CO Code § 31-12-103 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 31 - Government - Municipal|Article 12 - Annexation- Consolidation - Disconnection|Part 1 - Municipal Annexation Act of 1965|§ 31-12-103. Definitions

 As used in this part 1, unless the context otherwise requires:    “Adult” means any person who has attained his twenty-first birthday.    “Agricultural land” means land used for the growing of crops, truck gardening, the grazing of farm animals, and other agricultural pursuits in contrast to land used for urban development.    “Development standards” means the substantive portions of building codes, zoning ordinances, housing codes, fire district ordinances, subdivision regulations, and any other ordinance, code, or regulation relating to the construction or occupancy of buildings upon land or the preparation of such land for such construction.    “Enclave” means an unincorporated area of land entirely contained within the outer boundaries of the annexing municipality.    “Identical ownership” means a situation where each owner has exactly the same degree of interest in each separate parcel of two or more parcels of land.    “Landowner” means the owner in fee of any undivided interest in a given parcel of land. If the mineral estate has been severed, the landowner is the owner in fee of an undivided interest in the surface estate and not the owner in fee of an undivided interest in the mineral estate.    (Deleted by amendment, L. 2010, (HB 10-1259), ch. 211, p. 913, § 2, effective August 11, 2010.)    “Period of notice for hearing” means the time between the effective date of the resolution establishing the hearing date and the date when such hearing first commences.    (Deleted by amendment, L. 2010, (HB 10-1259), ch. 211, p. 913, § 2, effective August 11, 2010.)    “Quasi-municipal corporation” means a corporation vested with the municipal powers for the accomplishment of a limited municipal purpose, including but not limited to domestic water districts, metropolitan districts, sanitation districts, water and sanitation districts, fire protection districts, recreation districts, and disposal districts. (10.5) “Registered elector” shall have the same meaning as set forth in section 1-1-104 (35) , C.R.S.    “Resident” means one who makes his primary dwelling place within the area proposed to be annexed.    “Taxpayer” means any person who has paid or becomes liable for ad valorem taxes on real property located in the area proposed to be annexed during a specified period of time.    “Urban development” means the construction on land of improvements for residential, institutional, commercial, industrial, transportation, public flood control, and recreational and similar uses, in contrast to use of the land for growing crops, truck gardening, grazing of farm animals, and other agricultural pursuits. The term also applies to vacant ground which has been or is being prepared for urban development by such steps as subdivision into lots or plots and blocks, installation of water and sewer lines, construction of access streets, and construction of railroad spur or branch tracks.     History. Source: L. 75: Entire title R&RE, p. 1076, § 1, effective July 1. L. 2010: (7) and (9) amended and (10.5) added,(HB 10-1259), ch. 211, p. 913, § 2, effective August 11.    Editor's note:   This section is similar to former § 31-8-103 as it existed prior to 1975.   ANNOTATION   Annotator's note. Since § 31-12-103 is similar to former § 31-8-103 prior to the 1975 repeal and reenactment of this title, and laws antecedent thereto, relevant cases construing those provisions have been included in the annotations to this section.   Status prerequisites for parties. The requirements of ownership in fee and the liability for taxes are both prerequisites for participation as a proponent of the annexation, and the same requirements confront an opponent of the annexation. City & County of Denver v. Holmes, 156 Colo. 586 , 400 P.2d 901 (1965).   Option-holder not owner in fee. Where the holder of an option was under no obligation to exercise that option and could have abandoned the development at any time, he was not the “owner in fee” of a single lot at the time he affixed his name to the petition, and since the owners of more than 50 percent of the area proposed to be annexed had not joined in seeking the annexation, the ordinance of the city council, purporting to annex the acres included in the petition is void. Elkins v. City & County of Denver, 157 Colo. 252 , 402 P.2d 617 (1965).   The streets and public ways in an area were not to be included in calculating the area to be annexed. City & County of Denver v. Holmes, 156 Colo. 586 , 400 P.2d 901 (1965).   Applied in Bd. of County Comm'rs v. City & County of Denver, 193 Colo. 325 , 566 P.2d 335 (1977).