October 25, 2005


            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., October 25, 2005.  Members Kent Bruxvoort, Larry Chisesi, Evelyn King, Vincent Costanzi and Jean Christman were present.  Also in attendance were County Planning Staff members Al Kadera and Casey Stewart and Assistant County Attorney Jeannine S. Haag.


            By Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the reading of the Minutes of the meeting of September 27, 2005 was dispensed with and such Minutes were approved with a change to the Haines setback variance to reflect that there were persons in attendance who objected to the variance and that a 65-foot setback variance was approved.


File No:           #05-BOA0578  (Educators Outlet Setback Variance)

Owner:            Robert Weisser and James Weisser

Applicant:       Robert Bond / PDS & RMB, LLC

Property Description:


Lot 3, Summit View Industrial Park P.D., Third Filing. Situate in the southwest ¼ of Section 8, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the Sixth P.M., County of Larimer, State of Colorado. Said parcel contains 3.3642 acres (146,545 S.F.), more or less. Otherwise known as 2535 International Blvd., Fort Collins, CO  80524.


            The Petition of PDS & RMB, LLC, Robert Bond appearing, requesting a variance was presented to the Board.  The Petition requested a setback variance upon the above-described property to allow an industrial building to be set back 130 feet from an arterial road (Timberline Road) rather than the required minimum of 160 feet in the I-Industrial zone.


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




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


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


3.         The property location is SW 08-07-68; 2535 International Blvd., located about ½ mile north of Highway 14 on the west side of Timberline Road.



4.         Site data is as follows:


a.         Land Area:                               3.3 Acres

b.    Proposed Use:                          Commercial

c.    Existing Zoning             I-Industrial (Fort Collins GMA)

d.    Surrounding Zoning:                  I-Industrial

e.    Existing Land Use:                    Vacant

f.    Surrounding Land Uses:            Industrial, Commercial

g.    Access:                                    International Blvd.


5.         Applicant proposes to construct a commercial/industrial building on Lot 3, Summit View Industrial Park P.D. 3rd Filing.  The property is currently vacant and consists of approximately 3.3 acres.  It is bordered on the north by International Blvd. and on the east and south by Timberline Road – an arterial road, and by other industrial lots to the west.  The proposed location of the building would be 130 feet from the right-of-way center for Timberline Road instead of 160 feet as required.  All other building setbacks would be satisfied.


6.         There are wetlands on the property that will be impacted with this building, however the owners are working through the County’s site plan review process and have submitted a wetlands mitigation plan that will be finalized through that process. 


7.         The County Engineering and Planning Departments are working together to revise right-of-way width requirements and setback requirements for County roads as part of the Transportation Master Plan.  No amendments have been adopted yet but based on the draft so far, the setback requirement for this section of Timberline Road would be 110 feet.  The proposed distance is even further than that.


8.         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, that are peculiar to the land or structure for which the variance is requested.


The lot’s shape combined with the existence of wetlands, which must be retained and maintained on the property create special circumstances that are peculiar to the land and structure for which the variance is requested.


B.        The special circumstances are not the result of action or inaction by the applicant.


The special conditions were not created by any action or inaction of the current property owner. 





C.        The strict interpretation and enforcement of the provisions of the code 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.


There are other buildings in the immediate area that also encroach into the required setback.  The strict enforcement of the Code would prevent the applicant from enjoying similar rights of surrounding properties.


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


Granting this variance is minimum action that will allow the applicant to construct and use the building in the proposed location.


E.         Granting the variance will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity of the subject land or structure.


It is not anticipated that granting the variance will adversely affect neighboring properties.  No objections or complaints from surrounding property owners have been received by the Planning Department.


F.         Granting the variance is consistent with the purpose of this code and the Master Plan.


Granting the variance would not be contrary to the purposes of the Land Use Code or Master Plan.  The property is within the GMA for Fort Collins which encourages properties to comply with the city’s standards.  The city has reviewed the proposal and has no objections.


9.         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.


Kent Bruxvoort moved and Evelyn King seconded the Motion that the Board adopt the following 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 petitioners 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.         This approval shall automatically expire in one year unless the applicant takes affirmative action consistent with the approval.


BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that in the event the Petitioners PDS & RMB, LLC, Robert Bond appearing, not act upon the setback variance granted herein by using the above-described property in accordance with this granted variance within one year from the date of this Resolution, this Resolution shall be null and void and of no further force and effect unless upon good cause shown to this Board, and said period of time shall have been extended; such application for an extension of time shall be made by Petition to this Board on or before one year from the date of this Resolution.  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 Kent Bruxvoort, Larry Chisesi, Evelyn King, Vincent Costanzi and Jean Christman voted in favor of the Resolution.  The Findings and Resolution were duly adopted and the setback variance was granted subject to conditions.




By Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting was adjourned at 7:15 p.m.





            By Motion duly made, seconded and carried the above and foregoing minutes were approved on the _____ day of __________________, 2005.


                                                            LARIMER COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT



                                                By:       __________________________________________