Previous  Next

30-28-113. Regulation of size and use - districts - repeal

Text

 

(1) (a) Except as otherwise provided in section 34-1-305, C.R.S., when the county planning commission of any county makes, adopts, and certifies to the board of county commissioners plans for zoning the unincorporated territory within any county, or any part thereof, including both the full text of a zoning resolution and the maps, after public hearing thereon, the board of county commissioners, by resolution, may regulate, in any portions of such county that lie outside of cities and towns:

(I) The location, height, bulk, and size of buildings and other structures;

(II) The percentage of lots that may be occupied;

(III) The size of yards, courts, and other open spaces;

(IV) The uses of buildings and structures for trade, industry, residence, recreation, public activities, or other purposes;

(V) Access to sunlight for solar energy devices; and

(VI) The uses of land for trade, industry, residence, recreation, or other purposes and for flood control.

 

(b) (I) In order to accomplish such regulation, the board of county commissioners:

(A) May divide the territory of the county that lies outside of cities and towns into districts or zones of such number, shape, or area as it may determine, and, within such districts or any of them, may regulate the erection, construction, reconstruction, alteration, and uses of buildings and structures and the uses of land; and

(B) May require and provide for the issuance of building permits as a condition precedent to the right to erect, construct, reconstruct, or alter any building or structure within any district covered by such zoning resolution.

(II) A county shall not charge permit, plan review, or any other related or associated fees to install an active solar electric or solar thermal device or system that, in aggregate, exceed the lesser of the countys actual costs in issuing the permit or five hundred dollars for a residential application or one thousand dollars for a nonresidential application if the device or system produces fewer than two megawatts of direct current electricity or an equivalent-sized thermal energy system, or that exceed the countys actual costs in issuing the permit if the device or system produces at least two megawatts of direct current electricity or an equivalent-sized thermal energy system. The county shall clearly and individually identify all fees and taxes assessed on an application subject to this subsection (1)(b)(II) on the invoice. The general assembly hereby finds that there is a statewide need for certainty regarding the fees that can be assessed for permitting such devices or systems, and therefore declares that this subsection (1)(b)(II) is a matter of statewide concern. This subsection (1)(b)(II) is repealed, effective July 1, 2025.

(2) The county planning commission may make and certify a single plan for the entire unincorporated portion of the county or separate and successive plans for those parts which it deems to be urbanized or suitable for urban development and those parts which, by reason of distance from existing urban communities or for other causes, it deems suitable for nonurban development. Any resolution adopted by the board of county commissioners may cover and include the unincorporated territory covered and included in any such single plan or in any of such separate and successive plans. No resolution covering more or less than the territory covered by any such certified plan shall be adopted or put into effect until and unless it is first submitted to the county planning commission which certified the plan to the board of county commissioners and is approved by said commission or, if disapproved, receives the favorable vote of not less than a majority of the entire membership of such board. All such regulations shall be uniform for each class or kind of building or structure throughout any district, but the regulations in any one district may differ from those in other districts.

History

History.
Source: L. 39: P. 300, 12. CSA: C. 45A, 12. CRS 53: 106-2-12. C.R.S. 1963: 106-2-12. L. 66: P. 43, 6. L. 73: P. 1054, 18. L. 79: (1) amended, p. 1160, 4, effective January 1, 1980. L. 2008: (1) amended, p. 892, 1, effective May 20. L. 2011: (1)(b)(II) amended, (HB 11-1199), ch. 311, p. 1518, 2, effective June 10. L. 2017: (1)(b)(II) amended, (SB 17-179), ch. 170, p. 621, 2, effective August 9.

Annotations

Cross references: In 2011, subsection (1)(b)(II) was amended by the Fair Permit Act. For the short title, see section 1 of chapter 311, Session Laws of Colorado 2011.

ANNOTATION

Law reviews. For article, 1974 Land Use Legislation in Colorado, see 51 Den. L.J. 467.

The limitations set forth in this section necessary regulate the density and distribution of population. Di Salle v. Giggal, 128 Colo. 208, 261 P.2d 499 (1953).

State has specifically granted county commissioners the authority to regulate, by resolution, the uses of land in unincorporated areas for trade, industry, residence, recreation, or other purposes, and for flood control, authorizing the establishment of districts or zones in order to accomplish such regulation. Famularo v. Bd. of County Commrs, 180 Colo. 333, 505 P.2d 958 (1973); Di Salle v. Giggal, 128 Colo. 208, 261 P.2d 499 (1953); Crittenden v. Hasser, 41 Colo. App. 235, 585 P.2d 928 (1978).

Parcel by parcel delineation and regulation of land use does not invalidate zoning regulations; nor does it constitute prohibited spot zoning. Carron v. Bd. of County Commrs, 976 P.2d 359 (Colo. App. 1998).

And establishment of flood control district and mineral conservation district was within powers granted County commissioners to regulate uses of land in unincorporated areas. Famularo v. Bd. of County Commrs, 180 Colo. 333, 505 P.2d 958 (1973).

Regulations relating to mineral conservation districts do not so limit uses of land included in such districts as to be unconstitutional on their face or as applied. Famularo v. Bd. of County Commrs, 180 Colo. 333, 505 P.2d 958 (1973).

Highest and best use not test of validity of regulation. Although other uses of plaintiffs land would not be as profitable as mobile home use, validity of zoning regulations is not determined by the highest and best use concept or in terms of dollars and cents profitability. Famularo v. Bd. of County Commrs, 180 Colo. 333, 505 P.2d 958 (1973).

Applied in Pennobscot, Inc. v. Bd. of County Commrs, 642 P.2d 915 (Colo. 1982); Theobald v. Bd. of County Commrs, 644 P.2d 942 (Colo. 1982).