Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning and Zoning Commission - MINUTES - 08/15/2024Julie Stackhouse, Chair Virtual Hearing Adam Sass, Vice Chair City Council Chambers Russell Connelly 300 Laporte Avenue David Katz Fort Collins, Colorado Shirley Peel Ted Shepard Cablecast on FCTV, Channel 14 on Connexion & York Channels 14 & 881 on Comcast The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. Regular Hearing August 15, 2024 Chair Stackhouse called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Roll Call: Katz, Sass, Stackhouse, Connelly, Peel, York, Shepard Absent: None Staff Present: Frickey, Yatabe, Matsunaka, Myler, Vonkoepping, Collins, Marko, Jarvis, Dial, Beals Chair Stackhouse provided background on the Commission’s role and what the audience could expect as to the order of business. She described the role of the Commission and noted that members are volunteers appointed by City Council. The Commission members review the analysis by staff, the applicants’ presentations, and input from the public and make a determination regarding whether each proposal meets the Land Use Code. She noted that items for this particular hearing involved recommendations to City Council. Agenda Review Planning Manager Clay Frickey reviewed the items on the Consent and Discussion agendas, noting the order of Item Nos. 2 and 3 will be reversed. Public Input on Items Not on the Hearing Agenda None Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Consent Agenda: 1. Draft Minutes for the P&Z June Regular Hearing The purpose of this item is to approve the draft minutes of the June 20, 2024, Planning and Zoning Commission hearing. Commissioner Katz made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda for the August 15, 2024, hearing as originally advertised. Commissioner York seconded the motion. Yeas: Shepard, Katz, Connelly, York, Sass, Peel, and Stackhouse. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Discussion Agenda: (**Secretary’s Note: As per the Agenda Review, the order of Item Nos. 2 and 3 was reversed for discussion before the Commission.) 2. Proposed Soil and Xeriscape Landscape Standard Updates PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for the Planning and Zoning Commission to provide a recommendation to City Council regarding proposed changes and seeking feedback on landscape standards regarding xeriscape, soil amendments, and irrigation. City of Fort Collins 300 Laporte Ave STAFF ASSIGNED: Katie Collins, Water Conservation Specialist, Utilities Kathryne Marko, Environmental Regulatory Affairs Manager, Utilities Recommendation: Approval Staff Presentation Kathryne Marko, Environmental Regulatory Affairs Manager, outlined the proposed soil standards, noting they would not apply to single-family residential homes, and commented on a recently passed State Senate Bill related to landscape requirements which has played into the proposed changes. Marko stated budget offers were submitted for additional enforcement staff and noted natural habitat buffer zones are excluded from soil requirements as an existing process already exists. Additionally, Marko stated exceptions to the proposed xeriscape code were recently added, including: 1) exceptions for duplexes and accessory dwelling units; 2) all streetscapes will be landscaped in accordance with the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards and Fort Collins Streetscape Standards; 3) addition of language in the escrow section to clarify that five-year escrows for non-potable systems is specific to parks; and 4) correction of some previously contradictory language related to mulch. In terms of soils, Marko stated the key improvements are to clearly define the thresholds for applicability, add a definition and standard for soil compaction, add definitions related to soil quality standards when topsoil is used, and remove barriers to amending in a manner that is best for vegetation establishment. Additionally, a proposal exists to shift from a primarily administrative oversight process to a comprehensive field inspection program. Katie Collins, Water Conservation Specialist, stated the proposed amendments were developed with the intent to address the Council priority to see less grass in new development, and to generally reduce the amount of water needed for landscapes and support the long-term resilience of landscapes. Collins noted the standards would apply to all new development and redevelopment projects, except for development on existing lots for single-unit detached, duplexes, and ADUs, and would not apply to streetscape landscaping. Collins stated a recent change relates to switching the mechanism by which highly irrigated turf is limited. In terms of cost and time impacts on development, Collins stated initial upfront costs for xeriscape will be variable depending on the plant selection and amount of hardscape, among other considerations. In many cases, the initial installation costs will be higher; however, the water supply requirements are based on the landscape type, so there would be a lower up front cost for xeriscape from that perspective. Collins stated there is no predicted cost increase associated with the Code amendments for soils and it is not anticipated there would be a significant amount of time added to a project for either soil or xeriscape requirements. Collins stated staff intends to go before Council for first reading on September 3rd and moving forward, will continue to work with internal and community partners to communicate changes and work through implementation strategies. Collins stated staff plans to use the Land Use Code phase two update to examine how the amendments are working and make adjustments as needed. Collins also discussed the State Senate Bill which prohibits the installation of non-functional turf in streetscapes, transportation corridors, and rights-of-way, noting that will require an update to the City streetscape standards in the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards. Commission Questions Commissioner Katz asked how much of what is being proposed is related to the State Senate Bill. Collins replied the Senate Bill restricts the installation of non-functional turf in the areas mentioned as well as every other area in new development and redevelopment. Additionally, the Senate Bill prohibits artificial turf installation except for on athletic fields, and that was already part of the City’s proposal. Additional City items include requiring dedicated irrigation to all new and existing trees within a development project, soil loosening, and every other change mentioned. Commissioner Peel asked about the impacts to places with existing artificial turf. Collins replied they are generally grandfathered in and would not be required to remove the turf. Noah Beals, Development Review Manager, stated the term non-conforming use is used as opposed to grandfathered and a non-conforming use can replace like for like, though each project would be considered individually. Chair Stackhouse asked if the State will provide any guidance in that regard. Beals replied he was unsure. Commissioner Peel thanked staff for providing the cost analysis and requested confirmation that the water supply requirement decreases when landscaping uses water-wise features. Collins replied the water supply requirement in Fort Collins Utilities is tied to the estimated water use for the property and at development review, landscape plans and hydro-zone tables are required; therefore, the cost for the water supply requirement would decrease if less water would be needed for the landscape. Commissioner Peel asked if similar cost reductions would be provided by other water districts across the city. Collins replied the water supply requirement calculation does differ across the water districts, though ELCO has a similar set up to the City. Collins stated she would follow-up with regard to Fort Collins Loveland Water District. Commissioner Katz asked if there has been any analysis of the maintenance cost differences by reaching out to landscape architects or property managers. Collins replied there was outreach and there is additional per square inch contact on landscapes with more shrubs, mulch, et cetera; however, costs can be reduced on native grass type landscapes. Commissioner Katz asked if that outreach resulted in concerns or support being expressed. Collins replied most commercial maintenance operators are more set up for a ‘mow and go’ experience and there was feedback that more staffing and a change of expectations would be required for those operators. Vice Chair Sass asked when these changes would go into effect. Marko replied much of that is dependent on whether the budget offer for additional staff is funded. If it is not, Codes go into effect through the normal Council process, which would be the end of September, and the inspection program would not be implemented, though the requirements would remain on the front end. Collins stated the lack of additional staff would lead to gaps in detailed field inspection. Vice Chair Sass expressed concern that there may not be inspectors available despite the Code requiring an inspection prior to a Certificate of Occupancy being issued. Collins replied irrigation standards do have dedicated staff doing inspections and there is a third party irrigation audit requirement. Vice Chair Sass asked about inspectors for soil loosening. Marko replied the current process involves a notarized form and that process would remain should the extra inspectors not be funded. Commissioner Peel asked if the inspection requirement could be revisited once the funding has been determined. Clay Frickey, Planning Manager, suggested the Commission could discuss that during its deliberation. Commissioner Shepard asked how many hydro-zones exist. Collins replied there are four hydro-zone categories, with the lowest being 3 gallons per square foot and the highest being 18 gallons per square foot. Commissioner Shepard asked if it is typical for a multi-family, commercial, or industrial landscape plan to have multiple hydro-zones. Collins replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Shepard commented on the importance of landscaping in compatibility. He asked if the State Bill preempts the City from using its modification procedure related to artificial turf and cited the examples of New Belgium and The Exchange. Beals replied the State law would prevail and those examples would become non- conforming uses as they do not meet the definition of athletic field. Commissioner Shepard expressed concern about creating legal non-conforming uses in this regard and would take up the issue with State Representatives. Commissioner Shepard asked if the standard related to 50% non-organic mulch is new. Collins replied the current Code allows for both organic and non-organic mulch, but there is no limit to how much inorganic mulch would be allowed and the goal of the change is to limit landscapes that would be 100% rock. Commissioner Shepard asked if the language allows for grasses that might not be considered turf. Collins replied the streetscape standards update work has just started; however, the State law allows for native grasses or hybridized species suitable for arid climates. Commissioner Katz asked if the hydro-zone requirement of 11 gallons per square foot is for new projects. Collins replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Shepard expressed support for having inspection requirements to help with consistency throughout the city. Public Comment None. Commission Questions / Deliberation Commissioner Katz expressed concern about negative cascading consequences despite the intent being positive. He questioned the true costs for making these changes, particularly as related to maintenance costs which often fall to tenants. He also expressed concern about the creation of non-conforming uses and stated he could not support the recommendation at this point. Commissioner Peel also expressed concern with the ambiguity around the inspections and unintended costs. Vice Chair Sass echoed some of the concerns and stated he would like to see some data or confirmation from business owners related to maintenance costs. He expressed support for the general idea, but stated additional details need to be considered. Commissioner Connelly also expressed concern about costs and stated there are additional details he would like to see prior to making an affirmative recommendation. Commissioner York stated there are two parts to the discussion, one being what needs to be done to be in compliance with State law, and one being making changes on a City level. He expressed support for making the changes necessary to be in compliance with State law and noted that needs to occur more quickly. He suggested breaking the changes down into a two-step process. Commissioner Shepard thanked staff for their hard work and stated he would support the staff proposal. He did express concern about how the changes would impact some of the smaller applicants and stated that while he is concerned about the creation of legal, non-conforming uses, it seems there are no options other than to work at the State level. Commissioner Katz noted the new hydro-zone and tree irrigation requirements would also create legal non- conforming uses, which is a City issue, not a State requirement. Vice Chair Sass suggested recommending bring the Code into compliance with the State requirements while tabling the other items. Chair Stackhouse stated something is going to need to be done regarding water conservation and stated the tree watering piece is also important. Commissioner Katz expressed support for the intention, but not for the potential unintended consequences and impacts on small local businesses. Commissioner Peel commented on the importance of ensuring all steps work toward common sense water conservation. Chair Stackhouse summarized the discussion stating the Commission seems to be leaning toward a recommendation that Council deny the proposed Land Use Code amendments with the caveat that items needed to accomplish compliance with the State Senate Bill 24-005 move forward expeditiously. Commissioner Shepard commented on the Code provision regarding existing limited permitted uses, which is a step above a legal non-conforming use from a legal standpoint. He suggested it could be possible to identify areas in which existing artificial turf is advantageous and consider them existing limited permitted uses. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe replied there would need to be some analysis of the difference between those two statuses. Chair Stackhouse made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that City Council deny the proposed soil and xeriscape Land Use Code amendments, finding that the total cost implications of the proposal are not well understood by the Commission, and the Commission believes additional analysis is warranted. The Commission recognizes and supports the implementation of the requirements of Senate Bill 24-005 which concerns the conservation of water through the prohibition of certain landscape practices. This recommendation is based upon the agenda materials, the information and materials provided at the work session and this hearing, and the Commission’s discussion on this item. Commissioner Peel seconded. Yeas: Katz, Connelly, York, Sass, Peel, and Stackhouse. Nays: Shepard. THE MOTION CARRIED. 3. Water Supply Requirement Fee, Excess Water Use Surcharges and Non-Residential Allotments DESCRIPTION: This is a request for the Planning and Zoning Commission to provide a recommendation to City Council regarding proposed changes and seeking expensive, the price to buy into the Utilities water rights and infrastructure has also grown. Utilities is evaluating the best way to charge future redevelopment and new development. City of Fort Collins 300 Laporte Ave Fort Collins, CO 80524 STAFF ASSIGNED: Jill Oropeza, Interim One Water Director Recommendation: Approval Jen Dial, Water Resources Manager, stated this item relates to a change to the City’s water supply -1984 non-residential customers. Dial requested the consider its general questions around the methodologies and how the community might be outlined the history of the water supply requirements (WSR) and water allotments noting they have in order to ensure water sources, to supply and protect the watershed for a financial mechanism to ensure current and future assets are adequate to to balance current needs and supply with future Dial noted the discussion tonight is solely related to the City of Fort which represents about 32,000 customers and 3,000 commercial accounts, about as well as outlined work that will be done leading up to the item Additionally, Dial noted the water supply requirement is a one-time fee . water allotment is a volume of water applied to non-residential customers, 2/3 of which currently have an . The excess water use charge is an annual charge for any amount a Dial noted that within the water fund, most of the revenue is from rates s. Plant investment fees are fees charged to commercial and residential customers to fund and other projects to help get methodologies: a full buy-in method, an incremental method, and a hybrid method of , and discussed the history of the WSR. Dial stated the City decided to implement the hybrid Moving forward, as water rates continued to and two were ultimately presented to Council: the cost- -in with contingency and safety, which was recommended by staff, and the -based approach for the buy-in, also with contingency and safety. and Utilities is on the lower end when using the cost-based approach for a multi-family . Fort Collins is in the middle of the pack when using the cost-based approach for a restaurant due to Fort Collins’ high dedication requirement for restaurant uses. Dial noted the currently proposed and outlined the impacts to rates given that , which would amount to a 0.5% rate increase over forty years. discussed the methodology for assigning allotments to pre-1984 non-residential customers noting this 1) create consistency among all non-residential customers; and 2) result in fairness as Moreover, as WSR fees may increase into the future, that would further increase the inequity between customers with and without allotments. Additionally, this change would provide the opportunity to identify : 1) based on tap credit, or tap size; based on the five-year average use; 3) based on the business type, which is the current methodology; a hybrid methodology, which was what staff ultimately recommended. Dial discussed potential customers of making this change, but noted staff believes most customers will not be . However, staff is recommending a one-year grace period during which surcharges Additionally, Dial noted staff has been engaging with affected customers directly so and went on to detail those engagement efforts. Commission Questions Commissioner Shepard asked how the water utility works with restaurants in terms of water conservation. and more efficient Water Conservation could provide a more thorough answer. key accounts exist that currently do not have allotments. Dial replied 30 and 50. sioner Peel asked if the large increase in price over time was due to the market. Dial replied in the and a focus on compatibility and he encouraged staff to ensure there was not unless that is done through a minor Dial replied the intent is not to disincentivize existing landscaping and staff could it is determining allotments. Dial replied the information if the non-potable water rights belong to the user. commented on the fact that the water fund emphasizes that most revenue He asked what percentage, funds would go toward restoring the watershed as a result of the fires in the Poudre canyon. works with other water providers who have water in the Poudre to do through grants and/or matching funds, particularly after the High Park and s. Additionally, Dial noted there is a redundant system which allows Fort Collins to take -breweries and distilleries fall under the same category as restaurants Dial replied in the affirmative. Public Comment None. Commission Questions / Deliberation Commissioner York stated this is a good step toward improvement and noted, as with other items, and agreed with Commissioner Shepard that unknown ramifications do exist. Additionally, he stated the Commissioner Connelly also expressed support for the changes. Commissioner Peel stated this is a step in the right direction and encouraged staff to continue engagement . fact that there will be a 7% to 10% rate increase for ten years for stated she assumes that any unintended Vice Chair Sass made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Commission authorize the and This recommendation is based on this item. Commissioner Katz seconded. Yeas: Peel, and Stackhouse. Nays: none. For more complete details on this hearing, please view our video recording located here: https://www.fcgov.com/fctv/video-archive.php?search=PLANNING%20ZONING Other Business Commissioner Shepard requested the Commission have a discussion about the new ADU regulations from the State during an upcoming work session. Adjournment Chair Stackhouse moved to adjourn the P&Z Commission hearing. The meeting was adjourned at 8:13 pm. Minutes respectfully submitted by Melissa Matsunaka. Minutes approved by a vote of the Commission on: September 19, 2024