HomeMy WebLinkAboutAIRPARK VILLAGE - ANNEXATION & ZONING - 16-05 - CORRESPONDENCE - CORRESPONDENCE-HEARING (8)Board recommended not to amend the subarea plan, but to keep
overlay zoning as originally adopted. Proper notice was given per
Appendix C of City Plan.
September 6, 2005 City Council hearing was held on the East Mulberry Corridor
subarea plan amendment. The subarea plan was amended to
show a zoning of E-employment across the entire Airpark Village
site.
January 2, 2006 A second petition (not application) was submitted to Ted Shepard
at Paul's request. The geographical area of this second petition
was exactly the same as the first.
As mentioned in the chronology, when the decision was made to bifurcate the subarea
plan application from the annexation and zoning, the annexation and zoning application
was not withdrawn. In fact there was specific discussion with Ted Shepard about the
fact that we recognized that it would be delayed. A new petition was submitted in
January only because the Mr. Eckman informed us that this was needed because the
signatures were over one hundred and eighty days old. Resubmitting new signatures
did not represent a new annexation and zoning application. The Current Planning office
maintained the same planning files and file numbers. A second application fee and form
were not submitted. In fact, we now believe that a second petition was unnecessary
given the fact that CRS 31-12-107(e) says in part "No signature on the petition is valid if
it is dated more than one hundred eighty days prior to the date of filing the petition for
annexation with the clerk." We clearly filed the petition with the clerk in less than 180
days. It does not say that these signatures expire after 180 days during the annexation
process. Therefore, there was never a need to submit a second petition, and we are
very clearly processing the same original annexation and zoning petition, which properly
went to the Planning and Zoning board on May 191n 2005. It is noteworthy that 2.12.3 of
the Land Use Code does require that the Planning and Zoning board conduct a hearing
to offer a recommendation on both annexation and zoning to the City Council. Nowhere
in chapter two is a requirement for notification of this hearing required. Despite this, we
voluntarily gave the city an APO list, which was mailed notifying the affected property
owners of the P&Z hearing. Tonight we go before City Council for first reading with a
P&Z board recommendation that the property be annexed and zoned [-Industrial. We
will attempt to persuade the council to adopt a different zoning, but the fact remains that
we are following the process and procedures laid out in the Land Use code and
Colorado Revised Statutes. It is also worth noting, that the zoning currently
recommended by the P&Z board is exactly the zoning that opponents to our project
would like to see. Any attempt to hold another hearing before P&Z for the sake of
ensuring that the neighboring property owners and opponents input is heard is
unnecessary given the fact that the recommendation from P&Z currently favors them,
not us. It is for these reasons that we request the Airpark Annexation and Zoning be
processed exactly as prescribed in the Land Use Code and State Statutes. We request
that First Hearing be held tonight, and second hearing be held on April 41n
Sincerely,
Mikal Torgerson
March 21, 2006
Mr. Roy and Mr. Eckman,
As you are aware, last Wednesday, March 15, city staff decided to have the Airpark
Village Annexation and Zoning removed from the March 21s` City Council agenda.
According to a conversation I had with Paul on March 15, the city staff intended to put
the Airpark Village Annexation and Zoning on the discussion agenda only to immediately
continue the item so that a second hearing before the Planning and Zoning board could
be held in order to address a perceived due process concern. Neither the applicant or
their consultants were notified, and in fact would only have become aware of this plan at
the hearing had we not called to find out where we had been placed on the city council
agenda. I believe that such a delay represents a violation of CRS 31-12-108(1) since
annexation hearings must be heard within 60 days of the initiating resolution. 31-12-
108(3) does allow hearings to be continued, but only after one hour of testimony has
been heard. On March 15, Troy Jones and myself attempted to meet with Steve and
Paul to address the perceived due process lapse, but were only able to meet with Paul.
At that time, a compromise was offered which proposed that we remain on the March
151h City Council agenda, but that we attend a second Planning and Zoning board
meeting following first reading, and that second reading be postponed to allow for this
P&Z hearing. This proposed schedule unnecessarily delays second reading, and
presents scheduling problems for my client. Our client reluctantly agreed to this delay
only to avoid being taken off the March 215` Council agenda, however since we've had a
chance to look at the applicable law, we contend there that an additional P&Z hearing to
offer a second recommendation to City Council on the annexation and zoning of Airpark
Village is entirely unnecessary and not required. Below is a chronology of relevant
events on the Airpark Village Annexation and Zoning as well as the East Mulberry
Corridor Plan amendment:
April 4, 2005
East Mulberry Corridor subarea plan amendment submitted to the
City of Fort Collins
April 4, 2005
Annexation and Zoning application submitted to the City of Fort
Collins
March 16, 2005
Clair McMillian signed the annexation petition for Community
Airpark Association Inc. 101 Acres,
March 28, 2005
Douglas Kinkade signed the annexation petition for his 21 Acres
May 19, 2005
Planning and Zoning Board hearing for recommendation to Council
on East Mulberry Corridor subarea plan amendment, Annexation
and Zoning. Proper notice was given per the Land Use Code and
Appendix C of City Plan. The P&Z board recommended
amending the East Mulberry Corridor plan to show an industrial
zoning on the entire Airpark Village area. They also
recommended annexation of the subject properties and that they
be zoned I -Industrial.
May 27, 2005
M. Torgerson Architects instructed Ted Shepard to bifurcate the
East Mulberry Corridor subarea plan amendment from Airpark
Village Annexation and Zoning. We informed him that we would
be aggressively pursuing the subarea plan amendment first, and
then continuing the Airpark Annexation and Zoning.
July, 21, 2005
A second Planning and Zoning Board hearing was held for East
Mulberry Corridor subarea plan amendment, at this time, the P&Z