Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-10/25/1983-Adjourned1 ADJOURNED MEETING COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO October 25, 1983 3:15 p.m. An Adjourned Meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, October 25, 1983, at 3:15 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the New Municipal Building. Roll call was answered by the following Councilmem- bers: Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, and Ohlson. (Secretary's Note: Councilmember Stoner arrived at 3:20 p.m.) Absent: Councilmember Rutstein. Staff Present: Arnold, Huisjen, Davis, Meitl, C. Smith. Mayor Knezovich noted that other business would be considered prior to adjournment into Executive Session to perform evaluations of the City Manager and City Attorney. Other Business University Place P.U.D. (Holiday Inn) Mayor Knezovich stated that the City Attorney had ruled that the appeal filed with the City Clerk on the University Place P.U.D., Preliminary Plan was not a valid appeal because it was not filed by a party - in- interest. He suggested that the Council would have the right to schedule the matter for review. Councilmember Horak recommended that Council hear the University Place case since Council has retained the responsibility to review cases of sufficient magnitude and interest. He suggested the process should remain as open as possible. He favored hearing the matter on November 15. Councilmember Elliott questioned whether this would be a re -hearing or acceptance by the Council of the appeal that had been filed. He favored giving as much opportunity as possible for input in the planning process. Councilmember Clarke stated that he believed that at the time Council delegated final authority to the Planning and Zoning Board, the intent was to allow the process to remain as open as possible, allowing virtually anyone to file an appeal to Council. Mayor Knezovich stated that, because of the interest expressed by Council - members in reviewing the case, he would direct that the matter be scheduled for Council's consideration on November 15. He asked the City Attorney if this would be an on -the -record appeal or a re -hearing of the matter. -92- Adjourned Meeting ' October 25, 1983 City Attorney Hui sjen stated this technically would not be an appeal, but Council has the authority under Section 2-13 of the Code to overrule the Planning and Zoning Board. Council could determine whether the matter should be heard on the record or in summary fashion as provided for in Chapter 3A of the Code. He stated that this would be considered to be a re -hearing. Mayor Knezovich requested the City Attorney's recommendation on the format of the re -hearing. City Attorney Huisjen suggested that the case be brought forward on -the - record, but that additional testimony be allowed at the hearing. David Wood, attorney representing John Q. Hammons Industries, spoke against suspending existing rules and regulations. He also stated that the appel- lants did not appear at the neighborhood or Planning and Zoning Board hearings on the matter. City Attorney Huisjen stated that Section 2-13 does allow Council to re -hear the matter, although that section does not spell out the procedures for such review. He stated that this is a re -hearing rather than an appeal, and that in fairness to the applicant, the Council should perhaps ' re -hear the entire matter. Councilmember Clarke spoke in favor of allowing an opportunity for both sides to present full information on the matter. Arthur March, attorney representing Ray Dixon, supported following Code provisions as set out in Chapter 3A of the Code relating to the Uniform Appeal Procedure. He stated that Appendix E to the Land Development Guidance System was intended as a guideline rather than a procedural ordinance. Mayor Knezovich stated that Council would re -hear all evidence and allow reasonable time at the hearing for presentation of pros and cons. Councilmember Elliott stated that Council should not abdicate its responsi- bility for ultimate decision -making in planning and zoning matters. Mayor Knezovich suggested that the appeal procedures be clarified in the near future. Councilmember Stoner asked if the hearing should be restricted to land use questions. Mayor Knezovich stated that any testimony could be presented in a re -hear- ing. He directed that the matter be scheduled after 7:30 p.m. on November 15. -93- 1 Adjourned Meeting October 25, 1983 City Attorney Huisjen suggested that notices be sent to property owners within 500 feet as set out in the Land Development Guidance System. Executive Session Authorized for Personnel Matters Councilmember Elliott made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to adjourn into Executive Session to conduct deliberations on personnel matters relating to evaluations of the City Manager and City Attorney. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, and Stoner. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. The meeting reconvened at 5:50 p.m. Councilmember Elliott made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to adjourn the meeting to 3:00 p.m. on Tuesday, November 1, 1983, to continue the evaluations of the City Manager and City Attorney. Yeas: Councilmem- bers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, and Stoner. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. The meeting adjourned at 5:55 p.m.