met or determined to be inapplicable:

 

A.        The proposed use will be compatible with existing and allowed uses in the surrounding area and be in harmony with the neighborhood. Input from surrounding property owners is a significant factor when evaluating compatibility. The Planning Department did not require that the applicant/property owner conduct a neighborhood meeting prior to the submittal of the Minor Special Review. However, neighbors were given notice of the proposal. We did not hear from any adjacent property owners. There is an existing residence to the north of the property. The land to the east is vacant and is currently used for agricultural operations.  The property to the south has an existing residence and is currently used as a soil and stone business. The property is adjacent to Interstate 25 and the NE Frontage Road along the west. The proposed use will take place primarily indoors.  Outdoor area is limited to 200 square feet. The applicant has proposed fencing and landscaping to screen the use from adjacent properties. The Development Services Team finds that the proposed use will be compatible with existing and allowed uses in the surrounding area and would be in harmony with the neighborhood.

 

B.         Outside a GMA district, the proposed use is consistent with the County Master Plan. Within a GMA district, the proposed use is consistent with the applicable supplementary regulations to the GMA district, or if none, with the County Master Plan. The property is not located within a Growth Management Area and is not within a County-adopted Sub-Area Plan. The O-Open zoning district allows for the proposed Pet Animal Veterinary Clinic through the Minor Special Review process.  Because it is allowed through the Minor Special Review process, it will be consistent with the County Master Plan as long as it meets the Minor Special Review criteria.

 

C.         The applicant has demonstrated that this project can and will comply with all applicable requirements of this Code:

 

Applicable Section 8 Standards for All Development:

 

Section 8.1 Adequate Public Facilities

 

Sub-Section 8.1.1 Sewage Disposal Level of Service Standards: The existing residence and barn are on separate on-site septic systems. When the application first came in the Health and Environment Department noted that the existing on-site septic system that serves the barn was not sized appropriately for the proposed use. Since the original submittal the applicant has worked with Health and Environment and the leach field that currently serves the barn will be expanded with an additional 30 chambers. A condition of approval has been included to note the requirement to obtain a permit from the Larimer County Health and Environment Department to expand the existing on-site septic system that serves the barn prior to receiving a building permit for a change of occupancy.

 

                                    Sub-Section 8.1.2 Domestic Water Level of Service Standards:                      

The property is served by the Northern Colorado Water Association. They have noted that the proposed business in the detached barn can be served by the same tap as the existing residence. Therefore, adequate water for the proposed use can be provided.

 

Sub-Section 8.1.3 Drainage Level of Service Standards: There are no proposed changes to drainage on the property as a result of the proposed use. The Engineering Department comments indicate that they do not anticipate that the proposed request for a Pet Animal Veterinary Clinic will adversely impact drainage patterns on the site.

 

Sub-Section 8.1.4 Fire Protection Level of Service Standards:

The property is located outside of a Growth Management Area (GMA) in the Wellington Fire Protection District. Comments on the proposal from the Wellington Fire Protection District are attached. The applicant would like to Appeal Section 8.1.4.G.1. of the Land Use Code. This is discussed in detail later in the staff report.

 

Section 8.3 Hazard Areas: The property is not within a mapped area for geological hazards. This property is also not located within a mapped wildfire hazard area.  Thus, there are no concerns related to geological or wildfire hazards.

 

Section 8.5 Landscaping: There is existing landscaping to the north of the existing barn and proposed Pet Animal Veterinary Clinic. Additional landscaping is required to buffer the dog runs on the south side of the barn/facility and proposed parking, as the property to the south and east are zoned O-Open and there is an existing residence to the south. Section 8.5.5. notes that a landscape buffer is required when a use is changed, expanded or enlarged in a way that increases visual impacts on other properties or rights-of-way. Since most of the use will be conducted indoors in the existing barn, visual impacts are limited to the 200 square foot dog runs on the south side of the barn and the proposed parking area along the southern property line. Staff believes that these areas can be successfully buffered using a combination of evergreen and deciduous plantings. The approximate number of trees that staff recommends is 3-5, depending on species and size, along with approximately 10 shrubs. A condition of approval has been included that additional landscaping shall be required to meet the intent of Section 8.5.5. as part of the final site plan approval. Staff has discussed this with the applicant and they are comfortable with fulfilling this requirement, as it meets their goals for buffering from adjacent properties as well.      

 

Section 8.6 Private Local Access Road and Parking Standards: Since the proposed use is accessed off of a gravel road, the access drive and associated parking are not required to be paved with the exception of the handicapped-accessible space. Engineering noted that based on the proposed project description 16 parking spaces are required including one paved handicapped-accessible space.  The proposed site plan meets noted parking requirements. Local access road and parking standards are being met.

 

Section 8.15 Lighting: The applicant has noted that existing lighting is currently flood lighting mounted on the exterior of the barn. All site lighting must comply with Section 8.15 and generally be downcast. A condition of approval has been included to require that all exterior lighting associated with the Pet Animal Veterinary Clinic use meet the requirements of Section 8.15.

 

Section 8.16 Fencing: Fencing to define the four 200 square foot outdoor areas are proposed to be chain link fence 6-feet or less in height. Proposed fencing will be within the property lines. As noted above, landscaping will be provided south of the outdoor areas to provide a buffer to the property to the south. As such, the proposed material, height, length and location meets the requirements of Section 8.16.        

 

D.        The proposed use will not result in a substantial adverse impact on other property in the vicinity of the subject property; and There is no evidence that approval of the proposed use will result in substantial adverse impacts on properties in the vicinity.

 

E.        The recommendations of referral agencies have been considered. The application was referred to a variety of agencies.  The responses received are noted in the report as they pertain to review criteria and are attached to this report. There were no major concerns that could not be addressed with proposed conditions of approval

 

F.         The Applicant has demonstrated that this project can meet applicable additional criteria listed in Section 4.3 Use Descriptions. Section 4.3 of the Land Use Code contains the use descriptions and specific development standards for a variety of uses organized by land use categories (accommodation, agricultural, commercial, institutional, residential, etc.).   The proposed use meets the square footage requirements for approval through the Minor Special Review process noted in Section 4.3.1.P. that specifically applies to Pet Animal Veterinary Clinics.

 

Appeal to Section 8.1.4.G. 1.

 

Section 8.1.4.G.1. of the Land Use Code reads: Standards for Non-residential development outside of a GMA.

 

1. Water supply. All development which is subject to review as defined in Section 6.0 (Site Plan Review) of this code, located in rural areas of Larimer County, shall be served by a public water system designed and constructed to supply fire flows of 1,000 (gpm) at 20 pounds per square inch (psi) minimum residual pressure within 1,000 feet of said buildings. If the water supply cannot meet this standard then plans for the building(s) must include a fire sprinkler system designed and installed according to the requirements of the fire protection provider, and an approved fire protection plan.

 

The Pet Animal Veterinary Clinic use is considered to be a non-residential use per the Land Use Code.  As such, Section 8.1.4. G. 1. applies. As noted, the residence is served by Northern Colorado Water Association and the existing tap may be used for the proposed use. However, there are no fire hydrants served by public water in the area that meet the water supply criteria. Therefore, fire sprinklers are required that meet requirements of the fire protection provider.

 

The Wellington Fire Protection District has noted that the applicant may apply for a variance from the fire sprinkler requirements from the Fire District since the barn is less than 3,000 square feet. In place of providing a fire sprinkler system for the barn, the applicant will be required to install a monitored fire alarm system. The applicant has applied for and received approval of the variance and has agreed to install a monitored fire alarm system. In addition, the applicant has prepared a fire protection plan that includes fire extinguishers and an evacuation plan that has been accepted by the fire district. A condition of approval has been included to address fire district comments and requirements.

 

A.        Approval of the appeal will not subvert the purpose of the standard or requirement. As noted above, the public water supply serving the area does not meet water supply standards, as there are no fire hydrants in the vicinity. The purpose of the fire protection standards are primarily to provide protection for people and secondarily to provide protection of buildings.  The barn will be used primarily during business hours and will be manned by staff during business operation. The applicant has prepared a fire protection plan that includes fire extinguishers and an evacuation plan in addition to the monitored fire alarm system. As noted above, the Wellington Fire Protection District is comfortable with a monitored fire alarm system in place of a sprinkler system for the barn. Approval of the appeal will not subvert the purpose of the standard, with the applicant’s fire protection plan and monitored alarm system to protect users of the facility and then the building.

 

B.         Approval of the appeal will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or property values in the neighborhood. Approval of the appeal will not be detrimental to the public health or safety, as the barn will be equipped with a monitored fire alarm system. The monitored fire alarm system includes an exterior strobe and horn to alert neighbors of a fire. There is no evidence that property values in the neighborhood will be impacted.

 

C.         Approval of the appeal is the minimum action necessary. Approval of the appeal is the minimum action necessary to achieve the applicant’s goals of using the existing barn for the proposed Pet Animal Veterinary Clinic without retrofitting the barn with a fire sprinkler system.

 

D.        Approval of the appeal will not result in increased costs to the public. Approval of the appeal would not result in increased costs to the public. The applicant will be responsible for all costs related to the proposed fire protection plan and monitored fire alarm system.

 

E.        Approval of the appeal is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Code. As previously noted, the intent and purpose of the Land Use Code’s fire protection standards is primarily to provide protection for people and secondarily to provide protection for buildings. Approval of the appeal will be consistent with the intent and purpose of the Code, as the applicant will be providing a monitored alarm system in place of a fire sprinkler system as approved by the Wellington Fire Protection District. The applicant also has a fire protection plan in place that includes fire extinguishers and an evacuation plan. A condition of approval has been included to address the requirement to install the monitored alarm system.

 

The Development Services Team recommends approval of the McCoy-Manfredo Minor Special Review, File #18-ZONE2478 subject to the following conditions:

 

1.         The site shall be developed consistent with the approved plan and with the information contained in the McCoy-Manfredo Minor Special Review, File #18-ZONE2478 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 McCoy-Manfredo Minor Special Review.

 

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.         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.

 

5.         Prior to applying for a building permit for a change of occupancy the applicant shall obtain approval of a final site plan and associated construction details to address Engineering comments and meet requirements for landscaping as specified in Section 8.5 of the Larimer County Land Use Code.

 

6.         Only 200 square feet of outdoor space shall be used at any given time for the Pet Animal Veterinary Clinic.

 

7.         All exterior lighting associated with the Pet Animal Veterinary Clinic use shall meet the requirements of Section 8.15 – Lighting, of the Larimer County Land Use Code.

 

8.           The applicant will obtain the appropriate permit from the Larimer County Health and Environment Department to enlarge the on-site septic system to serve the barn/ Pet Animal Veterinary Clinic use prior to receiving a building permit to change the occupancy for the use.

 

9.         The applicant will utilize a fire protection plan that includes fire extinguishers and an evacuation plan in addition to installing a monitored fire alarm system as required by the Wellington Fire Protection District prior to receiving a certificate of occupancy for the change of use.

 

Jenn Cram, Community Development, briefed the Board on the project.  She noted that this request is for Pet Animal Veterinary Clinic for the boarding of canine patients. The clinic will be located onsite in an existing barn that is 2,500 square feet. The barn/facility will include a reception area, exam acupuncture/acupressure room, rest room, non-cooking kitchen area, rehabilitation room, 12 kennels and no more than 200-square-feet of outdoor space. Ms. Cram noted that there is also more than 200-square-feet of fenced outdoor space adjacent to the barn.  The applicant has agreed to only use 200-square-feet at a time and will rotate the 200-foot areas as needed to keep them clean and vegetated.

 

Ms. Cram relayed that the project description notes that the existing residence may be used as an office for the proposed Pet Animal Veterinary Clinic in the future. At such time that the applicant proposes to change the use of the existing residence, a Special Review approval may be required, as the square footage of the use would then be greater than 2,500-square-feet indoors in the O-Open zone district. Lastly, Ms. Cram reported that since there is not a fire hydrant located within the specified area, that an appeal for not having the required sprinkler system in the barn is also being requested.  Ms. Cram relayed that the Wellington Fire Protection District has signed off on the facility not having a sprinkler system if a monitored fire alarm system is put in place.

 

There was a brief discussion between the Board and staff regarding the definition of a vet clinic versus a boarding facility. Chair Donnelly then invited the applicant to come forward. 

 

The applicant, Brenda McCoy-Manfredo briefed the Board on the proposed clinic. She noted that the facility will offer wholistic treatment methods including: acupuncture, acupressure, hydro-therapy, rehabilitation, aromatherapy, massage and stretching as well as diet evaluation.

 

There was a discussion between the Board and the applicant regarding the types of animals to be treated.  Ms. McCoy-Manfredo reported that the clinic will focus mostly on the treatment of canines. Additionally, the Board asked about the applicant’s training and if a veterinarian would be onsite. Ms. McCoy-Manfredo reported that she is not a veterinarian but does have training in treating animals as well as her own personal experiences.  She also noted that she would hire a veterinarian.

 

Chair Donnelly then opened the hearing for public comment.  Gayle and Doug Cringan came forward in opposition to the McCoy-Manfredo Minor Special Review.  Ms. Cringan expressed concerns about previous incidents of animals running loose in the during dog obedience classes. She also reported an incident when the occupant of the residence on the property German Sheppard chase the llamas located on their property. Lastly, Ms. Cringan expressed worry over an increase in traffic on County Road 5. Mr. Cringan specifically reported concerns about the area of fencing on the north side of the property and if this would be used to run dogs.

 

Chair Donnelly closed public comment and invited the applicant back to the podium. Ms. McCoy-Manfredo reported to the Board that she plans to treat approximately eight dogs each working day.  She also noted that the property was purchased as an investment and that the residence was rented out. There was a discussion between the Board and Ms. McCoy-Manfredo regarding the incident with the tenant’s German Sheppard.  Ms. McCoy-Manfredo reported that the dog is now tethered when it is outside.  She also relayed to the Board that the fenced-in area on the north side of the property would not be used to run dogs, but rather as place for employees to have lunch etc. Lastly, there was additional discussion between the Board and the applicant as to whether she or a vet would be on the premises during business hours.  Ms. McCoy-Manfredo reported that she or a vet would be present.

 

The Board had a brief discussion with staff, as to whether it was permittable to have both a vet clinic and a residence on the same property.  Staff reported that it was acceptable to have both.  There was an additional discussion regarding the nature of the type of notification that was sent out.  The staff reported that postcards were sent out and a notice was placed in the Coloradoan.

 

M O T I O N

Commissioner Johnson moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Mccoy-Manfredo Minor Special Review, File #18-Zone2478 subject to the conditions as outlined above; and further move that the Board of County Commissioners the appeal to Section 8.1.4.G.1.

 

Motion carried 2-0.

 

With there being no further business, the Board adjourned at 3:35 p.m.

 

TUESDAY, JULY 9, 2019

 

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

 

There was no meeting held on July 9, 2019, due to the Commissioners attendance at the Rodeo Parade in Estes Park, Colorado.

 

 

 

 

 

____________________________________

TOM DONNELLY

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

ANGELA MYERS

CLERK AND RECORDER

 

ATTEST:

 

__________________________________________

Elizabeth Carter, Deputy Clerk