Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSOUTHGLEN PUD, 2ND FILING - MAJOR AMENDMENT - 31-99 - REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL4. That, for the foregoing reasons, the Council hereby overturns the Board's decision denying the Amendment, and said Amendment is hereby approved by the Council. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held this 18th day of April, A.D. 2000. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk RESOLUTION 2000-60 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS REGARDING THE APPEAL OF A DECISION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RELATING TO THE SOUTH GLEN PUD, SECOND FILING (MAJOR AMENDMENT) WHEREAS, on December 16, 1999, the City Planning and Zoning Board (the "Board") denied the major amendment to the South Glen PUD, Second Filing (the "Amendment"); and WHEREAS, on December 30, 1999, a Notice of Appeal of the Board's decision was filed with the City Clerk by South Glen Partnership, LLC, (the "Appellant"); and WHEREAS, the foregoing Notice of Appeal alleges that the Planning and Zoning Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the City Code and Charter and failed to conduct a fair hearing; and WHEREAS, on April 4, 2000, the City Council, after notice given in accordance with Chapter 2, Article II, Division 3, of the City Code, considered said appeal, reviewed the record on appeal, heard presentations from the Appellant and other parties in interest and, after discussion, decided to overturn the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board; and WHEREAS, City Code Section 2-56(e) provides that no later than the date of its next regular meeting after the hearing of an appeal, City Council shall adopt, by resolution, findings of fact in support of its decision on the appeal. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that, pursuant to City Code Section 2-56(e), the Council hereby makes the following findings of fact and conclusions: That the grounds for appeal as stated in the Appellant's Notice of Appeal conform to the requirements of Section 2-48 of the City Code. 2. That, during the course of the hearing, the Appellant withdrew its allegation in its Notice of Appeal that the Board failed to conduct a fair hearing; accordingly, the Council made no findings regarding the issue of whether the Board failed to conduct a fair hearing by exceeding its authority or jurisdiction. 3. That the Board failed to properly interpret and apply the relevant provisions of the City Code and Charter in denying the Amendment, specifically including the provisions of Section 2.2.10(B) of the Land Use Code, which require major amendments to comply with applicable standards contained in Articles 3 and 4 of the Land Use Code, to the maximum extent feasible. AGEMDA 1 r Ef SUMMARY F0;9T COLLINS CITY COUFCIL SUBJECT: ITE... NUMBER: 22 DATE: April 18, 2000. STAFF: Stephen Olt Resolution 2000-60 Making Findings of Fact and Conclusions Regarding the Appeal of a Decision of the Planning and Zoning Board Relating to the South Glen PUD, Second Filing (Major Amendment). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On December 30, 1999, a Notice of Appeal of the December 16, 1999 decision of the Planning and Zoning Board to deny the Major Amendment to the South Glen PUD, Second Filing — Final, consisting of a request to eliminate the existing swimming pool and bath house facility at the east end of the 40 dwelling unit multi -family residential development, was filed by the Appellant Southglen Partnership, LLC. On April 4, 2000, City Council voted to overturn the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board. In order to complete the record regarding this appeal, the Council should adopt a Resolution making findings of fact and finalizing its decision on the appeal. GROUND: The Appellant's Notice of Appeal was based on the allegation that: The Planning and Zoning Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Code and Charter. The Planning and Zoning Board failed to conduct a fair hearing in that it exceeded its authority or jurisdiction as contained in the Code or Charter. At the April 4, 2000 hearing on this matter, Council considered the testimony of City staff, the Appellant, and the Appellant's attorney and consultant. In subsequent discussion at this hearing, Council determined that: The Planning and Zoning Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Code and Charter. The Appellant withdrew the allegation that the Board failed to conduct a fair hearing. No action was taken on this allegation. Council voted to overturn the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board.