The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCARIBOU APARTMENTS - PDP - 18-02A - LEGAL DOCS - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCILACTION BEING APPEALED: Approval by Planning and ZoningBoard of Caribou Project # 18-02A on 1-16-2003. APPELLANT: Janet Winters Specific grounds for appeal are defined in "Appeal Guidelines" (revised 4-99) manual. Grounds for this appeal include: RELEVANT LAWS WERE NOT PROPERLY INTERPRETED AND APPLIED. This is unclear at this point. The agendas from the council meetings state ' "the P&Z Board are the final authority..." This leads one to believe that there is not an appeal process, consequently, this is being compiled in less than 24 hours due to the deadline. THE BOARD, COMMISSION OR OTHER DECISION MAKER FAILED TO HOLD A FAIR HEARING BY: - IGNORING ITS PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHED RULES OF PROCESS, - CONSIDERING SUBSTANTIALLY FALSE OR GROSSLY MISLEADING EVIDENCE, - IMPROPERLY FAILING TO RECEIVE ALL RELEVANT EVIDENCE OFFERED. Issues of concern Inctuae: • Documentation provided to the council was incomplete. • Documentation provided to the council has multiple inconsistencies. • There was conflicting information between the presentation to the council by the project team and their documentation. • The issues presented in the neighborhood meeting, and again in the council meeting were not addressed. • Documentation including meeting minutes from May, 2002, neighborhood meeting minutes, etc. were not Provided upon request. • Promises made by the city project manager and the project team were not kept, that impacted the outcome of this project. This is a brief overview of the issues that lead to the FAILURE OF A FAIR HEARING. All of these facts Can be verified with documentation. 1 would like to have the accurate information submitted for review, taken under consideration, and give the board the opportunity to make a fair decision based upon all the facts_ I am not at this time asking for a complete denial of the project, although the council reiterated my concem of 2 low income housing projects within % mile of one another. At the minimum, if this project is approved once all of the facts are presented accurately, I would ask that it be with stringent conditions for the�potential 600+ new residents of this low income apartment complex (45%)_ There are other issues identified in the tape that need addressing however, in order to get this in by the deadline, time does not permit documenting specifics. Signed: Winters 4345 Gemstone Lane, Ft. Collins, Co 80525 970-266-0933(H) 970-278-8767 (W) 10 'd 96Z92ZOL6 'ON Xd3 NH310 A IO Wd 69:80 INA £OOZ-I£-Ndf Wanda Krajicek January 31, 2003 Page 2 not presented or some documents were not provided or that promises were not kept. The Appellant did indicate in the last sentence that time was a factor in the filing of her Notice of Appeal and that apparently, given more time, the factual specifics would be documentable. The filing of an Amended Notice of Appeal should be of assistance to the Appellant in actually providing those specific facts. Although not an important issue, the Appellant also refers to the Planning and Zoning Board as the "council' in many places in the Notice of Appeal, which tends to make the Notice of Appeal confusing since the appeal is to the City Council from a decision made by one of the City s Boards. The Appellant might consider changing the word 'council' to 'Board" when the context would indicate that the word "Board" was intended. WPE:pec City Attorney City of Fort Collins MEMORANDUM DATE: January 31, 2003 TO: Wanda Krajicek, City Clerk FROM: W. Paul Eckman, Deputy City Attorney RE: Notice of Appeal Filed by Janet Winters Pertaining to the Planning and Zoning Board Approval of the Caribou Project #18-02A You have provided me with a copy of the Notice of Appeal filed by Janet Winters pertaining to the above -referenced matter. Section 2-50 of the City Code requires that, within 5 working days of the date of the filing of a Notice of Appeal, I must review the notice for any obvious defects in form or substance. Measuring the Notice of Appeal against Sections 2-48 and 2-49 of the City Code, I would recommend that Ms. Winters filed an Amended Notice of Appeal. The Notice pf Appeal does properly identify the action of the Board and the date of the action, and it contains the signature of the Appellant as well as her name, address and telephone number. However, Section 2-49(3) of the Code requires the Appellant to indicate the nature of her relationship to the subject of the action of the Board. In other words, she must explain in the Notice of Appeal how she is a "party in interest" as that term is defined in Section 2-46 of the Code. From my recollection of the hearing of January 16, 2003, I believe that she may have been the person who came and appeared before the Board at that hearing. If so, paragraph (5) of the definition of "party in interest" would include her. She may have also received mailed notice of the hearing or sent written comments (paragraphs 3 and 4) but I do not know. In any event, she needs to indicate to the Council how she has become a "party in interest". Section 2-49(4) requires all appellants to indicate the grounds for appeal including specific allegations of error, and a summary of facts contained in the record on appeal which support those allegations. In the Notice of Appeal, Ms. Winters has indicated that the allegation of error is that the Board failed to hold a fair hearing. This is a legitimate allegation of error as provided in Section 2- 48(B)(2). Additionally, she indicates the three points that she wishes to make to support the argument that the Board failed to conduct a fair hearing, namely that the Board ignored its previously established rules or procedure, considered substantially false or grossly misleading evidence, and improperly failed to receive all relevant evidence offered. This is all fine. However, Section 2-49 also requires appellants to include a summary of the facts contained in the record on appeal which support those allegations. In her Notice of Appeal, although she lists some issues of concern, that listing does not give the Council much to go on in considering the Appeal because it does point the Council to "facts" contained in the record, but rather, presents "argument" that, for example, documentation was incomplete or inconsistent, that testimony was conflicting, that some issues were 300 LaPorte Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6520 • FAX (970) 221-6327 City Clerk City of Fort Collins February 3, 2003 RECEIVED FC3 0 3 2003 CURRENT PLANNING Janet Winters 4345 Gemstone Lane Fort Collins, CO 80525 Dear Ms. Winters, This letter is in reference to your Notice of Appeal dated January 30, 2003, appealing the January 16, 2003, decision of the Planning and Zoning Board, pertaining to the Caribou Project. The Deputy City Attorney has reviewed the appeal document and his findings are set out in the attached memorandum dated January 31, 2003. You will want to pay particular attention to the recommendations suggested in his memorandum. Section 2-51 of the City Code provides that an amended Notice of Appeal may be filed by the appellant(s) within fourteen (14) working days after the date of filing of the original notice of appeal. An amended Notice of Appeal must be submitted NO LATER THAN 5:00 P.M. on Wednesday, February 19, 2003. The City Council hearing on the appeal has been scheduled for Tuesday, March 4, 2003, at 6:00 p.m. Sincerely, Wanda M. Krajicek City Clerk Attachment 300 LaPorte Avenue • PO. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6515 • FAX (970) 221-6295