Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPINE RIDGE 4TH ANNEXATION & ZONING - 2-98 - CORRESPONDENCE - OTHER JURISDICTIONSHarter, City of Fort Collins Page 2 • Resolution 98-10: Fort Collins Business Center 2"d Annexation. No objection to the annexation. For your information, it appears that the legal description in the resolution may have an error (property is in Range 68 West, not Range 69 West). • Resolution 98-11: Lemay Avenue 3`d Annexation. No objection to the annexation. For your information, the legal description in the resolution states that the property is in the northeast quarter of the section. It appears that the property is located in the northwest quarter. • Resolution 98-12: Lincoln-Lemay Avenue Annexation and Resolution 98-13: Pine Ridge 41h Annexation. No objection to these annexations. I hope that this information is helpful to you. The questions on the legal descriptions came up when I was researching the properties and I thought that you may want to double-check them before they are finalized. Please call me at 498-7688 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Carol Evans LL�� Planner II cc: file Board of County Commissioners Larimer County Attorney's Office K & M Company, 3201 Shore Road, Fort Collins, CO 80524 • rED TO EXCELLENCE February 12, 1998 Leanne Harter City of Fort Collins Current Planning Department PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 RE: ANNEXATION RESOLUTIONS Dear Leanne: PLANNING DIVISION P.O. Box 1190 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-1190 Planning Department (970) 498-7683 Building Department (970) 498-7700 Fax (970) 498-7711 I have been asked to review a number of annexation resolutions and provide comments to you regarding any impacts on the County. Generally, there do not appear to be any major impacts from any of these annexations. I do have some informational comments on some of the annexations; those comments are included in the following list: • Resolution 98-9: Visitor's Center at the Environmental Learning Center. The County does not object to this annexation, but there are some issues with how and when the property being proposed for annexation was created. It appears that the 5 acre parcel being annexed was first created by a deed recorded on March 29, 1996. The remaining portion of the original parcel (approximately 15 acres) is not proposed to be annexed at this time and will remain in unincorporated Larimer County. I could not find any record of a land division application to create this parcel or any approval by Latimer County. State and County Subdivision regulations require County approval to create lots that are smaller than 35 acres. Based on this information, this Department would consider the remaining unincorporated portion (parcel ID number 87210-00-006) to be an illegal lot. In these circumstances, County building permits can not be issued on that remaining parcel until some action has been taken by the owner to resolve the situation. Larimer County would have this concern regardless of the annexation being proposed. The owner would either need to provide evidence that the parcel had been created according to State and County regulations or to submit an application (such as a subdivision or P.U.D.) to resolve the illegal split. However, because the remaining parcel is almost completely surrounded by city limits, any subdivision application would trigger the provisions of the Intergovernmental Agreement (requiring property to be annexed and development to be done according to the City's regulations). A copy of this letter will also be mailed to the last owner of record as shown by the County Assessor's office so that the property owner is aware of this situation. i0 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER