HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemo - Read Before Packet - 3/3/2020 - Letter From Carolynn White, Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck Re: Harmony Corridor Plan Amendment For The Gateway Area (Agenda Item #8)Carolynne C. White
Attorney at Law
303.223.1197 tel
303.223.0997 fax
cwhite@bhfs.com
410 Seventeenth Street, Suite 2200
Denver, CO 80202-4432
main 303.223.1100
bhfs.com Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP
February 28, 2020
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL AND REGULAR MAIL
Fort Collins City Council
Wade Troxell, Mayor
300 LaPorte Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80521
RE: March 3, 2020 City Council, Harmony Corridor Plan Amendment for the Gateway Area (the
“Amendment”) – Support for Planning Board Recommendation; Opposition Otherwise
Dear City Council:
This firm represents Harmony-McMurray, LLC (the “Owner”), the owner or contract purchaser of virtually all
of the privately owned property (the “Property”) within the proposed Harmony Corridor Gateway area (the
“Area”). In this letter, we set forth a summary of Owner’s comments on the proposed Amendment for the
consideration of the City Council and for the record.
As discussed in the February 6, 2020, letter to the Planning and Zoning Board (the “Planning Board”), the
Owner generally agrees that the Harmony Corridor Plan and existing zoning in the Area is somewhat
outdated. The Owner also agrees that an amendment should diversify the desired mix of land uses
allowed within the Area and ultimately should allow a mix of uses more tailored to current market needs in
the City, and even has previously sought to propose an amendment with similar goals.
The owner opposes the City staff recommendation that 40% of the land area must remain undeveloped,
unless the City also incorporates the Planning Board’s recommendation from its February 20, 2020
meeting that the City must compensate the Owner for such land. Details regarding the process for
determining fair market value for compensation and the timing of such compensation would still need to be
worked out, but the Planning Board’s recommendation appropriately recognizes the problem with the 40%
open space requirement, absent compensation.
As discussed in our February 6, 2020 letter to the Planning Board and at the Planning Board meeting on
February 20, 2020, the existing constraints on development already make the Property very difficult and
expensive to develop. The Property was originally a gravel mine, and still includes several former gravel
pits, now full of water. These gravel pits must be filled at significant cost to the Owner before the Property
can be developed, and the water presently filling them cannot be maintained. The Property also is located
within a flood zone, so the Owner will have to design and construct a floodway channel before it can
develop the Property, a lengthy and costly process that will require coordination with FEMA and CDOT, as
well as the City, making development difficult and expensive. Additionally, the Property overlies a high
water table, and any utilities must be installed at a greater depth, and pursuant to more stringent
specifications, further increasing the cost to develop the Property.
Fort Collins City Council
February 28, 2020
Page 2
2
Following a lengthy and robust deliberation at its February 20, 2020 meeting, the Planning Board opted to
recommend that City Council adopt the Amendment, “with the condition that the City of Fort Collins
participates with private land owners in the creation, management and maintenance of 40% natural area
created within the ODP. City participation would include purchasing or contributing in other financial
manners and maintaining in perpetuity for public enjoyment. The Harmony Corridor Plan is in need of
proposed amendments and proposed amendments will promote public welfare and be consistent with
vision, goals, principals, and policies of city plan and the elements thereof. The information and findings
contained in this staff report prepared for this hearing are adopted by the Board.”
By recommending the Amendment to City Council with the addition of the condition regarding the City’s
financial participation, several members of the Planning Board stated concerns about the infringement of
private property rights that would occur with the 40% undeveloped open space, if no compensation were
provided. The Planning Board members noted that this requirement is excessive compared to the amount
of open space required elsewhere in Fort Collins, and some expressed concerns about the cost to install
and maintain landscaping on such a significant open space area being imposed on a property owner.
During the discussion, several Board members even likened the Amendment as originally proposed to an
ordinance requiring private landowners to maintain the Pioneer Museum, a duty clearly belonging to the
City. These Board members were concerned that, without the condition approved by the Planning Board,
the City would be putting too much onus on the private landowners in the Area, and the 40% natural area
requirement would take private landowners’ property without just compensation.
The Planning Board also incorporated citizen concerns regarding cultural uses raised at the meeting into its
recommendation by including language that “40% [of the Area] could be in fact covered in part by up to
20% of cultural amenities with the City being obligated to participate in the purchase of the open space.”
The Owner does not object to this additional modification although this issue is not central to its concerns.
Fundamentally, the Owner has already spent a great deal of time and resources evaluating and designing
solutions for the existing considerable constraints, and has worked with City staff to evaluate alternative
development scenarios to make development of the Property feasible. Imposition of the originally
proposed 40% open space requirement, without the Planning Board’s recommendation to include a
financial participation, would render that work meaningless, and the property undevelopable.
Also, the Owner objects to the Standards and Guidelines requiring 140–190 foot setbacks from Harmony
Road and I-25. Nowhere else in the City does the Code or Comprehensive Plan require such significant
setbacks – not even in places with extraordinary habitat or wildlife value. While some people may believe
the Property contains extraordinary habitat or wildlife value in need of additional protection, it should be
noted that the City has declined on several occasions to purchase or even to accept a donation of any
portion of the Property as a natural area.
Without the condition on the Amendment requiring the City to purchase or contribute financially to the 40%
open space, the 40% open space requirement would take approximately 55 acres from the Owner, and
would increase landscaping and maintenance costs not only for the 55 acres of natural area, but for the
entire Property. Similarly, the 140–190 foot setback and landscaped buffer requirements would take
approximately 12 acres from the Owner, while also increasing landscaping and maintenance costs for the
entire Property.
When added to the existing constraints on development of the Property, the significant setbacks in the
Standards and Guidelines and the 40% natural area requirement without the Planning Board’s
recommended condition and without the City Council’s added language regarding timeframe,
compensation, and maintenance of the natural area would push the Property over the brink, rendering it
infeasible to develop, and depriving the Owner of its property.
Fort Collins City Council
February 28, 2020
Page 3
3
The City is essentially seeking to acquire open space and community separators without paying for either.
There is clear history demonstrating that the City has sought to prevent or severely limit development on
this property dating back to at least 2005. Since 2005, the City’s position has been confirmed in a variety
of City staff summaries, presentations, and memos, and City representatives have publically confirmed this
position opposing development of the Property on several occasions. Notably, page 4 of the Staff memo to
the Planning Board reaffirms that City staff have considered the opportunity to purchase the Property but
have declined due to “costs and liabilities of mining permit closeout, water augmentation and site
restoration.”
Within the last 60 days the Owner has again proposed to the City that the City consider purchasing or
accepting a donation of all or a portion of the Property to be slated as natural area, which the City has
again declined.
Furthermore, the onerous requirement of 40% undeveloped land in the proposed Amendment applied only
to property located south of Harmony Road – e.g. the Owner’s Property - until the Owner raised its concern
with City staff that this requirement would constitute an unlawful taking.. However, now the most recent
draft of the Amendment was revised shortly before submittal to the Planning & Zoning Board, and applies
the Amendment and all of the supporting Standards and Guidelines to the entire Gateway, both north and
south of Harmony Road, even though all of the City annexed property north of Harmony Road is owned by
the City. This sequence of events indicates a clear understanding of, and attempt to mitigate, the legal
argument Owner is raising. However it cannot be effective because the application of the Amendment to
the north side of Harmony Road is a distinction without a difference. Owner was the only private property
owner affected by this Amendment prior to the last-minute revision, and remains the only private property
owner affected after the last minute revision. Nor has this change been discussed in any of the numerous
public forums conducted by the City related to the Harmony Corridor over the last 18 months.
As numerous state and federal courts have noted over the years, it is not fair to require a single property
owner to bear a public burden which in all fairness and justice should be borne by the public as a whole.
Indeed, this concept is enshrined in the United States Constitution, the Colorado Constitution, and the
Colorado Revised Statutes. If the City wants the private property located within the Harmony Corridor
Gateway to be open space, then the City should purchase it and operate and maintain it as open space.
As the Planning Board recognized, to impose this requirement legislatively without compensation,
particularly in a manner which renders development of the Property infeasible, constitutes a taking.
When a local government regulates property owners in such a way as to prevent the property owner from
using his or her land, and instead requires that the land is used for the public benefit, the local government
is overstepping its role, and must compensate the private property owner for the land owner’s loss of land.
The requirement to leave at least 40% of the property undeveloped (with or without the option to allow up
to 20% to be a cultural use), without a requirement that the City purchase or contribute in other financial
manners and maintain the area in perpetuity for public enjoyment, particularly in light of the City’s repeated
stated desire to maintain the Property as open space, while declining to purchase it, takes the Owner’s
property without compensation, which is prohibited under state and federal law.
The City must understand that the Owner cannot allow such a taking to occur without taking appropriate
action to protect its property rights. If the City approves the Amendment, without the Planning Board
modification to provide compensation, the Owner will have no alternative but to take legal action to
preserve its rights.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Amendment, and, at a minimum, to ensure that the
record reflects the viewpoint of the Owner. We request that the City Council either adopt the Amendment
Fort Collins City Council
February 28, 2020
Page 4
4
with the Planning Board recommended Amendment, or decline to adopt the Amendment if the Planning
Board’s recommendation is not incorporated.
Sincerely,
Carolynne C. White
cc:
Brad Yatabe, Deputy City Attorney
Carrie Daggett, City Attorney
20345395.6
From: Sarah Kane
To: City Leaders
Cc: Cameron Gloss
Subject: Letter from Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck re: Harmony Corridor Plan Amendment
Date: Monday, March 2, 2020 10:41:00 AM
Attachments: Harmony McMurray LLC - Letter to City Council re Harmony Corridor Plan A....pdf
image001.png
Council,
Please see the attached letter from Carolynne White. I will include hard copies in tomorrow’s Read-
before packet.
Thank you.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sarah Kane
Executive Administrative Assistant to Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich and Mayor Wade Troxell
City Manager’s Office
City of Fort Collins
PO Box 580
300 Laporte Avenue, Building A
970-416-2447 office
skane@fcgov.com