Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Referendum topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff outlines zoning uncertainty after Cascadia PUD was set aside by referendum; some annexed parcels left in limbo
Summary
Staff told the Planning Commission that a referendum repealed a previously approved Cascadia PUD, reverting much of the project area to holding agriculture zoning; staff said the city is awaiting court guidance and will take stopgap steps for annexed parcels that currently lack effective zoning.
During the staff report, Interim Planning Manager Caleb Jackson flagged the recent referendum that set aside the Cascadia planned-unit development (PUD) approval and the uncertainty it has created for zoning and entitlements in the project area. “There was the Cascadia vote … that set aside the PUD for Cascadia, and that raises a lot of questions for staff and the city about how to proceed,” Jackson said, adding that staff and city leadership are assessing next steps.
Staff explained that where a PUD was repealed, much of the project area currently defaults to holding-agriculture zoning; that status allows capital-improvement work such as water-main installation or road construction to proceed but would bar vertical construction on individual lots until new zoning or entitlements are adopted. Commissioners asked whether citizen-led referenda can permanently apply zoning; staff said referenda can repeal ordinances but cannot themselves create new zoning, noting pending guidance from a Colorado Supreme Court case out of Telluride that many jurisdictions are watching.
Staff also noted two recently annexed parcels (the Schmerzhi and Kinison annexations) are in a legal limbo because their previously approved PUD zoning was repealed and they cannot revert to county zoning after annexation. Staff said the city has 90 days from vote certification to establish zoning on those parcels and plans to apply holding-agriculture zoning as a stopgap consistent with surrounding areas.
Jackson and other staff urged patience as legal decisions and city leadership guidance develop; commissioners asked for clarity on whether the city would seek judicial interpretation or wait for court rulings. Staff said they expect further direction from city leadership and that litigation outcomes will likely inform long-term policy on zoning and referenda.
The Planning Commission did not take final action on these points but requested updates as the situation evolves.
