Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/15/2022 - Planning and Zoning Commission - AGENDA - Work Session * Work session times are approximate and are subject to change without notice. David Katz, Chair Virtual Meeting Ted Shepard, Vice Chair Zoom Webinar Michelle Haefele Per Hogestad Adam Sass Jeff Schneider Julie Stackhouse Planning and Zoning Hearing will be held on Thursday, April 21, 2022 in City Hall Chambers or online. Regular Work Session April 15, 2022 Virtual Meeting Noon – 4:00 p.m. Planning and Zoning Commission Work Session Agenda Participation for this remote Planning and Zoning Commission work session will be available online or by phone. Commission members and staff may be present in-person but interested members of the public and applicant teams are strongly encouraged to participate via Zoom. No public comment is accepted during work sessions. Public Attendance (Online): Individuals who wish to attend the Planning and Zoning work session via remote public participation can do so through Zoom at https://fcgov.zoom.us/j/95923335908. Individuals participating in the Zoom session should also watch the meeting through that site. The meeting will be available to join beginning at 11:45 a.m. on April 15, 2022. Attendees should try to sign in prior to 12:00 p.m. if possible. In order to attend: Use a laptop, computer, or internet-enabled smartphone. (Using earphones with a microphone will greatly improve your audio). You need to have access to the internet. Keep yourself on muted status. If you have any technical difficulties during the work session, please email kclaypool@fcgov.com. Public Attendance (Phone): If you do not have access to the internet, you can call into the work session via phone. Please dial: 1-253-215-8782 or 1-346-248-7799, with Webinar ID: 959 2333 5908. (Continued on next page) Packet pg. 1 City of Fort Collins Page 2 TOPICS: PROJECTED TIMES: Consent: 1. February 11, 2022 Hearing Draft Minutes 2. Bucking Horse Park (Mapes) 12:00 – 12:15 Visit from Mayor Pro Tem, Emily Francis 12:15 – 12:30 Discussion: 3. Enclave at Redwood (Wray) 4. NEWT 3 Pipeline SPAR (Mapes) 12:30 – 2:00 Policy and Legislation: • Land Use Code Phase 1 (Overton/Beals) • CSU Master Plan Update (Hansen, CSU) • East Mulberry Plan Update (Tatman-Burruss) 2:00 – 3:00 Commission Topics: • APA Planning Officials Training Series Part 2: Essential Skills – Managing the Meeting (Sizemore) • Upcoming Hearing Calendar (Sizemore) • Commission Updates (Sizemore) • Public Engagement Updates (Stephens) • Transportation Board Liaison Update (Gavaldon) 3:00 – 4:00 The meeting will be available beginning at 11:45 a.m. Please call in to the meeting prior to 12:00 p.m., if possible. Once you join the meeting: keep yourself on muted status. If you have any technical difficulties during the meeting, please email kclaypool@fcgov.com. The April 21 Planning and Zoning Commission regular meeting will be available online, remotely and in- person. Information on participating in the April 21 Planning and Zoning regular meeting is contained in the agenda for the April 21 meeting available at https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/planning-zoning.php. Members of the public wishing to submit documents, visual presentations, or written comments for the Commission to consider regarding any item on the agenda must be emailed to smanno@fcgov.com at least 24 hours prior to the April 21 meeting. Packet pg. 2 April 15th, 2022Noah BealsDevelopment Review ManagerPlanning and Zoning CommissionLand Use Code HOUSING UpdateLAND USE CODE UPDATEPacket pg. 3 Re-Organization2• Article 1 General Purpose• Article 2 Administration/Procedures• Article 3 Site Suitability • Article 4 Development Infrastructure• Article 5 Site Design• Article 6 Building Design• Article 7 Zone Districts and Overlays• Article 8 Uses with Specific Standards• Article 9 Signs• Article 10 Definitions and Rules of Measurements• Article 1 General Provisions• Article 2 Administration• Article 3 General Development Standards• Article 4 Districts• Article 5 Terms and DefinitionsExisting Land Use CodeProposed Land Development CodeDraft 03/2022LAND USE CODE UPDATEPacket pg. 4 Re-Organization3Article 1General ProvisionsArticle 2Zone Districts & OverlaysIntroduction (Purpose, Existing Conditions, Building Types, Lot Area/Unit)Building Placement (lot size, setbacks)Access / Parking LocationBuilding Envelope (height)Building Components (porch, chimneys, encroachments, transparency/ground floor activation)Accessory StructuresArticle 3Building TypesArticle 4Use StandardsArticle 5General Planning and Design StandardsDevelopment InfrastructureEnvironmentalHistoric PreservationSite DesignSignsArticle 6Administration and ProceduresArticle 7Rules of Measurement and DefinitionsProposed Land Development CodeDraft April 2022LAND USE CODE UPDATEPacket pg. 5 CSU Master Plan 2024 Update Planning CSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 6 2014 Main Campus Master PlanCSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 7 CSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 8 CSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 9 CSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 10 CSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 11 Goals: The physical master plan should:•Align with forthcoming CST and Academic Master Plan•Incorporate the university space assessment & parallel planning efforts•Align with research priorities/reputation/branding•Establish student growth objective:•Is 35,000 still the right number?•Align with on‐campus Housing and Dining master plan•What is the future of…?•Meridian Village•Allison Hall•Newsom Hall•Aggie SouthCSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 12 Goals: The physical master plan should:•Establish new parking ratio and mode split goal to determine:•Land Necessary for garage(s) or surface lot(s)•Increase in Transit Services•Investments in mobility infrastructure (trails, bike lanes, intersections)•Focus on the uniqueness of the place, “situated at the foothills of the Rocky Mtns…”•Environmental Sustainability efforts:•STARS Platinum university•Pollinator friendly campus•Platinum bicycle friendly university•Level III Arboretum•Physical attributes:•Recreation fields adjacent to residence halls thanks to thoughtful planning of the past•Local and Regional transportation linking to a Community Transit Center located on the core of campus•College lake – supplying water both for research and irrigation purposesCSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 13 What the 2014 plan did well•Parking moved to the perimeter of campus leveraging structures and transit•Protected open space•Protected viewshed corridors•Defined a pedestrian core of campus•Defined campus edge setbacks•Acknowledged and responded to flood plain constraints in physical design•Reinforced the need for a strong relationship with City of Fort CollinsCSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 14 How was the 2014 plan used succesfully?•It kept the Master Plan committee engaged and effectively guided process and decision making•core tenants were easily recognized and upheld by decision makers•Intergovernmental Agreement ‐Stadium siting, neighborhood relations, RP3 •Nuanced Public engagement•Greater permeability of campus to the public•Successful joint grant applications with the City of Fort CollinsCSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 15 What is new since the 2014 Master Plan adoption?•New Campus Planner role forthcoming and reorganization of support staff•Courageous Strategic Transformation process underway•Academic Master Plan process underway•Impacts of COVID•Remote work‐what are the parking and office space metrics?•Virtual courses‐what are the space/ infrastructure needs?•Enrollment impacts‐what is the expected student population?•Focus on resiliency•Focus on sustainability (AASHE Stars)•Focus on safety (Vision Zero Task Force)CSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 16 What is new since the 2014 Master Plan adoption?•Focus on inclusion (Inclusive Physical and Virtual Campus Policy, Principles of Community)•Focus on engagement and outreach (City Plan, Bicycle Master Plan, Multiple Sub‐Area Plans)•Focus on affordable/attainable housing for staff and students•Foothills Visioning process (Campus Master Plan)•South Campus Master Plan Update•Development of sub‐area Master Plan for UCA•Development of remote campus Master Plans: (ARDEC, Mountain Campus)•University rebranding effortCSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 17 Proposed Timeline to 2024 Update AdoptionCSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 18 Active Planning Initiatives:CSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 19 District Energy Masterplan – Main Campus Near-Term Financial InvestmentBusiness as Usual (BAU):•$18M for construction year 2025 to replace end of life boiler•$20M for construction year 2030 to renovate and expand Chill Plant #1Recommendation ‐Combined Heating and Cooling (CHC):•$18M for construction year 2025 to replace end of life boiler•$104M for construction years 2025 to 2030 for steam system conversion to hot water•$54M for construction year 2030 to renovate and expand Chill Plant #1 with heat recovery chillers and construct thermal storage facilitiesLife Cycle Cost difference:  $162M savings for CHC over 60 yearsEstimated decision point is 2022CSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 20 Idea Corridor – Academic Spine Clark RevitalizationGlover RedevelopmentBiomedical Discovery CenterCSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 21 Update – Transportation Master plan•Develop TDM plan for CSU•Evaluate transit services to Foothills, Main and South Campuses•Foothills Campus Shuttle in alignment with West Elizabeth plans•Mobility Hub planning•Distributed fleet vehicles•Bike/ Ped infrastructure network•Parking planning – Future Structures?CSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 22 2022 South Campus Master Plan UpdateCSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 23 Second year DVM Programming - South Campus•College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences•Expansion of Veterinary Program at CSU, shift more students from main to south campusCSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 24 Foothills Campus VisioningActive planning initiative to realize research facility opportunities at the Foothills Campus.CSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 25 Foothills Campus – Jud Harper Complex Planning UpdateCSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 26 •College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences•Budget: $8M NIH Grant •Anticipated Completion Date: Summer 2024Chiropteran Research Facility - Foothills CampusCSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 27 CSU Capital Construction and Renovation:Nearing CompletionCSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 28 NutrienAgricultural Sciences Building Renovation & Addition (Formerly Shepardson Hall), cont.CSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 29 NutrienAgricultural Sciences Building Renovation & Addition (Formerly Shepardson Hall)•Budget: $44 M•GSF: 43,600 Renovation with 40,500 Addition•Status: Final Commission•Anticipated Completion Date: Late Summer 2022CSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 30 CSU SolarMain, South, Foothills, ARDEC Campuses •Budget: $14 M•PPA agreement•4.3MW generation•Status: buildout continues•Anticipated Completion: Summer 2022CSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 31 CSU Capital Construction and Renovation:Coming SoonCSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 32 Lory Student CenterPhase 3 and ALVS Center•Budget: $24M•Status: Logistics Planning•Anticipated Completion: Summer 2023CSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 33 NCAA Women’s Sports Complex•Department of Athletics•Budget: $6.5M•Status: Construction Documents•Anticipated Completion: Summer 2023CSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 34 University Projects Temporarily SuspendedMeridian Village(Student Housing)CSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 35 Thank youCSU MASTER PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 36 East Mulberry Annexation Lenses & PhasingApril 1, 2022Advisory Group Sylvia Tatman-BurrussE MULBERRY PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 37 East Mulberry Map2E MULBERRY PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 38 3Agenda1. Review timeline2. Update on engagement3. Annexation Lenses & PhasingE MULBERRY PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 39 4Timeline/Work Plan UpdateMarch 8thReview Goals and Big Ideas for East Mulberry PlanReview Annexation Scenario FrameworkApril 26thReview financial assumptionsReview Draft Annexation Phasing ScenariosWinterReview Draft of the East Mulberry PlanDiscuss final annexation scenariosSummerConsider refined financial assumptions, timeline and scenarios for annexationNew Timeline (2022):E MULBERRY PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 40 Advisory Group MeetingKey Takeaways and PerspectivesSupport for annexation in hopes of eventually benefitting from increased resources and attention toward transportation, policing, stormwater, and other topicsConcerns and surprise that annexation was in questionDesire for greater connectivity, continuity, and safety for different modes of transportation.Preference to start with Mulberry Corridor and the I‐25 Gateway. 5E MULBERRY PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 41 Annexation Lenses & PhasingE MULBERRY PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 42 Safety• I-25 and East Mulberry consistently noted as an area where business success is partially impeded by safety issues not adequately addressed by current law enforcement efforts• actively requested to be annexed early to mitigate law enforcement deficienciesAesthetics/Transportation• Aesthetic improvements along the East Mulberry frontage• Hwy is dangerous to access by all transportation modesStormwater Improvements• The service-area/Industrial park southwest of the old airport and directly east of Home Depot and Walmart is severely affected by stormwater infrastructure deficiencies and flooding related to Dry CreekHousing and Transit• Mechanisms for affordable housing preservation can be utilized in these neighborhoods• Investments in transportation mobility on key corridors (e.g., Summit View)Priorities by SubareasP0E MULBERRY PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 43 Slide 7P0 What are the priorities for Subarea 5? Do we want to say they are the same as two and make more generic about transportation mobility? Plaut,Josie, 2022-03-28T21:50:30.113E MULBERRY PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 44 PhasingBased on precedent from previous annexations, a phased approach is recommended.• Allows for allocation of resources over time• Allows time for revenue generation ahead of other phases• Allows for better community engagement ahead of each phaseE MULBERRY PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 45 9Phasing Lenses Phasing Lenses Each lens focuses on one priority area. Other priority areas are still present but might be delayed or resourced differently. Emphasizes environmental buffers, flood mitigation Emphasizes connectivity, utilities, and other social priorities Emphasizes economic development and vitality in the areaEmphasizes fiscal impact to City of annexation, including existing priorities, risks, and timingFiscal Health for City Environmental & Hazard ProtectionEconomic Opportunity Residential Enhancement The Gateway Community Emphasizes improvements and reinvestment potential for the Mulberry Corridor, including the highway and frontage roadsE MULBERRY PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 46 Economically-Focused Phasing Option•Prioritize the annexation of properties with potential for new industrial and service commercial usesPhasing Assumptions•Prioritizes the annexation of undeveloped industrial land•Prioritizes stormwater improvements in Subareas 4 and 5 to address existing stormwater issues and create potential for new or renewed development.Advantages•Maximizes potential for new business attraction through undeveloped land at the I-25/Mulberry interchange and at the airpark•Prioritizes support opportunities for existing businesses from city programs and through improvements to support existing areasDisadvantages •Would require stormwater investment•Does not address the interests and concerns of area residentsEconomic Opportunity E MULBERRY PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 47 Socially/Residential-Focused Scenario•Prioritizes the annexation of existing residential neighborhoods and improving their quality of services and infrastructure.Phasing Assumptions•Prioritizes annexation from the south (Subarea 2) and north (Subarea 5) with Subarea 3 annexation to improve access.•Prioritizes stormwater and light & power and broadband to annexation areasAdvantages•Addresses the interests and concerns of the largest number of potential residents and votersDisadvantages•Would likely trigger the need for investments in stormwater and road improvements.•Would have to address inequities in service levels and quality of infrastructureResidential Enhancement E MULBERRY PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 48 •Prioritize the annexation of areas that need improvements to address environmental and hazard concerns.Phasing Assumptions•Prioritize annexation of Subareas 1, 2, and 4 to address stormwater issues•Assumes city support in addressing safety issues along roadwaysAdvantages•Addresses hazard concerns and liabilities•Helpful for business development in Subareas 1 and 4Disadvantages •Greater upfront investment and doesn’t maximize potential for new development to support improvement costsEnvironment & Hazard ProtectionE MULBERRY PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 49 •Prioritize the annexation of property/subareas that will generate revenues for capital and/or on-going improvements in near termPhasing Assumptions•Prioritize annexation of Subareas 1, 3, and the undeveloped portions of Subareas 4 and 5•Light and Power (along with Broadband) built on schedule that maximizes leverage with other extensions and is most cost effective for rate payersAdvantages•Maximizes property tax and sales tax growth (indirect from new residents)•Maximizes opportunity to recoup capital expendituresDisadvantages •Does not address the interests and concerns of area residents•Requires proactive investment in some areas and delayed investment in othersFiscal Health for CityE MULBERRY PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 50 Phasing Assumptions•Prioritizes annexation of Subarea 3 and the central portion of Subarea 1. Advantages•Improves the image of a major city gateway•Provides more control over the Mulberry Street roadway the quickest•Is likely to stimulate commercial infill and redevelopment of underutilized sites•Addresses health and safety concerns in the area that are in Subarea 1 and 3.Disadvantages •Would require stormwater investment•Does not address the interests and concerns of area residentsGateway CommunityE MULBERRY PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 51 E MULBERRY PLAN UPDATEPacket pg. 52 1 EAST MULBERRY ADVISORY GROUP: ANNEXATION LENSES & PHASING Date: April 1, 2022 Location: Zoom (virtual) Participants: Sylvia Tatman-Burruss (City of Fort Collins), Shawna Van Zee (City of Fort Collins), Mike Brown, Amy Young, Erika, Josie Plaut (IBE), Susan Hsin (IBE) ACTION ITEMS •Share recording of this meeting with other Advisory Group members. •Share recording of Council’s most recent meeting to Advisory Group members. •Joint City Council and County Commissioners meeting on April 13th •City Council work session focused on annexation April 26th •Complete draft of East Mulberry Plan – City will reach out in the coming months. •Notify Advisory Group when the Council’s vote will take place in an updated newsletter. KEY TAKAWAYS & PERSPECTIVES •Support for annexation in hopes of eventually benefitting from increased resources and attention toward transportation, policing, stormwater, and other topics •Concerns and surprise that annexation was in question and group members expressed concerns about Council leadership, vision, and potentially damaging County relationship if the City chooses to back down from annexation. •Desire for greater connectivity, continuity, and safety for different modes of transportation. •Preference to start with Mulberry Corridor and the I-25 Gateway. KEY MESSAGES FROM ADVISORY GROUP MEMBERS •The financial implications and concerns should not get in the way for the betterment of the community. •It is short-term thinking to hesitate making improvements to this area. Feels like a short-sighted perspective to think that investing in this area won’t be worth it. I would like to see the council be more optimistic in this effort. •It would be challenging to employ a phased approach for the improvements. It seems like the area should either be annexed or not annexed. If we don’t annex, then the City does not need to worry about having a plan and can stop spending so many hours and resources to wait on decisions. •Lack of vision by the City. Does the City want a cohesive feel on this side of town? At this point it does not seem like they are convinced it is worth investing in East Mulberry. Objective/Topic Notes E MULBERRY PLAN UPDATE Packet pg. 53 2 Introductory Remarks + Meeting Kick-off Brief overview of the agenda and conversation about the focus on the difference between the Annexation Plan and the East Mulberry Plan. The meeting was recorded via Zoom. Community Workshops Update •Council asked staff to focus more on annexation phasing and options •The East Mulberry Plan, while related, is on hold for a couple months. •Council work session on April 26th will hopefully provide some clarity on options for next steps in the process. •The East Mulberry Plan can and does exist without annexation, but annexation would provide greater accountability and resources focused on implementation. •Annexation is part of the longstanding agreements between the City and the County, though it is not a given. Staff and consultants are working to develop information and context to help inform Council’s decision-making process Annexation Overview Difference between Annexation Plan and East Mulberry Plan Annexation Plan •There is an intergovernmental agreement that defines when an area becomes an enclave, it will be annexed into the City and the City will become the service provider in the area for policing, zoning, building codes, stormwater infrastructure, and transportation. Because this would be the largest enclave annexation in Fort Collins history, Council is taking a careful, analytical approach to the process. East Mulberry Plan •Existing plan from 2002 that addresses development in the area. It works as a guiding document on whether this area will be jointly adopted by the city or not. Recent efforts have focused on updating the 2002 plan. The plan will be more robustly implemented if the area is annexed than if it is not. Questions/Comments from the Group •We were under the impression that the annexation was going to happen, and it was just a matter of time until it was finalized. Is that still the case? At this point, Council is asking for more information to make a more informed decision about moving forward. •Is the City waiting for more information or is there something else going on behind the scenes? The starting point was the agreement, but ultimately the decision is up to Council, and they can choose whether to follow through with annexation. This area is very large and therefore considerations are potentially different from past annexations. •What are the repercussions if Council decides to not annex this area? E MULBERRY PLAN UPDATE Packet pg. 54 3 This is something that the staff is still trying to understand as well. Staff hopes to gain better clarity at the April 26th Work Session. • What happens to the East Mulberry Plan that we have been working on over the past many months? Staff did not anticipate the Council direction at the last Work Session. Staff understands that Council wants to take a slow, careful approach to the topic. However, Council wants to make sure that all the community engagement work that has already been done is still accounted for moving forward. The annexation plan and East Mulberry Plan are related, but not directly tied together. If Council does not decide to proceed with annexation at this point, the East Mulberry Plan can still be adopted. If the plan is adopted without annexation, it is likely that it will serve as more of a guiding document, rather than a typical area plan. • What was the purpose of updating the 2002 Plan? Many City policies have changed since 2002, so the City wanted to reevaluate the original plan in alignment with the current needs of the community and changes the Fort Collins has experienced since 2002. This gives the City an opportunity to take more community feedback into consideration as well. • What factors influence what City Council is looking for in deciding on annexation? It’s a matter of having enough resources, the timeline of when to start projects, and how to handle existing issues with roads and infrastructure. They are looking for staff to outline these concerns with more clarity to help make their choices more obvious. • Has there been discussion about the increasing development and population increase in this area? Genuine concern about public safety due to the anticipation of many people moving to this area. Because the policies of the City have changed to accommodate multimodal transportation, the City, as an urban service provider, requires this for new development. The requirements for the county, which has more rural foundation, are much different. The requirements and services from the City and the County do not exactly line up, so the issue at hand is to figure out a solution that will be a common ground for the differences between the two jurisdictions. The objective of today’s conversation is to be able to better understand and articulate the community’s responses around potential annexation by understanding different perspectives from the community. We are trying to identify what the community perceives as the benefits and drawbacks of annexation. Suggestion to watch the recorded Council session to better understand the shift in direction / the Council’s questions around E MULBERRY PLAN UPDATE Packet pg. 55 4 annexation. It’s important to note that Council works and decides on issues and that City staff’s role is to provide information and guidance to Council, but they are not one and the same. •Pedestrian, bike, and resident safety in this area is why an advisory group member decided to join. The Mosaic Neighborhood, for example, has great roads and infrastructure, but outside of the neighborhood, that is no longer the case. No private builders and developers are going to deal with the City’s infrastructural and connectivity issues. Planning and resources from the City can begin with annexation, but even if that is the case, it is very unlikely that any major changes would happen in the next 5 years. It is a long process. Phasing Overview The group moved into an annexation activity after being introduced to the annexation subarea map (which is a little different from the East Mulberry Plan Subarea Map). The group reviewed a summary of concerns and opportunities by subarea. There are no hard boundaries for the subareas on this map, but it is divided up in a way to help us make sense of the area. Why are we talking about phasing for annexation? •Allows for the City to build up resources over time, rather than all at once. •Allows time for revenue generation ahead of other phases. •Allows for better community engagement ahead of each phase. Often, annexation areas are much smaller than what is to be the case for East Mulberry, so the phasing plan helps annexation be more feasible. Phasing lenses Each lens focuses on one priority area. Other priority areas are still present but might be delayed or resourced differently. The idea is to spark conversation, rather than expect that the city will take on any one of these lenses specifically. The options generally represent a time that would start in couple of years and last 10 or more years. E MULBERRY PLAN UPDATE Packet pg. 56 5 1. Fiscal Health for City  emphasizes fiscal impact to City of annexation, including priorities, budges, risks, and timing. • Prioritizing revenue for the city through primarily through city sales and some property taxes. • Annexes commercial areas first with residential areas coming later. • Allows financial resources to be built up most quickly to help offset additional costs (e.g., policing, capital improvements, etc.) 2. Environmental & Hazard Protection  Emphasizes annexation areas that need improvements to address environmental and natural hazard concerns (e.g., flooding). • Recognizes that floods are a major concern in this area. • Prioritizing subareas 1, 2, 4, which include Cooper Slough, Dry Creek, and the Poudre River Trails. • Might be a while until stormwater infrastructure improvements are made, but this lens would get it on the list as a priority. 3. Economic Opportunity  Prioritizes the annexation of properties with potential for new industrial and commercial development that would generate income for the local economy. • Effort to identify which areas will maximize business potential while meeting the multimodal requirements. 4. Residential Enhancement  Emphasizes connectivity, utilities, and other social priorities. • Focuses on residential / resident priorities. • Prioritizes annexation of subareas 2, 3, and 5, which have existing residential neighborhoods • Conversation around affordable housing in this area. 5. The Gateway Community  Emphasizes functional and aesthetic improvements along the Mulberry corridor. • Aesthetic and functional improvements in partnership with CDOT. • Prioritizes Subarea 3 and central portion of Subarea 1 Sylvia clarified that staff would present financial numbers to council on April 26th. These lenses are meant to help inform council’s thinking about an annexation approach based on different priorities. Questions from the Advisory Group • Have any numbers for cost and benefit been put together yet? What is the bare minimum for cost and funding? Seems like there is a huge gap in this presentation about this. Round numbers will be presented from the financial analyst in the next council meeting on April 26th. We currently have a general idea, but it is up to Council to decide what to do including looking E MULBERRY PLAN UPDATE Packet pg. 57 6 annexation from staffing, services, maintenance, and capital perspectives. Phasing Lenses Conversation QUESTION FOR THE GROUP Which area would you suggest annexing first and why? If you had to rank them, or put them in an order, which order would you choose? Why? • Focusing on the Gateway Lens should be prioritized to address the issues of public safety and transportation. If this was the starting point, there is potential that the improvements would spill over into the other Subareas. • The Gateway seems to be the most palatable choice because it would have the greatest positive impact on the most people and the whole town of Fort Collins, versus improvements to other subareas would only be a help to the people who interact with those areas more exclusively. • Even though this would be the most beneficial lens to take on, it is equally probably the most difficult subarea to address. • There are many overlapping issues characteristic to this area (i.e., stormwater infrastructure/flooding, traffic safety issues), that might make this phasing plan not the most pragmatic solution. It would be difficult to compartmentalize the improvements to one specific subarea. • To clarify, the Gateway Lens is not just a notion for beautification. • Policing by the interstate is needed. Is there any data to provide to City Council that addressing this area would be a crime reduction effort, which would reduce the urgent need for police services? The data is available in call volumes to the area. It shows that police are needed in this area, which could help the case for the Gateway area being pushed forward. • It seems Council is struggling with the justifying the cost to cover policing, but that cost isn’t supported by the current revenue/budget, making it a barrier for the city to annex this area. • Being short in resources doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be doing anything. What would you most like council and staff to understand about your thoughts on annexation? • The financial implications and concerns should not get in the way for the betterment of the community. • It is short-term thinking to hesitate making improvements to this area. Feels like a short-sided perspective to think that investing in this area won’t be worth it. Would like to see the City be more optimistic in this effort. • It would be challenging to employ a phasing approach for the improvements that need to be done in this area. It seems like it should either be annexed or not annexed, which might make this whole plan less confusing to our benefit. If we don’t annex this, the E MULBERRY PLAN UPDATE Packet pg. 58 7 City does not need to worry about having a plan, which is currently something that the City is expending so many hours and resources to wait on decisions. • Lack of vision by the City. Does the City want a cohesive feel on this side of town? At this point it does not seem like they are convinced it is worth to invest in. Closing Remarks + Next Steps The civic process only works because of the engagement from the community. Our commitment is to continue facilitating opportunities that will elevate the voices in the community. This is far more than just a financial decision, but rather a whole city decision. Despite the interesting turn in the road for all of us in this process, all the progress made today is helpful for the City to gain clarity for this complex decision. The Council work session on April 26th is focused on the Annexation Plan, which will include the lenses we discussed today, accompanied by the round financial numbers. There is currently no deadline for council to decide by. The work session on the 26th will not lead to any decisions, but the hope is to get enough done to create guiding direction that will lead to a decision. Regarding the East Mulberry Plan, it has the most impact is when single properties and new development occurs. New developments will be subject to the plan guidance whether the annexation happens or not. At the very least, the impact will happen, but at a smaller scale (developers, builders, private businesses) with the creation of this plan document. Josie thanked everyone for their time and encouraged the group to keep learning, keep staying involved, and to watch and participate in the council work sessions and hearings accordingly. E MULBERRY PLAN UPDATE Packet pg. 59