HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 07/20/2004 - SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 106, 2004, AMENDIN ITEM NUMBER: 11
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: July20, 2004
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Cam McNair
SUBJECT
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 106, 2004, Amending the City Code by the Addition of a New
Section 23-115 Pertaining to Vacating Public Right-of-Way.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Requests for the City to vacate portions of its public right-of-way(ROW)are received with regular
frequency. These requests are normally from private property owners or developers who want to
convert portions of the public ROW to private use. An informal process has been in place to deal
with such requests,but the increasing frequency(now averaging 1-2 per month)has prompted staff
to create policy and procedure language to insure consistent responses to these requests. At present,
the City Code is silent on this issue, and ROW vacations are handled in accordance with state law.
This Ordinance, which was adopted 5-0 (Councilmembers Hamrick and Roy were absent) on First
Reading on July 6, 2004, adds language to the City Code to clarify local policy and procedures, as
well as reinforce state law (CRS 43-2-302).
ORDINANCE NO. 106, 2004
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW
SECTION 23-115 PERTAINING TO VACATING PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
WHEREAS,the City frequently receives requests to vacate portions of City public right-of-
way, which requests typically are generated by private property owners or developers who want to
convert portions of the public right-of-way to private use; and
WHEREAS, heretofore, the City has only had an informal process for the handling of such
requests; and
WHEREAS, the Council has determined that the City Code should be amended to provide
a process and criteria for handling requests for vacations of public right-of-way in order to ensure
due process and consistent response to such requests; and
WHEREAS, the Council has further determined that the addition of such Code provisions
will clarify local policy and procedures,as well as reinforce the state statutory procedures contained
in Section 43-2-302 of the Colorado Revised Statutes.
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS that the Code of the City of Fort Collins be amended by the addition of a new Section 23-
115 to be entitled "Vacating Public Right-of-Way"to read as follows:
Sec. 23-115. Vacating public right-of-way.
(a) The City Council is authorized to vacate public right-of-way,provided that
the City Council first finds,by ordinance,that the right-of-way being considered for
vacation is no longer needed for any public purpose, and that it is in the public's
interest to vacate the same.
(b) Any person desiring the vacation of public right-of-way shall make written
application therefor to the City Engineer on the form prepared and provided by the
City Engineer's office. Supporting documentation such as land survey(s), legal
descriptions,maps and other materials as determined necessary by the City Engineer
to properly describe the property to be vacated,or to explain or provide justification
for the request, shall be provided with the application.
(c) The applicant for a right-of-way vacation shall remit to the city a
nonrefundable application fee in such amount as may be established by the City
Manager pursuant to Chapter 7.5, Article I of this Code.
(d) The City Engineer shall route the vacation request to, and solicit comments
from,potentially affected utility agencies,city staff,emergency service providers and
affected property owners in the vicinity of the right-of-way being proposed for
vacation. Upon receipt of such information from potentially affected interests, the
City Engineer shall develop a recommendation for approval or denial, and shall
submit such recommendation to the Director of Transportation Services.
(e) Recommendations of the Director of Transportation Services for approval
of a right-of-way vacation shall be forwarded to City Council for its consideration of
action by ordinance to vacate the right-of-way. Decisions of the Director of
Transportation Services for denial of a right-of-way vacation request shall be
delivered in writing to the applicant and may be appealed to the City Manager
pursuant to the provisions contained in Chapter 2, Article VI of the Code.
(f) For approved right-of-way vacations, the title to the vacated right-of-way
shall vest in accordance with Section 43-2-302, C.R.S.
Introduced and considered favorably on first reading and ordered published this 6th day of
July, A.D. 2004, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of July, A.D. 2004.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading this 20th day of July, A.D. 2004.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
ITEM NUMBER: 19
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: July 6, 2004
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Cam McNair
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 106, 2004, Amending the City Code by the Addition of a New
Section 23-115 Pertaining to Vacating Public Right-of-Way.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Minimal. An application fee will be developed that will allow the City to recoup some of the City
staff's costs that are incurred in the process in of rn public rights-of-way (ROW).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY C
Requests for the City to vacate portions of its public right-of-way(ROW)are received with regular
frequency. These requests are normally from private property owners or developers who want to
convert portions of the public ROW to private use. An informal process has been in place to deal
with such requests,but the increasing frequency(now averaging 1-2 per month)has prompted staff
to create policy and procedure language to insure consistent responses to these requests. At present,
the City Code is silent on this issue, and ROW vacations are handled in accordance with state law.
Adding language to the City Code will c
lan" l olicy and rocedures, as well as reinforce state
law (CRS 43-2-302).
The proposed additions to theCy, 9v e for an lication process through the City
Engineer's office. ROW vacation Iequen a routed o'r comment to utilities, other City
staff, emergency service providers, and affected property owners. Based upon the comments
received, a recommendation from the City Engineer will be forwarded through the Director of
Transportation Operations to the Executive Director of Transportation Services. Recommendations
for approval of a ROW vacation will then be forwarded to City Council for approval. Decisions of
denial will be returned to the applicant. An appeals process will be available in accordance with the
existing provisions of the City Code (Chapter 2, Article VI).
BACKGROUND
Recent staff discussions regarding requests from developers and citizens to vacate existing public
rights-of-way (ROW) have centered on the process currently in use and whether the vacation of
July 6, 2004 -2- Item No. 19
public ROW is appropriate. It is important that a clear policy on ROW vacations is established in
order to insure consistent and fair decisions when such requests are submitted.
While the informal policy has been to generally discourage the vacation of public ROW for private
use, there may be some instances when the vacations of ROW are appropriate and even desirable.
However, policies and guidelines need to be established to help in the decision-making process
when considering ROW vacation requests. Following are policy recommendations that will be
helpful in making a determination to dispose of public ROW property.
Policy for Vacation of Public hts f- 9" O -
a
• It shall be the policy oft City to enera courage t vacation of public rights-of-way
when the vacated area is pep�d s or ate use, d when the area is still beneficial
to the public, or when there is no clear public benefit to be gained from the ROW vacation.
Property that is dedicated to the City as ROW has been so dedicated for public purposes. If the
ROW is determined to no longer be needed for the public, it may be vacated. For example, if
a street is realigned and excess ROW remains and is no longer needed for any public purpose,
it may be vacated. Another example may be where ROW was dedicated by plat as part of a
land use planning and development process, but the improvements were not constructed and
the property subsequently needs to be reconfigured. Then the ROW no longer needed for
public improvements ma va t . yam"
• Vacation of public rights- -way h not ' e re with present and/or future needs of the
City for maintaining and pro mg the a and nloymen public areas by the general public
and by service providers.
• Property that has been dedicated to the public as ROW cannot be sold. It can only be vacated
in accordance with State law. However, property that has been purchased fee simple for use
as public ROW may be sold if the public no longer needs the property.
It is important to carefully consider whether property reserved for public use as ROW may be
vacated. It is important to b ; rta' o ' thaYted land will never be needed
for public purposes.
ROW Vacation Procedure
• Only the City Council has the authority to vacate ROW.
• All public ROW vacation requests must be submitted to the City Engineer,who will then route
the requests to utility providers, other City staff, emergency services providers, and other
property owners that may be affected by such vacation. Input from service providers and
affected property owners will be considered when deciding whether to approve vacation
requests.
• Upon receipt of the input from service providers and affected property owners, the City
Engineer will develop a recommendation for the Director of Transportation Operations and the
Executive Director of Transportation Services. The Executive Director of Transportation
July 6, 2004 -3- Item No. 19
Services will then either make a recommendation to the City Council for approval of the
vacation, or will deny the vacation. The decision will be based upon the public's present and
future needs for the land in question, as well as upon the needs of affected property owners in
the vicinity of the ROW requested for vacation.
• If the Executive Director of Transportation Services recommends approval of the ROW
vacation request, the application will be forwarded to City Council for vacation of the ROW
by ordinance.
• If the Executive Director MCpter
th W vacation request,then the
applicant may appeal to t wi a nal authority for reconsideration
of the denial, in accordanton VI o e Municipal Code.
• For approved ROW vacations,the title to the vacated ROW shall vest in accordance with State
law. Usually, the vacated property is split between abutting property owners, each receiving
one-half of the vacated land, depending on the law and how the original ROW was dedicated.
Determining who should get the vacated property is not the role of City staff. It is up to the
abutting private party (or parties) to resolve ownership.
Pros and Cons of Right-Of-Way Vacations
Pros:
• Vacation of public ROW ws c' i s a e lopers to ve additional land to make desired
improvements or to enlarge lot siz . n es a ished area of the City's core,this could help
to promote infill development and re-development of aging facilities.
• Vacation of ROW that is not needed could reduce the City's costs of maintaining these
properties, as well as reduce the City's liability for injuries or damages sustained on those
properties.
Vacation of public ROW puts these lands onto future tax roles. However, relatively small
incremental land amountsnand
ve .. or eYerall
sed property values since the
County typically assesse upo a ze impact to the tax rolls is
considered to be small.
Cons:
• Vacation of public rights-of-way may prohibit or seriously deter the City from making future
improvements should the need arise. When future improvements may become necessary, the
City is most often obligated to purchase any lands needed to provide such improvements.
Given the laws covering acquisition and condemnation, the costs of acquiring land will likely
increase significantly over historic costs.
• Vacation of public ROW, while maintaining such land as an easement, is often suggested as
a compromise solution. However,this may make it more difficult(from a practical or political
standpoint) for utility providers to access their facilities when they need to service those
July 6, 2004 -4- Item No. 19
facilities. Property owners frequently build fences, sheds and other facilities on easements,
sometimes making access more difficult for the maintenance of facilities within easement areas.
• Vacation of public rights-of-way without assessing a cost for the value of the vacated land
becomes essentially a gift,which directly benefits the abutting property owners. These owners
are often many times removed from the original owners who dedicated the ROW.
C'�-1 0 P Y
OPY
OPN
,.