The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNOEL ANNEXATION & ZONING - 58-87, A - CORRESPONDENCE - CITY COUNCILNOEL & COMPANY 375 E. HORSETOOTH - SHORES 3, SUITE 201 - FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80525 - (303) 225-0168 November 299 1988 Fort Collins City Council Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: NOEL ANNEXATION & ZONING #58-87 To The Honorable Ed Stoner, Mayor Bob Winokur, Assistant Mayor Larry Estrada Jerry Horak Susan Kirkpatrick Chuck Mabry Loren Maxey Over the past several years and most recently over the last several months I have been work- ing to implement a plan to develop my property that is both beneficial to the City and my- self. The plan, as worked out with City Planning Staff, outlines a proposal to annex my Overland Trail. The property lies between the existing Colorado property located west of State University Equine Center to the North and the existing Miller developed multi -family housing to the South. My property totaling 287 acres was presented with a Staff recommen- dation of approval to the Planning and Zoning Board on Monday, November 21, 1988. This letter is a formal protest of the way the Planning and Zoning arrived at a decision of denial (6-0) as well as the overall conduct of the meeting in general and, in particular, the conduct of the members Sandy Kern, Laurie O'Dell, and Lloyd Walker. Since this is an annexation, the City Council has final authority regarding the matter so an appeal cannot be filed. I feel compelled to document and call to your attention abuses directed at me, my consultant, and the proposal which was presented in good faith and with your City Staff recommendation of approval. I have to say that I have never before been treated with such total lack of respect especially from a public service board. The pro- test includes the following allegations: 1. 1 believe that the decision was arbitrary and done without taking into account evi- dence presented by Staff and the applicant. The Board chose to ignore the basic foun- dation of the goals and objectives set forth in the City's Land Use Policies Plan adopt- ed in 1979 and actually stated that this particular property has no right to identify with the City's basic comprehensive Land Use Policies Plan. I believe the Board to be in error in its finding that the "Foothills Policy" is ex- empt from the City's basic goals and objectives for land use. I find it hard to be- lieve that my property has such profound impact on the City as a whole that the Plan- ning and Zoning Board chooses to set it aside and not allow it to be judged as other properties might be judged. NOEL & COMPANY 375 E. NOS+SFOOTH - SHURES 3, SUITE 201 - F'ORF COLLINS, COLORADO 80525 - (303) 225 01G5 Fort Collins City Council November 29, 1988 Page 2 2. 1 was appalled at the pompous attitudes of both Mr. Kern and Mr. Walker. Their rude- ness and self-serving remarks were unjustified and unbecoming of a person in the posi 'Linn of dealing with the public. I would remind Council that the members of the Planning and Zoning Board are not there for their self -edification, but that they are there to serve the public and not put themselves above their peers. Mr. Kern's "bully- ing" conduct toward City Staff and other Board members who were trying to comprehend thecomplexities of this proposal had a misleading affect on the outcome of the meeting.' The "self-serving" attitude displayed by Mr. Walker is totally abusive of his powers as a Planning and.Zoning Board member. Mr. Walker questioned as to "Why was he even looking at this and wondered how the proposal got this far?" As a citizen and property owner, I have an undeniable right to be heard. I resent Mr. Walker declaring that the Staff should screen projects to his satisfaction prior to his review. I submit that Staff found this project to be in conformance to City goals and objectives and recommended approval of the same.. Mr. Walker may choose to vote against this proposal for whatever reason he may have, but no one should be denied their rights because Mr. Walker does not want to be bothered, 3. Laurie O'Dell completely lost control of the meeting in that we, as applicants, were not allowed to rebut or clarify misleading allegations made by the Millers (adjacent property owners) or Board members themselves. Due process relative to previously es- tablished "Rules of Procedure" were ignored by O'Dell. Our lack of opportunity to refute misleading comments made by Board members weighed on the outcome of the vote. 4. After the Board meeting we were made aware of a letter submitted by Robert Burnham representing Colorado State University to all Planning and Zoning Board members just prior to the meeting. This letter was n_ot identified publically during the meeting nor did Colorado State University speak at the meeting. It appears that every effort was made during the meeting to hide the existence of the letter. First of all, Mr. Kern, who is employed by CSU, should have excused himself due to conflictof interest pertaining to the property proposal. The letter reveals that CSU has a priority in- terest in acquisition of this property to add to its Foothill's collection. They indicate that the Foothills are a finite University resource and that use of Foothills' lands by others should be denied. I submit that Mr. Kern is in question as to whether his actions are in the best inter- est of the City of Fort Collins or are they that of his employer, Colorado State Univer- sity? 5. It was stated that the "Foothills Zone" was created to "control" my property. This statement made by an adjacent property owner was not reputed by the Board during the meeting, but was upheld by the Board. I am compelled to explore as to what "control" the City means to have in light of the fact that most of the property along the Foot- hills immediate to my property is in the control of Colorado State University.. NOEL & COMPANY 375 E. HORSETOOTH • SHORES 3, SUITE 201 • FORT COLL'NS, COLORADO E0525 • (303) 225-016B Fort Collins City Council November 29, 1988 Page 3 Ms. O'Dell commented that her decision to deny is due to her belief that the Foothills has a fragile, sensitive environment to protect and that high density development shouid not be allowed. She fails to address the fact that CSU can do whatever it wants and without any concern for the public vielfare and safety. CSU seeks no City approvals nor contributes to any public improvements. CSU admits,in the letter submitted to the Planning and Zoning Board of which O'Dell had a copy during the meeting, that it not only intended to fill in the Foothills with concentrated, nonresidential research and experimentation uses, but that these uses are high intensity in nature and develop animal waste odors, blowing dust, noise, and seasonal insect infestations and produce less —than -desirable air quality. How can O'Dell be really concerned about the sensi- tive nature of the Foothills knowing full well what CSU intends to do with its prop- erties? She cited higher densities as not appropriate for the Foothills, our devel- opment potential would amount to two units per acre overall. 6. At one point in the meeting, Mr. Kern alluded to the fact that Mr. Dave Edwards, who had excused himself due to a potential conflict of interest, would also vote to deny the proposal: His statement was truly out of order, misleading, and in poor taste. 7. 1 find it obviously discriminatory for Planning and Zoning to approve the Stuart prop- erty, an almost identical rezoning of a like.piece of property,in late 1987 on the same street, in the same.urban growth area, and even closer to the 5200 foot elevation than my property. We have to ask ourselves the question, "Is it because we are contiguous to CSU?" Unlike the Stuart property which has no surrounding urban density, my property is surrounded on three sides by higher densities than we are requesting. In summary, I feel that the Board totally ignored competent evidence in support of the pro- ject by Staff and the applicant. It is my opinion that the Board was grossly out of order in its rudeness and actions, and failed to conduct a fair and impartial Dearing. Furthermore, due to the complete misconduct of members Mr. Kern, Mr. Walker, and Ms. O'Dell, 1 call for their immediate dismissal from the Board. Mr. Kern's pompous, comedic, rude attitude and apparent conflict of interest; Mr. Walker's self-serving position; and Ms. O'Dell's complete lack of fairness to me should not be allowed or have a place in a public setting or board. In closing all we ask of the City Council is a fair and impartial judgment based on recent decisions such as the. Stuart property. We do not feel that Colorado State University's objectives should have a bearing or interfere with a private citizen's right to develop his property. Respectfully, ��/,y t Wallace R. Noel. kam cc: M; Davis, L. Hopkins, T. Peterson-