Council conditionally approves parts of Cherry Creek South metro district service-plan amendments, blocks HOA removals pending code changes
Loading...
Summary
The Parker Town Council on Sept. 15 held a public hearing and conditionally approved portions of proposed amendments to service plans and intergovernmental agreements for Cherry Creek South Metropolitan Districts Numbers 4 through 11, but declined to remove the town's requirement for homeowners associations without a separate code change.
The Parker Town Council on Sept. 15 held a lengthy public hearing on proposed amendments to the service plans and intergovernmental agreements for Cherry Creek South Metropolitan Districts Numbers 4 through 11, approving only portions of the applications that the town attorney found not to conflict with Parker's model service plan and land-development code.
Why it matters: the applicants sought the right for several metro districts to provide typical homeowners-association services'including covenant enforcement, trash collection and design review'and to impose fees and special assessments to pay for those services. Town staff and the council's outside special counsel said Parker's existing code and model service plan require a homeowners association (HOA) for residential communities and that removing that requirement would conflict with current law unless the council first amends the town code.
Town planner Jamie Wynne told council the packet contained the proposed amendments and the background: the districts had submitted service-plan amendments largely to update to the town's current model, but the primary change requested was to remove the HOA requirement. Metropolitan-district special counsel Kim Crawford told council that a number of the proposed amendments fit within the model service plan, but many of the changes that would expand fee authority or allow districts to take on HOA functions would require amendments to town code before they could lawfully be approved.
Applicants and supporters, represented by attorney Chris Elliott and planner Megan Murphy, told council the change would eliminate duplication and lower homeowner costs because the metro district could directly impose fees and provide O&M services rather than routing fees through an HOA. Homeowner Doug Townsend, who said he serves on the Trails at Crowfoot HOA board, told council the current setup creates duplicate administrative costs and obscures transparency: "A homeowner in Trails pays $1,200 per year in HOA fees ... 93% or $1,116.87 of that assessment will be transferred to the metro district," Townsend said, adding the layering "does not contribute either to efficiency or transparency." Builder Chad Rodriguez said the metro district structure, not the HOA, would be less prone to entrenched board control and would be more transparent to homeowners.
Council response and action: council members repeatedly said the concept merited further study but that Parker's code limits what the council can approve tonight. Rather than rejecting the applications wholesale, the council adopted motions that approve the portions of each resolution and ordinance that do not conflict with the town's model service plan. Each approval was conditioned on the applicant submitting revised service-plan and IGA drafts that remove the conflicting provisions and on the town attorney's office determining in writing that the conflicts have been removed; upon such determination the revised drafts would be deemed approved. The motions were introduced by "Councilmember Dyack" and seconded by Councilmember Barrington; council recorded unanimous aye votes on the conditional approvals.
What was not approved: the council did not grant the blanket removal of the HOA requirement during this hearing, and councilmembers said making that change would require an ordinance amending the land development ordinance and model service plan first, or a formal waiver process with findings that the waiver is not a self-created hardship and does not impair the intent of the LDO.
Next steps: the applicants may submit revised drafts conforming to the town attorney's direction, or they may seek a code/ordinance change through the legislative process. Council members signaled willingness to continue the conversation but declined to override existing code tonight.
Votes at a glance: For each of items 5a.1 through 5a.16 (resolution and associated ordinance entries for Cherry Creek South Metropolitan Districts Numbers 4 through 11), council approved "portions not in conflict with the town model service plan" by unanimous roll-call votes; approvals were expressly conditioned on the applicant providing revised drafts to the town attorney's office and the attorney's written confirmation that conflicting provisions were removed.
Background notes: Parker town code provisions referenced during the hearing included the town's model service plan and Parker Land Development Ordinance provisions (staff cited Parker Town Code section 13.08.0.14[a] and LDO section 13.03.04[y] as relevant to HOA requirements and waiver criteria). Metropolitan districts are quasi-governmental units in Colorado and may be authorized to provide a wide range of public infrastructure and operations/maintenance services; whether they can lawfully supplant an HOA's covenant enforcement or related functions depends on local code language and state law.
What to watch: whether applicants submit revised drafts that remove the conflicting language, and whether council pursues a separate legislative ordinance process to amend the model service plan or the LDO to allow metro districts to provide HOA-like services in future developments.
