Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREGISTRY RIDGE - OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN ..... APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL OF P & Z BOARD'S DECISION - 32-95 - REPORTS - CITY COUNCILSection 2. That the Council hereby upholds the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board in approving the Overall Development Plan and Preliminary P.U.D.Plan for the Project. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the -City f'F -0 Collins ld this 5th day of March, A.D. 1996. UW19 O City Clerk 2 Mayor RESOLUTION 96-22 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS REGARDING THE APPEAL FROM A DECISION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RELATING TO THE REGISTRY RIDGE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY P.U.D. WHEREAS, on December 11, 1995, the Planning and Zoning Board ("the Board") approved the Registry Ridge Overall Development Plan and Preliminary P.U.D. (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, on December 21, 1995, a Notice of Appeal of the Board's decision was filed with the City Clerk by LeAnn Thieman (the "Appellant"), which Notice of Appeal was subsequently amended and refiled with the City Clerk on January 26, 1996; and WHEREAS, on February 2, 1996, additional issues pertaining to the appeal were identified by Mayor Pro Tem Gina Janett, pursuant to Section 2-56 of the City Code; and WHEREAS, on February 13, 1996, 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 and heard presentations from the appellants and other parties -in -interest; and WHEREAS, Section 2-56 of the City Code provides that no later than the date of its next regular meeting after the hearing of an appeal, the 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 as follows: Section 1. That the Council hereby makes the following findings and conclusions: (a) that the grounds for appeal as stated in the Appellant's Amended Notice of Appeal conform to the requirements of Section 2-48 of the City Code; (b) that the Planning and Zoning Board did not fail to conduct a fair hearing for any of the reasons stated in the Notice of Appeal; (c) that the Planning and Zoning Board did not fail to properly interpret and apply the relevant provisions of the City Code in approving the Overall Development Plan for the Project; and (d) that the Planning and Zoning Board did not fail to properly interpret andapply the relevant provisions of the City Code in approving the Preliminary P.U.D. Plan for the Project. DATE: March 5, 1996 �� 2 EM NUN R: 3 the City Council approved motions to the following effect: The Board did not fail to properly conduct a fair hearing in that the Board did not exceed its authority or jurisdiction as contained in the Code or Charter, nor did it ignore its previously established rules of procedure; 2. The Board did not fail to properly interpret and apply the relevant provisions of the City Code in approving the Registry Ridge Overall Development Plan #32-95. 3. 1 t "[�o rl Rd or d apply relevant provisions of the Code and ~ly a ofthe Residential Uses Point Chart; and All - Development Criteria A-2.2, A-A-2.12 of the Land Development Guidance System when considering Cit�CtlNsdge P.U.D., Phase 1, Preliminary, #32-95A; For these reasons the e�uncal_v(4-3) to uphold the Planning and Zoning Board's decision to approve the Registry Ridge O.D.P., #32-95 and voted (4-3) to overturn the Board's decision to approve the Registry Ridge P.U.D., Phase 1, Preliminary, #32-95A. At the meeting of February 20, 1996 Council postponed action on Resolution 96-22 at the request of the developer's attorney. The continuation was requested in view of the fact that Councilmember Wanner had indicated that he would be making a motion to reconsider or rescind the Council's decisions regarding the approval of the Overall Development Plan and Preliminary P.U.D. Because of the possibility that the Council decision on February 20 may be reconsidered, and in view of the fact that findings of fact must be adopted by Council at this meeting, four alternative resolutions have been prepared. All would find that the Appellant was not denied a fair hearing. Beyond that, the four options would be as follows: Option A would uphold the approval of the Overall Development Plan and overturn the approval of the P.U.D. Option B would overturn the Board's approval of both the Overall Development Plan and the P.U.D. Option C would uphold the Board's decision to approve both the Overall Development Plan and the P.U.D. Option D would remand the matter to the Board for further consideration. If Council selects Option D, it should identify the particular issues raised on appeal that it believes should be further explored by the Board. �5CGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ITE:o NUMBER: 3 DATE: March 5, 1996 FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Mike Ludwig SUBJECT: Resolution 96-22 of the Council of the City of Fort Collins Making Findings of Fact and Conclusions Regarding the Appeal from a Decision of the Planning and Zoning Board Relating to - the Registry Ridge Overall Development Plan and Preliminary P.U.D. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On January 26, 1996, an Amended Notice of Appeal of the December 11, 1995 decisions of the Planning and Zoning Board to approve the Registry Ridge O.D.P., #32-95 and the Registry Ridge P.U.D., Phase 1, Preliminary, #32-95A was filed by the Appellant, LeAnn Thieman. In a memorandum to the City Clerk dated February 2, 1996, Mayor Pro Tem Janett identified additional issues for review by the Council. On February 13, 1996, the City Council voted (4-3) to uphold the Planning and Zoning Board's decision to approve the Registry Ridge O.D_P.,#32-95 and voted (4-3) to overturn the Board's decision to approve the Registry Ridge P.U.D., Phase 1, Preliminary, #32-95A. 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. The consideration of this matter was postponed from February 16 to a continuation of that same meeting on March 5. BACKGROUND: The Appellant's notice of appeal was based on allegations 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 the Board exceeded its authority or jurisdiction as contained in the Code or Charter;" and "The Planning and Zoning Board failed to conduct a fair hearing in that the Board substantially ignored its previously established rules of procedure."