LARIMER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION

Minutes of April 16, 2014

 

The Larimer County Planning Commission met in a regular session on Wednesday, April 16, 2014, at 6:30 p.m. in the Hearing Room.  Commissioners’ Christman, Cox, Dougherty, Gerrard, Jensen, Miller, Wallace, and Zitti were present.  Commissioner Glick presided as Chairman.  Also present were Matt Lafferty, Principle Planner, Terry Gilbert, Planning and Building Services Director, Rob Helmick, Senior Planner, Karin Madson, Planner II, Michael Whitley, Planner II, Clint Jones, Engineering Department, Doug Ryan, Health Department, and Jill Wilson, Recording Secretary. 

 

The Planning Commission went on a site visit to Art 342 Amended Special Review and Modesitt Rezoning.

 

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:  

None.

 

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE MARCH 19, 2014 MEETING:   MOTION by Commissioner Cox approve the minutes, seconded by Commissioner Gerrard.  This received unanimous voice approval.

 

AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA:

MOTION by Commissioner Dougherty to move Item #5 Amendments to the Larimer County Land Use Code -  Buildings 120 square feet or less, file #14-CA0142, to the consent agenda, seconded by Commissioner Cox.  This received unanimous voice approval.

 

CONSENT ITEM:

 

ITEM #1  AMENDMENTS TO THE LARIMER COUNTY LAND USE #14-CA0141 :   Ms. Madson provided background information on the request to make amendments to the Larimer County Land Use Code regarding general housekeeping amendments.

 

DISCUSSION:

Commissioner Cox moved that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolution:

 

BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of County Commissioners approval of the Amendment to the Larimer County Land Use Code, file #14-CA0141, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.    Delete the following Category/Use combination from the zoning table(redundant):

Category

Use

Industrial

General Commercial

Industrial

Outdoor Display and Sales

 

 

 

2.    Add “S” to the zoning table under the “AP” column as follows:

Category

Use

AP

Commercial

Outdoor Display and Sales

S

 

3.    Modify the Section 0.1 Definition of Community Development Director as follows:

Community Development Director. The person appointed by the County Commissioners to head the Community Development Division, including the term Planning Director and Rural Land Use Center Director as referenced in this code and those persons designated to act in his/her stead.

4.    Modify Section 5.8.5.B.1.b. as follows:

Director of the Rural Land Use Center (RLUC director): The RLUC director will be a designated staff person in the planning and building services division and will report to and be under the immediate supervision of the director of planning. The RLUC director will be responsible for administering and enforcing the rural land use process.

 

5.    Add “S” under the B,C,I columns (in addition to “SP”)

Category

Use

B

C

I

Institutional

Community Hall

SP/S

SP/S

SP/S

 

6.    Clarify language used in Section 4.3.2.I. 

4.3.2. I. Storage buildings and garages on vacant lots. Prior to the construction of a single family dwelling each lot may include a storage building or garage for the purpose of storing personal property of the lot owner. All storage must be inside the storage building or garage. No residential, business or commercial activities are permitted in these buildings unless approved by the County Commissioners through the special exception, special review or minor special review processes. On lots of less than two acres (net area) these buildings may not exceed 800 square feet. On lots of two to five acres (net area) these buildings may not exceed 2,400 square feet. On lots over five acres (net area) there is no limit to the size of these buildings.   In no event shall the total square footage ground floor area of detached storage buildings and garages exceed ten percent of the net area of any lot. Only those buildings that are designed, constructed and approved by the Larimer County Building Department as storage buildings or garages may be used for this purpose. Manufactured homes, including pre-1974 mobile homes, cannot be used as storage buildings or garages. 

 

7.    Correct the “Easement Vacation” portion of Table 12.3.1. as follows:

 

Type of Hearing

Published Notice**

APO Notice**

Sign Posted**

Easement Vacations

14 days

14 days N/A

N/A

 

 

 

8.    Correct a spelling error in Section 5.13.1. as follows:

The purpose of the land division process is to promote the health, safety, morals, convenience, prosperity and welfare of county residents by approving only those development proposals that are consistent with the guiding principals principles and strategies of the master plan and the standards and requirements of this Code.

9.    Modify Section 4.3.10.I.2.f. to reflect current procedure as follows:

Note:  Permits issued under this subsection are effective for such period of time as the county commissioners determine is appropriate based on the particular hardship after considering all the information presented at the public hearing. The county commissioners may not extend the permit may be extended administratively for additional three-year periods, provided the conditions noted in subsection 2. below continue to exist. without a public hearing and finding that standards above continue to be met.

 

10.   Modify Section 9.5.6.C.2. as follows:

During the month of February of each year, the The fees in the road fee schedule shall be updated annually by the fee administrator to reflect changes in road construction costs during the previous year. The updated fees shall become effective on the first day of April July. To calculate an updated fee, each fee in the road fee schedule shall be multiplied by a ratio, the numerator of which is the annual two-year eight quarter moving average in the Colorado Construction Cost Index Report prepared by the Colorado Department of Transportation and the denominator of which is the same index for a period one year earlier than the numerator. If the ratio is less than, or equal to 1.05, the fees in the road fee schedule shall be updated by the fee administrator without further action by the county commissioners. If the ratio is greater than 1.05, the fee administrator shall report the ratio to the county commissioners, and the county commissioners shall determine the ratio that shall be used to update the fees. All obligations to pay the non-regional road capital expansion fee shall apply to the most recent update of the fees in the road fee schedule.

 

11.   Modify Section 9.6.7.C.2. as follows:

During the month of February of each year, the The fees in the road fee schedule shall be updated annually by the fee administrator to reflect changes in road construction costs during the previous year. The updated fees shall become effective on the first day of April  July. To calculate an updated fee, each fee in the road fee schedule shall be multiplied by a ratio, the numerator of which is the annual two-year 8 quarter moving average in the Colorado Construction Cost Index Report prepared by the Colorado Department of Transportation and the denominator of which is the same index for a period one year earlier than the numerator. If the ratio is less than, or equal to 1.05, the fees in the road fee schedule shall be updated by the fee administrator without further action by the county commissioners. If the ratio is greater than 1.05, the fee administrator shall report the ratio to the county commissioners, and the county commissioners shall determine the ratio that shall be used to update the fees. All obligations to pay the regional road capital expansion fee shall apply to the most recent update of the fees shown in the road fee schedule.

 

12.   Modify Section 15.1.1.A., B., D. and E. as follows:

15.1.1. - Supplementary engineering regulations.

A. Larimer County Rural Area Road Standards adopted November 20, 2006 updated October 22, 2007 .

B. Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards. Repealed and reenacted October 1, 2002 April 1, 2007

D. Larimer County Access Policy. Adopted April 8, 1987.

E. Larimer County Right-of-Way Permit Application and Construction Guidelines. Adopted January 19, 1999.

F C . LaPorte Plan Area Access Control and Roadway Design. Adopted February 23, 2004.

 

Commissioner Dougherty seconded the Motion.

 

Commissioners’ Christman, Cox, Dougherty, Gerrard, Jensen, Miller, Wallace, and Chairman Glick voted in favor of the Motion.

 

MOTION PASSED:  8-0

 

 

ITEM #5  AMENDMENT TO THE LARIMER COUNTY LAND USE – BUILDINGS 120 SQUARE FEET OR LESS #14-CA0142 :   Ms. Madson provided background information on the request to add a new Section 4.9.2.E. Detached Accessory Building 120 square feet in area or less.  Many properties within Larimer County have sheds and other small accessory buildings in their rear or side yards.  Many of these buildings were located such that they didn’t meet required building setbacks.  The purpose of the code amendment was to bring many of those structures into compliance, while maintaining minimum safety and access requirements.   She noted that building permits were not typically required if the structure was 120 sq. ft. in area or less and met other building requirements. 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Commissioner Cox moved that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolution:

 

BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of County Commissioners approval of the Amendment to the Larimer County Land Use Code, file #14-CA0142, by adding Section 4.9.2.E. and renumber the balance of the section as follows:

 

 

 

E. Detached Accessory Building 120 square feet in area or less. Detached accessory buildings may be placed within the rear or side setbacks of a lot as long as the following requirements are met:

1.   The accessory building must maintain a distance of five feet from all lot lines (including eaves, etc.). 

2.   All other required setbacks, including those from highways, county roads, and stream, creeks and river, apply.

3.   The building is not on a permanent foundation,

4.   The average roof height does not exceed 12 feet.

5.   The building is not used for any type of commercial  or residential purpose.

6.   No part of any building may extend into or above any easement.

7.   The accessory building may be located outside a building envelope unless restricted to the building envelope as part of a specific development approval condition.

 

Commissioner Dougherty seconded the Motion.

 

Commissioners’ Christman, Cox, Dougherty, Gerrard, Jensen, Miller, Wallace, and Chairman Glick voted in favor of the Motion.

 

MOTION PASSED:  8-0

 

 

TABLED ITEM:

 

ITEM #2  FLOWER POWER BOTANICALS LICENSES #14-G :   Mr. Whitley provided background information on the request for approval of a Retail Marijuana Store License and a Retail Marijuana Cultivation Facility License.  The applications included a waiver request from a provision within Section VIII.A.4 of the Larimer County Resolution for Licensure of Retail Marijuana Establishments to allow the licensed premises to be located closer than 500 feet to a place of amusement or recreation.   The location of the proposal was at 1308 & 1310 Duff Drive, Fort Collins, which was north of Duff Drive and approximately 750 feet northwest of the intersection of Link Lane and Duff Drive.  He noted that a State License had been issued to Flower Power Botanicals.  He also noted that the applicant had received approval to operate a medical marijuana grow facility and dispensary in the same location.  He identified a unit within the multi-tenant building that housed a radio-controlled racetrack that would be categorized as a place of amusement or recreation which triggered the waiver request.  The owner of the racetrack did submit a letter and petition of support for the marijuana license application. 

 

At this point Commissioner Zitti joined the hearing.

 

Commissioner Jensen mentioned that a place of amusement and recreation was added to the Larimer County Resolution and wondered why that standard would be waived.  He asked if the applicant knew that the racetrack was located nearby.

 

 

Mr. Whitley replied no.  He also spoke to the separation standards and measurements.

 

Scott S, general manager of Flower Power Botanicals, read a letter from the owner of the business, Peter Verchick.  The letter reiterated that the owner of the racetrack supported the application.  He wondered if the conflict was known at the time the Resolution was adopted if an exemption would have been allowed.  The same kind of exemption that was allowed to Choice Organics in regards to the drug rehab facility located near their business and the church in the proximity of Flower Power Botanicals.

 

Commissioner Wallace asked how long had the owner known about the racetrack.

 

Mr. S could not comment for the owner but from his personal experience he did not know that it was a place of amusement.

 

Gordon Wilfrey, 413 and 505 N. Link Lane, was President of the Fort Collins Business Center.  He felt that the applicant/proposal did not go through the appropriate channels to receive approval through the Business Center Board of Directors.  He opposed the license until an application was made to the Board of Directors.  He stated that he would also like to see the property fenced to prevent people from going on different areas of the property or onto other properties.

 

Commissioner Dougherty asked if there was a mechanism in place for the Fort Collins Business Center to require a fence to be erected on property within the Business Center.

 

Mr. Wilfrey replied yes. 

 

Mary Brenten, manager at Flower Power Botanicals for two years, stated that she never knew that there was a racetrack within the building.

 

Mr. S explained the access and parking at the site and noted that the business did not encourage any traffic to the rear of the site.

 

DISCUSSION:

Commissioner Zitti felt that the retail aspect of the use would be an increase in activity, which was a huge consideration since there was the place of amusement and recreation nearby which was frequented by minors.

 

Commissioner Gerrard agreed with those comments since minors frequented the racetrack.

 

Commissioner Jensen did not believe it was in harmony with the neighborhood since the racetrack was only 25 feet away and added that the license did not meet the distance requirements.

 

Commissioner Christman agreed. 

 

Commissioner Miller mentioned that no one had been aware of the racetrack over the years, and he would be in favor of granting the waiver.

 

 

Commissioner Cox was not in support of granting that waiver due to the fact that it was a new regulation and granting a waiver right away would be premature.  .

 

Commissioner Dougherty pointed out that the medical marijuana had been in operation for 3 years and the racetrack in operation for 10 years.  Within those times, no complaints had been received regarding the medical marijuana facility.  He stated that he was in favor of the waiver since there had been no complaints against the medical marijuana facility by the racetrack (place of amusement).

 

Commissioner Wallace was undecided on the waiver request.

 

Chairman Glick pointed out that the operating hours of the medical marijuana facility and hobby racetrack.  He was also undecided on how he would vote. 

 

Mr. Whitley explained that a license would have to be renewed every year by the Board of County Commissioners. 

 

Commissioner Dougherty mentioned that there was security in place at the facility.  He also pointed out that if the proposal was denied a medical marijuana facility would still operate at the site.

 

Commissioner Jensen moved that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolution:

 

BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of County Commissioners denial of the Flower Power Botanicals Retail Marijuana Store License (File #14-G0259) based on non-compliance with the land use standards and review criteria cited in Sections X.F.6 and XIII of the Larimer County Resolution for Licensure of Retail Marijuana Establishments, for the property described on “Exhibit A” to the minutes.

 

Commissioner Gerrard seconded the Motion.

 

Commissioners’ Christman, Cox, Gerrard, Jensen, Wallace, Zitti and Chairman Glick voted in favor of the Motion.

 

Commissioners’ Dougherty and Miller voted against the Motion. 

 

MOTION PASSED:  7-2

 

Commissioner Jensen moved that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolution:

 

BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of County Commissioners denial of the Flower Power Botanicals Retail Marijuana Cultivation Facility License (File #14-G0259) based on non-compliance with the land use standards and review criteria cited in Sections X.F.6 and XIII of the Larimer County Resolution for Licensure of Retail Marijuana Establishments, for the property described on “Exhibit A” to the minutes.

 

Commissioner Gerrard seconded the Motion.

 

Commissioners’ Christman, Cox, Gerrard, Jensen, Wallace, Zitti and Chairman Glick voted in favor of the Motion.

 

Commissioners’ Dougherty and Miller voted against the Motion. 

 

MOTION PASSED:  7-2

 

 

ITEMS:

 

ITEM #3  ART 342 AMENDED SPECIAL EXCEPTION #14-Z1924 :   Mr. Helmick provided background information on the request to amend the Art 342 Special Exception approval for an artist retreat with five studios, a single-family residence, accessory home occupations and studio space, which was located at the northwest corner of the intersection of W. Douglas Road and Eagle Lake South.  Specifically the applicants were now requesting the following changes to the original approval:

·  Rental of the studio spaces to artists

·  Owner occupy the dwelling on site

·  Use the large shop building on site as a home occupation office for the owner as well as private studio space for the owner.

·  Not install or use the additional modular home that was approved.

·  No employees.

 

He stated that as a result, the impact on the site would be reduced. 

 

Commissioner Wallace inquired about outdoor pollution that was a concern of a neighbor.

 

Commissioner Jensen asked if the studio spaces could be used as retail.

 

Mr. Helmick replied no.

 

Tim Hasler, applicant, stated that they were in agreement with the proposed conditions and recommendations.  He stated that there would not be use of an outdoor, wood burning kiln. 

 

PUBLIC TESTIMONY:

Carol LaCram, stated that the artist building seemed to be commercial and thought that they were apartments that to be rented.

 

Mr. Helmick stated that the units were only studio space, did not have kitchens and could not be lived in. 

 

Teresa Spaeth, stated that there had not been any problems on the site. 

 

DISCUSSION:

Commissioner Cox moved that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolution:

 

 

 

 

BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of County Commissioners approval of the Art 342 Amended Special Review, file #14-Z1924, for the property described on “Exhibit B” to the minutes subject to the following conditions:

 

1.   Failure to comply with any conditions of the Special Exception approval may result in reconsideration of the use and possible revocation of the approval by the Board of Commissioners. The Special Exception approval shall automatically expire without a public hearing if the use is not commenced within three years of the date of approval.

2.   The Site shall be developed consistent with the approved plan and with the information contained in the Amended Art 342 Special Exception, File #14-Z1924, 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 Art 342 Special Exception, File #14-Z1924.

3.   The Amended Art 342 Special Exception Special Exception is approved without the requirement for a Development Agreement. The Findings and Resolution shall apply and 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 Special Exception approval.

4.   In the event the applicant fails to comply with any Conditions of Approval or otherwise fails to use the property consistent with the approved Special Exception, 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 Special Exception approval should not be revoked, and / or bring a court action for enforcement of the terms of the Special Exception. 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 Special Exception approval, applicant agrees to pay all expenses incurred by County including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney's fees.

5.   County may conduct periodic inspections to the property and reviews of the status of the Special Exception as appropriate to monitor and enforce the terms of the Special Exception approval. The Artist Retreat is limited to no more than five artists at a single time coming to the site. No on site, sales of artwork, art showings or art instruction are allowed.

6.   The applicant shall maintain the vault system for the sink drains in the artist studio building and provide for routine maintenance and pumping of the vault

7.   All activities and uses on site are limited to those for the Special Exception as approved, and shall not include art sales, showings, instruction or other special functions.  The use of the large studio building shall be allowed to contain the home occupation and the resident’s studio space. 

 

Commissioner Dougherty seconded the Motion.

 

 

 

Commissioners’ Christman, Cox, Dougherty, Gerrard, Jensen, Miller, Wallace, Zitti and Chairman Glick voted in favor of the Motion.

 

MOTION PASSED:  9-0

 

 

ITEM #4  MODESITT REZONING #13-Z1921 :   Ms. Madson provided background information on the request to rezone from FA-Farming to PD-Planned Development to allow commercial type uses.  The property was located on the south side of Highway 287 approximately 1/2 mile west of N. Shields Street.  The applicant proposed to rezone 12.77 acres from FA-Farming to PD-Planned Development.  The property included the 3.5 acre Mountain Whitewater Descents parcel on which the existing business was located along with an additional 9.27 acre area (now part of the Modesitt’s residential parcel).  The rezoning was being requested to allow Mountain Whitewater Descents to expand the existing approved rafting business to include additional commercial uses including a restaurant/bar/tavern, and an events center (community hall) for outdoor concerts, ceremonies, music, theatre, dance and sporting events.  The rezoning would also allow a limited set of other commercial, agricultural, institutional, recreational and limited industrial uses consistent with the C-Commercial zoning district described in the Larimer County Land Use Code. 

 

Commissioner Dougherty mentioned that the sewer would not be connected until next year and wondered if the septic system could currently handle the uses on the site.

 

Doug Ryan, Health Department, replied no.  It would need to be a phased use.  The use could continue as a seasonal type use.

 

Ms. Madson stated that the music events could not be held until sewer was extended.  A special event permit would need to be issued for those events. 

 

Michael Chalona, applicant, was in agreement for the recommendation for approval and understood that the Special Review application would need to be reviewed.  The property was located along U.S. Highway 287 and should be reflected as a C-Commercial site. 

 

PUBLIC TESTIMONY:

Jan Iverson, owned property south of the proposal, stated that it would compromise the integrity of the rural area.  She stated that there were many concerns with having an outdoor music venue and the impacts it might have. 

 

Tom Hays, felt that it was a great opportunity for the north part of Fort Collins.  It would provide positive growth to the area. 

 

Tom Miller, resident of north Fort Collins, spoke in favor of the establishment and felt that the changes were needed in that area of the county. 

 

Jean Wheeler, lived near the proposal, had concerns about the noise and traffic that could be generated with the proposal.  She stated that she could hear the music that was conducted on the site.  She asked that the neighbors being considered as well. 

 

 

Brad Modesitt, applicant, spoke to the mixed-uses in the area. 

 

DISCUSSION:

Commissioner Wallace went over the review criteria for rezoning property. 

 

Commissioner Cox moved that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolution:

 

BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of County Commissioners approval of the Modesitt Rezoning, file #13-Z1921, to rezone the property from FA-Farming to PD-Planned Development for the property described on “Exhibit C” to the minutes, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.   The applicant shall submit a complete Amended Plat application for the properties affected by this rezoning no later than 180 days after Board of County Commissioners approval.  The property line between the lots shall reflect the legal description in the rezoning request.

 

2.   Within 60 days of approval the applicant shall provide Community Development staff with an executed and notarized Annexation Agreement to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.

 

3.   The permitted uses, lot building and structure requirements, setbacks and structure height limitations for Modesitt Planned Development shall be as follows:

 

Modesitt PD Rezoning (all use descriptions referenced as listed in the Larimer County Land Use Code, as amended).

 

A.   Principal uses:

Agricultural

1.   Apiary (R)

2.   Farm (R)

3.   Equestrian Operation (SP, MS, S)

4.   Garden supply center (SP)

5.   Livestock veterinary clinic/hospital (SP/S)—See section 4.3.1

6.   Pet animal facility (SP/S)—See section 4.3.1

7.   Pet animal veterinary clinic/hospital (SP/S)—See section 4.3.1

Commercial

8.   Bar/tavern (SP-indoor only/ S- with outdoor seating area)

9.   General commercial (SP)

10.   General retail (SP/S)—See section 4.3.3

11.   Instructional facility (SP)

12.   Outdoor display/sales (SP)

13.   Personal service (SP)

14.   Professional office (SP)

15.   Restaurant (SP-indoor only/ S-with outdoor seating area, outdoor food service and/or drive through)

 

 

 

Institutional

16.   Church (SP-indoor only/ S-with outdoor seating, recreation or activity area and/or school/daycare)

17.   Community Hall (SP-indoor only/ S-with outdoor seating, recreation or activity area)

18.   School, nonpublic (S)

Recreational

19.   Rafting Business (SP)

20.   Place of amusement or recreation (SP/S)—See section 4.3.5

Industrial

21.   Enclosed storage (SP)

22.   Light industrial (S)

23.   Small solar facility (R/PSP)

24.   Trade use (SP)—See section 4.3.7

Utilities

25.Commercial mobile radio service (SP/S)—See section 16

 

B. Lot, building and structure requirements:

1. Minimum lot size:

a. 100,000 square feet (2.3 acres) if a well or septic system is used.

b. 15,000 square feet (0.34 acre) if public water and sewer are used.

2. Minimum required setbacks: (If more than one setback applies, the greater setback is required).

a. Street and road setback (Refer to section 4.9.1 setbacks from highways, county roads, and all other streets and roads.) The setback from a street or road must be 25 feet from the lot line, nearest edge of the road easement, nearest edge of right-of-way, or nearest edge of traveled way, whichever is greater.

b. Side yards—10 feet.

c. Rear yards—20 feet.

d. Refer to section 4.9.2 for additional setback requirements (including but not limited to streams, creeks and rivers).

3. Maximum structure height—40 feet.

4. A parcel may be used for one or more principal buildings and accessory buildings.

 

Note:

a.   Uses followed by an (R) are allowed by right.

b.   Uses followed by an (SP) require approval through the site plan review process described in section 6.1.

c.   Uses followed by a (PSP) require approval through the public site plan review process described in section 6.2.

d.   Uses followed by an (MS) require approval through the minor special review process.

e.   Uses followed by an (S) require approval through the special review process described in section 4.5.

 

 

 

f.   Uses followed by a combination of (R/SP/PSP/MS/S) may be allowed by right or require approval based on thresholds identified or as listed in section 4.3 (use descriptions).

 

Commissioner Wallace seconded the Motion.

 

Commissioners’ Christman, Cox, Dougherty, Gerrard, Jensen, Miller, Wallace, Zitti and Chairman Glick voted in favor of the Motion.

 

MOTION PASSED:  9-0

 

 

 

 

 

 

REPORT FROM STAFF:  Mr. Lafferty reminded the Commission of their upcoming meetings. 

 

ADJOURNMENT:   There being no further business, the hearing adjourned at 9:20 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.

 

 

_______________________________                      ______________________________

Scott Glick, Chairman                                                            Nancy Wallace, Secretary

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EXHIBIT A

 

 

 

LOT 3A, AMD LOTS 2 & 3, FORT COLLINS BUSINESS CENTER 3RD FILING

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EXHIBIT B

 

 

Lot 2, Kessler M.R.D. No. 92 EX 0052, except that

portion conveyed to Western Land and Investment

Corporation, a Wyoming Corporation, by Deed

recorded December 19, 1994, as Reception

No. 94099632 and except that portion conveyed by

Deed of Dedication recorded April 24, 2009, under

Reception No. 20090025587, County of Larimer, State of Colorado,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EXHIBIT C

 

A Tract of land located in the Northwest Quarter of Section 34, Township 8

North, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, County of Larimer, State

of Colorado, being the same Tract of land and being more particularly

described as follows:

 

Commencing at the Northwest corner of said Section 34,

Thence along said North section line N90 ° 00'00''E, 1308.68 feet to east 1/16

corner of Section 27 and 34 and, thence S90 ° 00'00''W, 23.2020 feet, thence

S89°00'58"E, 50.00 feet to the point of beginning;

Thence S89°00'58"E, 198.07 feet;

Thence S43°22'00"E, 194.84 feet;

Thence S58°13'00"E, 230.41 feet;

Thence S44°23'00"W, 387.99 feet;

Thence S89°54' 52"W, 689.17 feet;

Thence N00 ° 05'08"E, 737.34 feet;

Thence, N90 ° 00'00''W, 629.80 feet MORE OR LESS;

 

Said Tract contains 12.77 acres (556,265.5221square feet) more or less and is

subject to any rights-of-way or other easements as granted or reserved by

instruments of record or that currently exist on said described tract of land.