Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning and Zoning Commission - MINUTES - 08/28/2024Julie Stackhouse, Chair Virtual Hearing Adam Sass, Vice Chair City Council Chambers Russell Connelly 300 Laporte Avenue David Katz Fort Collins, Colorado Shirley Peel Spanish Interpretation Available 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. Special Hearing August 28, 2024 Chair Stackhouse called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Roll Call: Katz, Stackhouse, Connelly, Peel, York, Shepard Absent: Sass Staff Present: Yatabe, Frickey, Mapes, Matsunaka, Myler, Escalante, Swoboda, Hill 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 this is a legal hearing, and that she will moderate for civility and fairness. Agenda Review Planning Manager Clay Frickey reviewed the item on the Discussion agenda. Public Input on Items Not on the Hearing Agenda Michele Pullaro, Old Town business owner, expressed concern about homeless individuals loitering in her entryway and near her store for days and weeks at a time. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Discussion Agenda: 1. Fort Collins Rescue Mission This is a proposed combined Project Development Plan/Final Development Plan for development of a homeless shelter located at Hibdon Court and the existing access drive north of Hickory Street, one block west of North College Avenue. Parcel #’s 9702100918 and 9702100007. PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE: STAFF ASSIGNED: Recommendation: Approval Chair Stackhouse outlined the order of procedure for the hearing. Staff Presentation Clark Mapes, City Planner, discussed the project location noting it is within the Service Commercial, CS, zone district. Applicant Presentation Claire Havelda, land use attorney with Brownstein, Hyatt, Farber, and Schreck, discussed the role of the Fort Collins Rescue Mission in the community and showed a video of firsthand accounts from members of the community who have been assisted by the Mission. Havelda went on to discuss the housing crisis in Fort Collins, part of which is homelessness, and noted the property is one of only a few in the city that is zoned for the shelter use. Havelda also stated the project meets all applicable Land Use Code criteria. Seth Forwood, Fort Collins Rescue Mission, discussed the two reports issued by the Homelessness Advisory Committee’s two iterations, both of which listed 24/7 men’s sheltering as the top priority. Forwood discussed the proposal for a more trauma-informed program with a housing focus for the shelter, which will include 250 beds, and will eliminate the need for a seasonal overflow shelter to operate during the winter months. Forwood discussed other recommendations of the Homelessness Advisory Committee for the shelter, including access to transit, walkability, on-site behavioral health support, commercial kitchen, laundry, shower facilities, adequate parking for staff, and adequate bicycle parking. Forwood discussed how the proposed location was determined and outlined the neighborhood outreach process that occurred once the site was selected, including two neighborhood meetings, one of which was offered with full Spanish translation services. Forwood noted individual meetings were held with directly adjacent neighbors to help inform the design of the facility. Forwood discussed the operations of the existing shelter at Jefferson and Linden, noting it is a low-barrier shelter; therefore, those under the influence of drugs or alcohol may be accepted in, though no drugs or alcohol are allowed in the building. Forwood commented on the close working relationship the shelter has with Police Services and noted the shelter switched to 24/7 operations to help with eliminating loitering outside the shelter building. Klara Rossouw, Ripley Design, discussed the advantages of the proposed location and noted the future Hickory regional pond will exist to the west and south of the site providing a significant buffer to the community to the west. Rossouw provided additional details about the design and layout of the building, landscaping, fencing, and parking. Additionally, Rossouw outlined the ways in which the proposal meets applicable Land Use Code standards and discussed how the building’s architecture and materiality fits within the area. Havelda commented on the project’s compliance with City Code, the Housing Strategic Plan, the North College Corridor Plan, and the Land Use Code. Staff Analysis Mapes noted there is a previously approved infrastructure plan for the area which will support the shelter. He stated staff’s review of the proposal showed no notable concerns or issues in terms of compliance with applicable standards. Mapes noted much of the neighborhood concern has been around compatibility, which is considered from both physical and operational perspectives, and stated staff was unable to find that those standards are not met with this proposal. Commission Questions Commissioner Shepard asked if Mason Street will be fully improved all the way south to Hickory. Mapes replied the approved plan shows the construction of Mason Street to the property line as well as acquisition of right-of-way for a future connection to Hickory. Commissioner Katz asked how the shelter enforces its no drug and alcohol policy. Forwood replied all guests are informed of the expectations frequently, and any individual who refuses to surrender any drugs or alcohol or who repeatedly violates the rule is asked to leave. Forwood noted the partnership with Police Services is important in the instances wherein an escalation might occur. Commissioner Katz asked if it is appropriate to consider Land Use Code Section 1.7.1 which involves compatibility with City Code, including nuisances. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe replied there is a tenuous relationship between a potential offense and the Land Use Code. Commissioner Peel asked about the entryway lighting, noting it seems similar to that at the Behavioral Health building, which has become an issue for neighbors. Rossouw replied that the amount of light spillage is limited. Sam Severance, Shopworks Architecture, noted a compliant photometric plan was submitted and that the entryway to the building is tucked back to help collect some of that lighting. Commissioner Peel asked if staff always reviews projects for compatibility based on the physical structure and not on social and economic factors. Frickey replied that the main focus of the compatibility section of the Land Use Code is physical compatibility and social and economic factors are not typically considered. Commissioner Peel asked how much the Commission should be considering compatibility or compliance with the North College Corridor Plan, given the recent court ruling from the Sanctuary on the Green appeal. Frickey noted the court order said the Hearing Officer needed to make findings of fact related to compliance and consistency with the Northwest Subarea Plan and did not make a ruling as to whether the plan was consistent with the Northwest Subarea Plan. Mapes stated compliance is the wrong concept when considering City Plan and associated subarea plans; they contain more policy direction used to inform staff’s evaluation and interpretation of standards. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe stated the interpretation of the court order is that adopted subarea plans do need to be complied with, though primacy is given to the Land Use Code. Commissioner Peel asked the applicant to address compliance with the North College Corridor Plan. Rossouw stated there are seven goals in that Plan, and the applicant believes they meet five of those, including a more complete street network, community appearance and design, and land uses and activity. In terms of the financing and administrative aspect of the North College Corridor Plan, Rossouw stated the project helps to solve infrastructure deficiencies in the area. Havelda acknowledged the project’s case is a bit weaker in terms of generating economic revenue; however, that does not make it non-compliant with the North College Corridor Plan. Commissioner Peel asked about having a concentration of non-profits in an area and whether that would have an impact on the financial base in terms of URA plans and the like. Frickey replied it is difficult to assess how concentration of a certain type of business would impact the tax base; therefore, staff tends not to utilize it as part of its analysis. Frickey noted there is a similar argument for concentration of affordable housing as well. Mapes stated no project can completely comply with all components of the North College Corridor Plan and noted no good mechanism has been identified to prevent the location of additional agencies or facilities within the North College corridor. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe noted the subarea plans were not drafted in the same manner as Land Use Code standards and are generally more aspirational in nature; therefore, they are subject to more interpretation in what could be viewed as compliance. Additionally, he stated he has consistently advised that the economic impact of one particular development is not under consideration for the Commission or the Land Use Code. Commissioner York asked where the loading dock is located. Rossouw pointed it out on the site plan noting it is east of courtyard three and the parking is to the south. Commissioner York asked about the material for the six-foot security fences. Rossouw replied there are two different styles of fences, the six-foot privacy fence is along the property line to the north and will be wood cedar, and the security fence will be a metal fence. Commissioner York asked about bicycle parking and whether additional spaces, if needed, could be accommodated on site. Rossouw replied it was determined that 40 spaces would be adequate at this time; however, the Mission would work with staff to find an appropriate location on site if additional spaces are needed. Commissioner York asked about the distance to a northbound bus stop. Mapes replied that is a fundamental issue with North College and there is a quarter- to half-mile distance between crossings all along the corridor. Commissioner Shepard asked about panic hardware and cameras. Severance replied there will be panic hardware at all exits and there are more than 70 cameras planned covering the inside and outside of the building. Commissioner Shepard asked if there will be a pull-out on Mason Street that would get vehicles out of the through lane. Rossouw replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Peel asked if individuals experiencing homelessness who may be living out of their cars would be allowed to park on site. Forwood replied that the parking lot will be designated for staff, volunteers, and people utilizing the building only. Chair Stackhouse asked if the existing shelter at Jefferson and Linden would be closed if this shelter is approved. Forwood replied in the affirmative. Chair Stackhouse asked if the winter overflow shelter will continue to be needed if this shelter is approved. Forwood replied in the negative. Chair Stackhouse requested input from Police Services regarding issues with shelters in the past. Police Chief Swoboda replied that the Police Department is equipped to handle any type of call in the city. Sargent Annie Hill commented on the good relationship the Mission has with Police Services and outlined how trespassing issues would be handled, but noted the existing shelter does not have to be regularly patrolled and officers only respond to issues there about twice weekly. Commissioner Katz asked if a larger shelter is expected to attract more transients to the community. Chief Swoboda replied that the word will get out to the community that the police will not tolerate illegal behavior and will address the issues. (**Secretary’s Note: The Commission took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.) Public Comment Adela Gonzales opposed the proposal, stating the use is out of character with the existing neighborhood. Maitay Marcha opposed the proposal, stating the concentration of services in a single area is incompatible with the need to spread resources more evenly throughout the city. Additionally, the traffic study was based on a two hundred bed facility. Anna (no last name given) opposed the proposal stating it risks worsening crime rates and further marginalizing the community. Rebecca Mendoza opposed the proposal stating the concerns of those that live and work in the area were ignored during the public outreach process. Adiana Quintero opposed the proposal, stating there was inadequate notice provided to Spanish speaking residents of the area. David Rout, Homeward Alliance Executive Director, supported the proposal, stating the current shelter is undersized for the community need. Rout commented on the plans of the Rescue Mission to address security issues and other concerns. Debbie Bradberry opposed the proposal, stating people in the area are afraid of the types of individuals the shelter may attract to the neighborhood. She stated the shelter is needed, but in a different location. Allison Hade commented on working with the Rescue Mission to set up a 24/7 shelter in Loveland and noted the additional shelter space is needed. Patricia Alvarez Harrell, Alianza NORCO Director, discussed current issues with transients in the area of Hickory Village and Soft Gold Park. Additionally, Harrell stated the area neighborhoods were not invited to community meetings and the Spanish meeting that was held only occurred because Spanish-speaking residents requested it. Joe Rowan stated the key to success with these projects is a good operator, and that is the case with the Fort Collins Rescue Mission. He stated the plan is in compliance with the Land Use Code and North College Corridor Plan and stated the decision cannot be based on speculative behavior. Nina Rubin stated the concerns of the neighborhood are realistic, and are currently occurring, but without the Rescue Mission. Rubin suggested having the Mission there actually has the potential to assist the neighborhood in monitoring what is going on with additional attention. Jared Stallones suggested staff erred in interpreting project compatibility solely in terms of the built environment and that social and behavioral issues must also be addressed. Stallones stated the shelter use is incompatible with the North College community. Don Butler opposed the proposal and expressed concern about safety for the children in the neighborhood. Samantha Stegner expressed concern about the proposed location of the shelter and that it could potentially expand beyond two hundred and fifty beds. Lisa Cunningham expressed support for the proposal and stated opposition to the shelter will disappear once it is proven to be well-run. Paula Stearns stated the shelter will alleviate many of the concerns by broadly addressing the challenges faced by people who need to find a place to sleep every night and will provide services and activities for those individuals during the day. Chuck Hubbard, Together Colorado Larimer County, expressed support for the proposal stating sound leadership will be provided by the Rescue Mission. Hubbard highlighted the success of existing businesses that are located around the current Rescue Mission. Jason Smith expressed support for the proposal citing its buffering and value to the homeless community. Stefanie Berganini, Affordable Housing Board, stated the Board supports the project and commented on the need for the shelter in the community. Ronnie Casias stated the Mission has changed his life for the better and he is currently there awaiting an affordable housing option. DeWayne Barton commented on the ways in which the Rescue Mission has assisted him. Charlie Messerlian opposed the proposal, stating it is incompatible with the neighborhood in various ways. Sarah Murphy expressed support for the proposal, stating it is a well-planned, practical solution that is also compassionate. Lyle Smithgraybeal, Northern Colorado Continuum of Care, expressed support for the proposal. Sue McFaddin expressed support for the need for the shelter but opposed the proposed location. Troy Jones stated the subarea plan cautions against the concentration of social services in one area and discussed the Land Use Code section related to operational compatibility arguing the intensity of this use is incompatible with the neighborhood. Jones suggested the Mission could leave its current 89 bed facility open and continue the use of the winter overflow shelter in order to reduce the size of the proposed facility. Patrick Gaebler questioned how far the applicants and Commission members live from the proposed site and suggested the process of finding a suitable location should be restarted. Peter Erickson stated the City has approached the housing crisis in a haphazard way and the Land Use Code does not do enough to address the root causes of homelessness, the shortage of affordable housing, or to meet the City’s racial equity and social justice goals. Erickson expressed support for the proposal. Commission Questions Chair Stackhouse requested staff address the concerns mentioned about noise, traffic, massing, and the potential the shelter could expand beyond 250 beds. Mapes replied he was unaware of any noise issues and stated the traffic study came from the previously approved infrastructure plan, but the conclusion of that study was that Mason, which is designated as a collector, could actually function as a local street. Additionally, there are no traffic issues related to the proposal. Cassie Slade, Fox Tuttle Transportation Group, acknowledged the traffic study was completed based on a 200 bed estimate rather than 250; however, the guests are not likely to have vehicles, and if they do, they are not allowed to park on site. Additionally, the extra beds will not result in an increase in traffic; therefore, the results of the study are still valid. Havelda noted there will never be more than 250 beds in the building. Additionally, Havelda stated the presumption that people experiencing homelessness are criminals or will engage in criminal behavior flies in the face of equity and inclusion. Havelda also noted there is no Code requirement for a compatibility study. Severance discussed the community outreach process that was undertaken to help inform the trauma-informed design. Chair Stackhouse asked if proper notice was provided for neighborhood meetings. Mapes replied in the affirmative. Chair Stackhouse asked if the notice was provided in Spanish. Mapes replied the first notice was not; however, the second notice was. Commissioner Peel asked Severance if the outreach mentioned included the area residents. Severance replied in the affirmative and stated they also spoke with La Familia, a local organization that does work in the area. Commissioner Peel asked if the area residents had to request a second meeting to be held with Spanish interpretation or if City staff set up the meeting. Em Myler replied staff noticed the lack of representation at the first meeting and set up a second meeting to be held with Spanish interpretation. Myler noted some equity standards have been created since the first neighborhood meeting that did not exist previously, and those would include automatically sending notice in Spanish if a mobile home park is within the notification radius. Reico Ishiwada, Shopworks Architecture, stated a 24/7 facility is crucial as it provides guests with a reserved bed, reducing stress and helping them move beyond survival mode. Additionally, access to showers and having a place to store belongings supports the transition out of homelessness. Ishiwada also noted the lobby has been made large enough to keep people from having to wait outside. Security measures have also been significantly enhanced, including the aforementioned cameras and fencing. (**Secretary’s Note: The Commission took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.) Commissioner York requested staff reiterate the compatibility definition in the Code. Mapes noted the purpose statement in the applicable Code section, 3.5.1, relates to ensuring physical and operational compatibility, and staff does not review projects for compliance with purpose statements, but rather with the specific standards such as building mass and scale, hours of operation, and so forth. Frickey stated staff reports now include a statement with a finding of fact related to consistency with purpose statements per the Sanctuary on the Green ruling; however, if a project complies with the more specific standards found in the Code, it is therefore consistent with the purpose statement for that section. Commission Deliberation Chair Stackhouse noted the Commission will be evaluating the proposal’s compliance with the Land Use Code, not whether it should be located elsewhere. Commissioner Connelly stated the project was designed with the Land Use Code in mind and appears to be compliant with all applicable sections; however, he expressed sympathy for the public safety concerns. Commissioner York concurred that the proposal meets the applicable Land Use Code standards. Commissioner Shepard commented on past controversial projects that seem to settle in from an operational perspective after a bit of time and stated building scale has evolved over time as the population has increased. Additionally, Commissioner Shepard stated this building is architecturally compatible. Commissioner Peel commended the work of the Mission in the community and commended the design of the new shelter. She questioned the wisdom of placing a vulnerable population in the midst of another vulnerable population; however, the project does seem to meet the Land Use Code and the way it has been historically interpreted. Commissioner Katz commended the design of the shelter and stated it will likely be run well; however, he stated there are ripple effects that will go beyond the boundaries of the property, and he fears the site will attract unsavory members of the transient population. He stated that while the Land Use Code needs to be considered, it is important to think critically about the safety of the city’s residents. Commissioner Shepard commented on buffering of the site with existing mature trees which lends to compliance with the compatibility standards. Chair Stackhouse commented on the difference between homelessness and a homeless shelter, which provides a community and services for individuals. She commended Police Services and the positive relationship with the Mission and stated the proposal is compatible with all applicable Land Use Code requirements. Commissioner Katz expressed sympathy with the North College businesses, but reiterated Joe Rowan’s comment that a decision cannot be based on speculative behavior. (**Secretary’s Note: A couple iterations of the motion were made until the proper wording was determined.) Commissioner York made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Connelly, that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Commission approve the Fort Collins Rescue Mission combined project development plan, final development plan, FDP230022, with the following condition: that the final development plan will not be signed by the City until all final development plan requirements are met as determined by the Director of Community Development and Neighborhood Services. The Commission finds in consideration of the condition of approval that the project complies with all Land Use Code requirements. This decision is based upon the agenda materials, the information and materials presented during the work session and this hearing, and the Commission discussion on this item. Further, this Commission hereby adopts the information, analysis, findings of fact, and conclusions regarding this project contained in the staff report. Commissioner Connelly seconded. Yeas: Shepard, Katz, Peel, Connelly, York, and Stackhouse. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. 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 None. Adjournment Chair Stackhouse moved to adjourn the P&Z Commission hearing. The meeting was adjourned at 10:30pm. Minutes respectfully submitted by Melissa Matsunaka. Minutes approved by a vote of the Commission on: November 21, 2024.