Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning and Zoning Commission - MINUTES - 05/15/2025Planning & Zoning Commission REGULAR MEETING May 15, 2025 – 6:00 PM Council Chambers, City Hall 300 Laporte Ave Also via Zoom CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 PM ROLL CALL a. Board Members Present – Adam Sass (Newly Elected Chair), Russell Connelly (Newly Elected Vice Chair), Ted Shepard, York, Kent Bruxvoort b. Board Members Absent – Julie Stackhouse, Shirley Peel c.Staff Members Present – Frickey, Kidwell, Beals, Kleer, Conovitz, Myler, Yatabe, Sawyer, Gilchrist AGENDA REVIEW Clay Frickey, Planning Manager, provided a review of the agenda. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION None. CONSENT AGENDA 1.CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF MARCH 26, 2025 The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the March 26, 2025, meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Commissioner York made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Connelly, to approve the Consent Agenda. Yeas: Connelly, York, Bruxvoort, Shepard, and Sass. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. DISCUSSION AGENDA 2.ELECTION OF OFFICERS Commissioner Shepard nominated Adam Sass as Chair. Vice Chair Sass stated he would accept the nomination and nominated Russell Connelly as Vice Chair. Commissioner Shepard made a motion, seconded by Commissioner York, that Adam Sass become Chair and Russell Connelly become Vice Chair of the Planning and Zoning Commission for the next 12 months. Yeas: York, Shepard, Connelly, Bruxvoort, and Sass. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. 3.SHORT TERM RENTALS LAND USE CODE CHANGES IN CCN This is a request for a recommendation to the City Council regarding an update to the Land Use Code. The proposed revision removes non- primary short-term rental from the Community Commercial-North College (CCN) Zone District. STAFF: Noah Beals, Development Review Manager Staff Presentation Noah Beals, Development Review Manager, stated this item relates to a Commission recommendation for a Land Use Code change to the Community College North College (CCN) Zone District to remove non-primary short-term rental (STR) uses from the district. He provided a history of the regulations around short-term rentals in the city and noted there are two types of short-term rentals: primary, which requires a property owner to reside on the property for at least nine months of the year, and non-primary, which does not require any type of residency. Beals discussed the zone districts wherein each type of short-term rental has been allowed. Beals provided a map of the CCN Zone District and noted the Old Town North neighborhood is included in the district and is the location of all short-term rental licenses in the district. He stated most of Old Town North is residential, though there is one mixed-use building, and he provided a map indicating where non-primary STR licenses can be granted in the city. Beals discussed another area west of downtown that also allows non-primary STR licenses and is approximately the same size as Old Town North. He stated the area included 575 dwelling units, three non-primary STR licenses which were legacy, and 16 primary STR licenses. He noted that since 2017, about 53 complaints have been received in Old Town North as opposed to two in the neighborhood west of downtown. Beals noted there was an open house held in February regarding the purpose of existing STR regulations. He noted there are 300-400 STR licenses granted each year and non-primary STR’s make up about 49% of those. Of the 189 non-primary STR licenses, 68 are found in Old Town North which also makes up about 22% of all complaints received regarding STR’s. Beals discussed the proposed Land Use Code change which would remove the ability to apply for a non- primary STR in the CCN Zone District. He noted the Commission will be providing a recommendation to City Council which is the final decision-maker. Commission Questions Commissioner York asked if the existing non-primary STR licenses would be able to continue to be renewed should this change be made. Beals replied staff will be suggesting the current licenses that have been issued would be able to be renewed by current property owners or within 30 days of a property owner change. Public Participation Walter Abercrombie spoke on behalf of himself, his wife, and other neighbors. He supported the proposed Land Use Code change, citing the density of STR’s in Old Town North. He stated the main impacts include excessive noise, parking access, illegal parking, trespassing, damage to private property, and a disregard of the neighborhood being residential in nature. He clarified he does not have any concerns about primary STR’s or long-term renters and noted the Old Town North HOA Board has been aware of the issues for many years but has not been able or willing to act as many of the complaints fall under the jurisdiction of the City. Michael Warkander, 238 Osiander Street, stated he appreciates the dense feel of the neighborhood, but noted that also means what others do impacts neighbors to a greater degree. He stated the west end of his street has become a wall of STR’s and he commented on negative interactions with renters. Mr. Warkander expressed support for the proposed Land Use Code change and suggested the existing licenses should not be allowed to be transferred. He also encouraged finding a way to sunset some of the existing STR’s. Mark Driskell stated many of the concerns he has heard result from poor management, not the length of stay, and many of the issues could be prevented by having a local, responsive contact and good management practices. He noted he has operated rental properties for a number of years and has developed practices specifically to address parking, trash, and noise, including rental agreements for acknowledgement of occupancy limits, parking rules, and the zero tolerance policy for parties, screening of all guests, smart locks that can alert of over-occupancy, clear communication of parking rules prior to arrival, response to neighbor concerns within 30 minutes, and strict enforcement of quiet hours. He stated the Old Town North HOA is actively working on similar strategies to achieve compliance among all rentals in the neighborhood. Additionally, Mr. Driskell stated STR’s make up only 0.52% of all housing units in Fort Collins. Jennifer Kelly, 451 Cajetan Street, spoke in opposition to the proposal to eliminate non-primary STR’s in the Old Town North neighborhood, stating the proposal conflicts with the City’s Strategic Plan. She stated the Neighborhood Livability goal number one calls for increased housing choice, type, and affordability, which is supported by STR’s as they offer temporary, flexible housing options for residents, families, and travelling professionals. Additionally, she stated Economic Health goal number one emphasizes removing barriers for small businesses and supporting local economic opportunity. Ms. Kelly argued this process has not been transparent and that there was no comprehensive data review or economic impact analysis completed. She stated there are very few non-primary STRs in the city and argued much of the crime in the neighborhood is related to the unhoused population. Additionally, she noted there are still lots to be developed in the neighborhood and making this type of change amid that is irresponsible. She stated the City should better enforce the rules it already has rather than eliminate legal uses. Kurt Kniegge, 369 Osiander Street, spoke in opposition to the proposed Land Use Code change stating the short-term rental he owes has become a significant portion of his retirement plan. Gail Keeler, 2302 West Mulberry Street, discussed her property at 232 Pascal Street which she purchased with the intention of building a two-unit home, one for her primary residence and one for a short-term rental. However, given surging construction costs, she was forced to redesign the project to make it more affordable, and ultimately had to redesign the project a third time to make it smaller and single-story, though still two units. She stated that she had hoped to rent both units as non-primary STR’s to assist with retirement expenses should she and her husband need to relocate to an assisted living facility. She expressed concern that only existing non-primary STR’s will be legacy, and her home is not yet built. She requested the City consider a provision allowing newly constructed homes a reasonable period following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy to apply for a non-primary STR license. Jennifer Spencer, 509 Cajetan Street, stated it seems the STR owners in Old Town North have been financially successful. She commented on a previous study in Fort Collins which revealed that STR’s provide financial benefits to owners and renters; however, it also highlighted the potential for nuisance code violations and the impact on the local housing market. Ultimately, regulations were adopted that included licensing requirements and zoning restrictions to manage STR activity to protect neighborhoods and promote a fair operating environment. Ms. Spencer stated it is not a good idea to have unregulated, unstaffed hotels in residential neighborhoods, and requested the Commission recommend the zoning change to bring Old Town North into compliance with the rest of the city. She also expressed concern about allowing existing non-primary STR’s to be legacy and suggested providing owners with a grace period to transition out of the STR’s. Matt Veghte, 503 Cajetan Street, stated he has both lived in and used the home as a short-term rental, and stated it has been the best maintained when used as a short-term rental. He stated the short-term rental paradigm is very beneficial for his situation to be able to call Fort Collins home in the long term. Harry Derderian, 508 Osiander Street, commented on the number of STR’s in the Old Town North neighborhood and noted Fort Collins has a housing shortage. He stated the percentage of non-primary STR’s in Old Town North is 175% greater than the rest of the city. He supported making the Land Use Code change. Kyle Keeler, 5127 West CR 51, Bellvue, and Vice President of the Old Town North HOA, stated he purchased his property in Old Town North with the intention of using it as a short-term rental. He stated he operated it as such for years while living in the smaller rear unit but has recently moved out. He stated the decision to restrict non-primary STR’s in Old Town North is in direct contradiction to the City of Fort Collins Housing and Strategic Plan as it does not relax restrictions but does the opposite. He also stated the change would create a two-tier system under which permanent privileges would be granted to some while the same opportunity would be denied to others based solely on timing. He requested the City consider a provision allowing newly constructed homes a reasonable period following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy to apply for a non-primary STR license. Mr. Keeler stated that if non-primary STR’s are found to be an issue, they should be banned city-wide with no legacy units allowed. Kay Osentowski, 160 Fairway Lane, stated she was one of the first developers of Old Town North and discussed the history of the neighborhood. She stated it was turned around from bankruptcy in part because of the zoning designation allowing many building options. She stated the economic benefits of STR’s are undeniable and they are a cornerstone of modern tourism. She stated occasional challenges are valid considerations; however, they can be effectively managed through balanced regulations rather than outright, dramatic zoning changes. Dolores Williams, 415 Mason Court, stated she owns two small townhouses in Old Town North which are long-term rentals. She stated her tenants have mentioned parking and noise problems in the neighborhood and stated there needs to be a balance for people who want to live quietly in the homes they have purchased. She also stated CSU students rent homes to have parties. Jennifer Anderson, 902 Jerome Street, discussed concerns with short-term renters in a unit adjacent to hers which had an outdoor firepit and kindling supplied by the property owners. She discussed other issues with noise, beer cans, fireworks, and vehicles parked on her property. She stated she bought her property to live next to neighbors, not businesses. Rowan Cech, 2400 Zenith Court, stated she is a property manager for a short-term rental at 262 Cajetan Street. She stated her rental hosts families who are coming to Fort Collins to visit family or friends, and she commented on the positive economic impact of visitors to the city. Additionally, she discussed the regulations she has put in place to ensure her property does not violate regulations and stated she immediately responds to neighbor concerns. Caley Follmer, 368 Cajetan Street, expressed support for the proposed Land Use Code change stating the high concentration of STR’s is incompatible with the cultivation of a strong community. She stated even a perfectly compliant STR is still a de facto hotel with a revolving door of unfamiliar faces. She stated failure to address existing STR licenses will perpetuate the erosion of community in Old Town North. Taylor Scott, 368 Cajetan Street and HOA Board Member, stated his home is effectively surrounded by STR’s which essentially function as hotels and commented on the negative impacts to the sense of community in the neighborhood. He stated Old Town North is the only neighborhood in Fort Collins zoned to allow this many non-primary STR’s and he expressed support for the proposed Land Use Code change without allowing non-primary STR licenses to be transferrable when a property sells. Tami Bond, 908 Jerome Street, asked if Planning and Zoning is intended to create areas where investors can purchase homes and let them on a short-term basis, and if that is the case, why there are no other neighborhoods in the city that allow that. She also questioned whether the commercial part of mixed residential/commercial designation is meant to be primarily for the benefit of investors and not the residents in the neighborhood. Additionally, she questioned whether a thriving neighborhood is one in which short-term rental income is so attractive to owners that long-term renters who would become neighbors are pushed out. She stated many of the STR’s are vacant 75% of the time. Steven Ertl, Old Town North resident and long-term rental owner at 250 Cajetan Street, stated it seems those opposed to this change have spoken a great deal about income and he questioned how economics apply to a community of residents. He questioned why Old Town North must be the sacrificial lamb for an individual’s retirement and asked why the non-primary STR owners seem to be more concerned with visitors and not the local residents who live in the properties year-round. Paul Francisco, 908 Jerome Street, stated his unit is the only one of four in the building that is not a short- term rental, and he commented on the lack of respect shown by short-term renters. He stated the number of STR’s in the neighborhood is the concern. David Katz, 1418 Paddle Court, expressed concern about the proposed Land Use Code change stating it is dangerously impulsive and threatens the character and integrity of the community without carefully weighing long-term consequences. He stated the issue is about how the community faces diversity and stated making land use policy only to reverse it seven or eight years later is short-sighted and reckless. He urged the Commission not to make a rushed recommendation. Dan Blonder, 902 Jerome Street, commended the Old Town North neighborhood and stated his ultimate goal is to be able to live in his property for a couple months and be elsewhere for a couple months, while still being able to pay the mortgage. He stated that is one of the reasons he invested in this property. He suggested implementing a policing system with steep penalties for violations, including losing the short-term license if enough violations occur. He stated changing the zoning and allowed uses will decrease the value of the neighborhood homes. Sarah Payne, 363 Osiander Street, stated limiting non-primary STR’s in Old Town North is the only decision that is in alignment with the City’s sustainability goals as it is neither environmentally nor socially sustainable to remove homes from the long-term housing inventory for part-time, transient use, especially in high-density neighborhoods like Old Town North. She urged the Commission to recommend limiting non-primary STR’s in the neighborhood and stated functional neighborhoods are foundational to a healthy Fort Collins. Shaun Armon, 824 Gregory Road and investment property owner in Old Town North, expressed concern about the proposed zoning change stating the properties were purchased in good faith and the potential zoning changes undermines trust in the City’s planning process, putting responsible owners and operators at risk. Blair Oliver, 363 Osiander Street, commented on the value of community and noted up to 1/3 of non- primary STR licenses in the city are in the small, dense neighborhood of Old Town North. He stated every third property in the neighborhood is run as a business. David Watkins, 363 Pascal Street, stated he has made 140 separate complaints about issues with short- term renters and stated there are systemic issues. Jacque Kinnick, 369 Pascal Street, stated that there was no response to years’ worth of resident complaints, raising questions about whether they were officially recorded. As a result, she believes the number of 53 complaints is low. She commented on the community feeling dissipating in the neighborhood. Kerri Watkins, 363 Pascal Street, stated the neighborhood feels like a hotel at times and noted the houses are advertised to sleep ten or more people. She expressed support for the proposed Land Use Code change and decreasing the number of STR’s in the neighborhood. Debi Kennison, 357 Pascal Street, commented on a police incident in the neighborhood and expressed concern about safety. She stated non-primary STR’s have been banned in other communities due to negative impacts and stated she is tired of policing the STR’s across the street. Jonathan Anderson, 902 Jerome Street, stated filing complaints about noise and other issues is difficult and stated that if a change is not made, properties that go up for sale are most attractive to speculative, non-residential owners. Greg Robertson, 233 Osiander Street, stated Old Town North should be treated as other neighborhoods in the city and there should not be an exemption for more non-primary STR’s than other neighborhoods. He stated freeing these STR’s for permanent residences could help solve some housing problems in Fort Collins. Josh Tinker, owner of a non-primary STR at 827 Heschel Street, stated his property has not received any complaints and commented on the broader economic impact of this type of land use change. He stated the proposal was hurried and requested the Commission recommend against the change. Maile Tinker, 2620 Sage Creek Road, opposed the proposal to change the Land Use Code and stated having a zone district for non-primary short-term rentals near Old Town is valuable for the city. Brent Nations, 538 Cajetan Street, opposed the proposal to change the Land Use Code stating he purchased the property based on the understanding it could be used as a short-term rental. He stated changing the rules now seems very unfair. Christophe Attard stated he owns 15 long-term rentals in Old Town North and commended the quality of his tenants. He stated the tools already exist to address nuisances and opposed the proposed Land Use Code change. Mike Gentile, 220 Pascal Street, opposed the proposed Land Use Code change stating he purchased the property as an investment with the hope of one day moving back to it. Collin Peterson, 802 Heschel Street, stated he rents out his property on a long-term basis. He stated eliminating new non-primary short-term rental licenses gives the current short-term rental license holders no incentive to sell their properties and no incentive to run a positive short-term rental. He encouraged additional enforcement of existing regulations. Em Myler, Neighborhood Development Liaison, read a comment from Randy Sladek in opposition to the proposed Land Use Code change stating there are many benefits provided by STR’s to Fort Collins residents. Staff Response Beals stated the staff provided number of complaints does seem to be conservative and staff will do some research to see if there were complaints received that were not properly routed and counted in the total. He noted City Council will also have a public hearing on this Code change, which is currently scheduled for First Reading on June 17th. Commission Questions Commissioner Shepard requested input from staff on how City departments coordinate with each other and Police Services. Beals replied that Land Use Code changes involve discussions with multiple City departments and public outreach. He stated there was a balance with all input received when the initial STR regulations were put into effect in 2017 which involved ensuring STR’s were allowed while also limiting impacts on residential neighborhoods. He noted that when rules need to be enforced, the Zoning Department coordinates with Police Services and Code Compliance. He also noted that noise complaints often occur after hours and are therefore handled by Police Services. Commissioner Shepard asked if there is a check done on citations during the annual non-primary STR license renewal process. Beals replied in the affirmative and stated those factors play into whether a license is renewed; however, there is no ‘three strikes and you’re out’ policy. Additionally, he noted there is an opportunity to appeal any license revocation to an appointee from the City Manager’s Office. Chair Sass asked if there is any data around the economic impact of this decision or the 2017 decision to allow STR’s. Beals replied he does not have that information readily available nor did staff do an analysis specifically of Old Town North economic impacts. He stated staff was looking more at the real intent for STR regulations to protect residential neighborhoods. Chair Sass asked if there is a way for complaints to be tracked outside of Police Services calls. Beals replied that the hope is for complaints to be registered through Access Fort Collins which would route them to appropriate departments. Chair Sass asked if the license renewal process includes review of Access Fort Collins complaints. Beals replied in the affirmative. Chair Sass asked if any STR license has not been renewed based on Access Fort Collins complaint data. Beals replied he was unsure. Commissioner Shepard noted Code Compliance is part of the Neighborhood Services Department and asked if those staff members work at night. Beals replied they are not on call but may have some extended hours when trying to address specific situations, mostly having to do with parking at CSU events. Commissioner Shepard noted Police Services considers these complaints to be non-emergencies; therefore, officers may not respond immediately. Beals concurred and stated most calls are received through the non-emergency line. Ginny Sawyer, Project and Policy Manager, clarified complaints are tracked; however, licenses cannot be revoked or not renewed unless it can be proven that the issue occurred through verification of Code Compliance or Police Services. Chair Sass asked if there is a means to verify the validity of a complaint. Beals replied that Police Services could respond; however, it may be hours after the initial complaint, or a garbage issue could be resolved by the time Code Compliance or a Zoning Inspector is able to respond. Vice Chair Connelly asked what kind of criteria is used when deciding whether to not renew a license or to revoke a license. Beals replied that the decision is based on whether the STR is out of compliance with the applicable standards and based on looking at validated complaints. Commissioner Bruxvoort asked about some of the thought process or deliberations that led to the staff recommendation. Beals replied that staff recognized this is a residential neighborhood and the STR license regulations that were put in place were meant to protect residential neighborhoods. He noted that Old Town North was initially, and still is, zoned for non-residential uses; however, most of it has built out as residential. Additionally, he noted this is the one of the only neighborhoods that allows for single- family residential uses and non-primary STR’s. He stated the original purpose of the STR regulations was not to allow for a single-family residential neighborhood to also have non-primary STR uses given the impacts to the neighborhood. Additionally, he noted the proposed change does allow for members of the public to make their comments to the Commission and Council. Commissioner York asked if there are other options that could achieve the same objective besides making this particular change. Beals replied this would be the best option; however, there may be other options outside the City’s purview. He noted the City does not have the capacity to monitor neighborhoods 24/7 to ensure STR’s are operating as they should be. Chair Sass asked if a cap on the number of STR’s in Old Town North was considered. Beals replied that it could be an option, but staff wanted to bring forth the conversation to the decision makers. He stated the proposed option would keep new licenses from being issued and additional alternatives can then be considered. Chair Sass asked how many lots are left in the neighborhood. Beals replied he was unsure of that number. Commissioner Shepard stated there are many vacant lots platted for future duplexes. Sawyer noted that when the regulations were first developed, caps on STR’s and the number owned were considered; however, those all presented their own challenges in long-term implementation. Commissioner Shepard asked if an applicant for a building permit can apply for a non-primary short-term rental license. Beals replied that one can only apply for the license after a certificate of occupancy is issued. Commissioner York asked if the neighborhood still meets the objectives of the current zoning. Frickey discussed the purpose statement for the zone district in the Land Use Code and noted the zone district was created in conjunction with the North College Corridor Plan. He stated the intent behind it was to create a district that provided a transition between the highway commercial orientation of College Avenue to the residential areas to the east by providing a mix of residential and commercial opportunities, which is why it was a zone district that allowed hotels and therefore non-primary STR’s. However, the way the district has developed has been primarily all residential which is why this issue has come up. (**Secretary’s Note: The Commission took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.) Commission Deliberation Commissioner Shepard noted there is no level of service to enforce on this issue. He stated the issue has brought up the fact that there is a gap in the community that is leaving many parties unsatisfied. Commissioner York stated he does not see the interactions that happen with STR’s as being significantly different than those that might occur next to a park or apartments. He noted there are issues with traffic, trash, noise, and parties in every neighborhood and stated he is looking at it more in terms of what options the City has for moving forward to achieving an objective. He stated that if the area was built out in a way that no longer meets what was envisioned for the zoning criteria, then perhaps the solution is having a different zoning designation on the property rather than trying to change what is allowed in the current zone. Commissioner Connelly stated it is unfortunate there is such a high density of STR’s in this neighborhood, and he is sensitive to the issues that come with that. However, it is clear that STR’s provide value to the community and there is obviously a market for owning them and renting them. He stated the people who have made investments in these properties deserve to have rules that do not change in the middle of the game as they have been acting in compliance with the zoning and the Code. Commissioner Bruxvoort noted the rules changed in 2017 as well and stated this is a circumstance where all evidence is not weighed in one direction. Commissioner Shepard stated some of the speakers mentioned a lack of collaboration and a rushed process. However, he noted there was a diverse group of staff members who started discussing STR’s beginning in 2015 and there was a great deal of city-wide collaboration. He noted there were approximately six Council work sessions on the topic and the city was a 4-3 Council vote away from not allowing any STR’s in the city at all. He noted no one ever expected there to be 68 out of 189 STR’s in one neighborhood that probably should have been zoned LMN. Commissioner Shepard stated the neighborhood is being severely impacted, though he applauded the economic vitality of the real estate community which recognized the need for STR’s. He stated he does not believe rezoning is the answer but supported the staff recommendation for the text amendment. He noted the existing STR’s will be legacy, and the neighborhood does not need any additional STR’s given the impacts. He reiterated the City does not have the capacity or mechanisms to address the existing problems. Chair Sass asked Commissioner Shepard how situations should be addressed wherein a property vacillates between a primary and non-primary STR. Councilmember Shepard replied that might be a policy discussion for Council as property rights are a consideration. He stated none of the existing non- primary STR’s would go away unless a more effective citation system is developed which will take more staff time and resources. He stated he would likely take a conservative approach and not allow a 30-day grace period for a transfer of title. Commissioner Shepard noted the speakers who opposed this change called for additional enforcement, which is not available. He suggested the cost of an effective enforcement system could be spread out over the non-primary STR’s and use license renewal fees to cover a response team. He noted there is clearly a demand for STR’s and commented on the fact that one entity owns 15 units and another entity owns 12, which is clearly an impact on the neighborhood feel. He reiterated he understands the real estate economic phenomenon that is driving the demand, but stated the impact does not seem to be fairly distributed throughout the community. Chair York noted this change would apply to all CCN zoned property. Beals concurred but noted there are currently no STR licenses in the other CCN zoned section, though there would still be the ability to place a hotel in that section. Commissioner York stated he believes the proposal is the wrong solution for the problem and a better option would be to rezone the neighborhood in question to a more appropriate zone district. Chair Sass noted the neighborhood has yet to be built out and expressed concern about having set out the rules and now changing them. Commissioner Shepard stated that his perspective is that creating a livable neighborhood in the city trumps the economic benefit that comes from the non-primary STR’s. He stated the density of STR’s in Old Town North was never envisioned. Commissioner York disagreed and reiterated living next to STR’s is akin to living near a city park. Commissioner Shepard stated the non-primary short-term rental system is hosted by national platforms and draws people in on a party basis. Chair Sass asked when the first houses were built in the neighborhood. Commissioner Shepard replied it started then sat vacant because of an economic downturn after which it went into receivership and new investors were found. Commissioner York stated property records show many of the initial transfers happened between 2012 and 2018. Commissioner Bruxvoort stated there are compelling reasons for both sides of the situation, both in terms of the unfairness in changing the ground rules for people who have made investments under those ground rules and for the residents of the neighborhood who are being impacted. He stated the more compelling argument from his perspective relates to this being a residential neighborhood with a disparate concentration of non-primary STR’s and therefore a disparate concentration of negative impacts. He stated he would support the staff recommendation. Chair Sass noted there was a great deal of input from various parties when the 2017 regulations were put into place and stated he is having difficulty recommending a change in such a short amount of time. He stated making this change would be a disservice to a fairly important group of constituents. Commissioner Shepard noted the legacy provision will allow existing non-primary STR’s to remain. Chair Sass stated there needs to be strong guidelines around that and enforcement. Commissioner Shepard acknowledged the demand; however, he stated he does not believe City Council will dedicate the resources needed to provide enough enforcement. He asked about the one-time annual registration fee and sales tax license for a non-primary STR. Beals replied that the initial license is $150, and renewals are $100. Commissioner Shepard noted Basalt charges $2,000 annually. Commissioner York suggested increasing the fees could be another tool that could be used so as not to impact other areas with the zone district amendment. Commissioner Shepard asked Beals if he could pass along to Council that at least one member of the Planning and Zoning Commission thinks that is a shockingly low price given the issues that need to be addressed in the neighborhoods. Beals replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Shepard noted the number of STR’s in Old Town North could increase with no stop if something is not done. He added that there must be a commonsense cap to preserve the lifestyle of the neighborhood which is facing issues unlike any other neighborhood in the city. He stated preserving the existing non-primary STR’s is an eloquent solution. Chair Sass asked Commissioner Shepard if he is amicable to the recommendation to include addressing the property owner who bought property under the existing Code but has yet to complete construction. Commissioner Shepard replied he is sensitive to that family and suggested the Zoning Department could take the issue to the Building Review Board for an appeal. Chair Sass noted there are neighborhoods with populations of all types of demographics and rental types and expressed concern with doing Code text modifications when it comes to light that a demographic that is not liked has formed within a neighborhood within the Code regulations. Commissioner Shepard stated that is how the ‘You Plus Two’ ordinance came to be strengthened: both in terms of Code modifications and the hiring of an enforcement officer. Beals concurred that there were Code changes and additional resources placed on that effort and noted ‘You Plus Two’ enforcement was done for mid- and long-term renters. Commissioner Shepard made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bruxvoort, that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the proposed Land Use Code change to remove non-primary short-term rentals as a use in the Community Commercial North College zone district based on the staff report and the materials presented at the work session and this hearing and the Commission discussion. He further stated that the testimony tonight indicates that the impacts on this one particular neighborhood are significant and at a scale not seen anywhere else in the city, and that calls for the negative externalities of non-primary short- term rentals to be addressed. Yeas: Shepard, Bruxvoort, and Sass. Nays: York and Connelly. THE MOTION CARRIED. 4. SWC DRAKE COLLEGE - ODP – ODP250002 DESCRIPTION: This is a request for an Overall Development Plan for the properties located at 2601 S College Avenue, including parcels 9726100016, 9726114001, 9726100023, 9726120001, 9726120002, 9726127003 infrastructure. This project is in the General Commercial (CG) Zone District and is subject to a Planning and Zoning Commission Review. STAFF: Kai Kleer, Sr Planner PROPERTY OWNER: KRF Drake 1509 York Street Suite 201 Denver, CO 80206 APPLICANT: Norris Design 244 N College Ave Suite #165 Fort Collins, CO 80521 Staff Overview Kai Kleer, Senior Planner, stated this item is the Overall Development Plan (ODP) for the southwest corner of Drake and College and it would establish the framework for development on the former Spradley Barr Mazda site and the Sherwin Williams building. He stated the site is a bit over 6 acres and is located within the General Commercial and TOD Overlay Districts. He stated an ODP sets parameters for a phased project and this ODP includes guidance from the Midtown Plan, City Plan, and the Active Modes Plan for items such as transportation and drainage improvements and land use. Kleer provided an aerial view and photos of the property and discussed the surrounding properties. He provided information regarding the guidance provided in the Midtown Plan and Midtown in Motion Plan. He stated the vision for the area places an emphasis on multi-modal improvements along the corridor. Additionally, Kleer noted City Plan identifies this area and a few others as high-priority areas for redevelopment with higher densities and an emphasis on connectivity to high-frequency transit service. Kleer discussed the neighborhood input received regarding potential future land uses, noting there has been a substantial amount of concern about traffic impacts and the need for multi-modal infrastructure and intersection improvements. Em Myler, Neighborhood Development Liaison, read three public comments into the record that were not part of the Commission’s packet. One supported housing development in the area with adequate parking and fewer auto-centric uses, one supporting housing also with adequate parking, and one suggesting the area be a sculpture park and open space. Applicant Presentation Ryan McBreen, Norris Design, stated the ODP consists of two plan areas with a north/south access road from Drake Road to Thunderbird Drive and an access road out to College Avenue. He noted the plan also includes minimum street sections for the access roads. He stated the property is underutilized and this ODP will provide the framework for future development, though no uses are proposed at this time. Commissioner Bruxvoort asked about the right-of-way dedication around the property perimeter. McBreen replied there is 7/10 of an acre being dedicated which includes frontage along McClelland, Thunderbird, College, and Drake. Staff Analysis Kleer reviewed the compliance requirements for ODP standards, three of which are not applicable to this ODP evaluation. He noted the specific uses have yet to be determined; however, the applicant has stated it will pursue any uses that are allowed in the GC zone district and TOD overlay zone at the time of development which provides for future adaptability for the ODP should any of the GC standards change as part of the commercial corridor Land Use Code work that is being done now. Kleer noted one of the important considerations for the Commission will be the cross-section of McClelland Drive in the Midtown Plan which calls for a 15-foot parkway and 15-foot walkway. He stated staff worked with the applicant and it appears the 10-foot walkway and 10-foot parkway is likely the most feasible continuous walkway cross-section that can be achieved throughout the corridor. Kleer noted the ODP identifies which improvements are necessary per the traffic impact study, including a left-hand turn lane, a right-hand deceleration lane going east bound on Drake Road, level of service improvements for pedestrian connectivity around the perimeter of the site, and frontage improvements along College Avenue. Additionally, Kleer noted the ODP contains a drainage master plan for the site. Kleer stated staff finds overall compliance with all relevant ODP standards and recommends approval of the plan. Commission Questions Commissioner Bruxvoort asked about the 10% design along College Avenue. Kleer replied work was done with consultants during the study of the corridor to develop enough design showing general concepts of implementing the vision of the Midtown Plan for the College Corridor. McBreen stated it is essentially a conceptual design without the final engineering components. Chair Sass asked if the frontage road that starts to the south of the property is going to continue to the north. Steve Gilchrist, Traffic Engineer, replied that the frontage road will dead end into the east/west access road, though there will be bike and pedestrian connectivity to the frontage road. Commissioner Shepard asked if the expectation is for multiple end users or a single development. Kleer replied the expectation is for multiple end users and conceptual review applications have been submitted for a bank, gas station, and multi-family development on the western portion. He stated the developers who are shepherding this application through the development review process originally looked to develop the multi-family portion; however, the market is currently not favorable for multi-family development. Commissioner Shepard asked if this would be the right stage to consider a unified, cohesive design theme, use of common exterior materials, or commonality in the landscape concept or other design elements. Kleer replied that those factors could be considered at this stage. He noted that the Land Use Code requires cohesiveness in multiple building developments under the same development. However, when they develop separately, there is more room for being more individualistic in design. He noted there are compatibility requirements; however, staff cannot require the level of sameness that could be envisioned with an overall development plan. Public Participation Greg Golz, 2632 Killdeer Drive, stated a bank or gas station use would be counterproductive to future City goals including climate neutrality plans. He stated places such as natural areas cannot be preserved without adding housing somewhere. He suggested encouraging first floor commercial uses with dense housing on floors above. Applicant Response Logan Heath stated no uses have been finalized, and they are not opposed to housing. Kleer noted the site is an Urban Renewal Authority plan area which aims to help achieve the visions in the Midtown Plan, which does include the densification of the corridor. Additionally, the URA will be able to partner with developers to help achieve those visions. Commission Questions/Deliberation Chair Sass asked about the status of the City’s transportation corridor requirements for or limits on auto- centric businesses. Clay Frickey, Planning Manager, replied the ODP would permit whatever uses are permitted in the General Commercial zone district at the time of project development plan submittal. Kleer concurred and stated Council recently had a work session on the transit corridor and generally seemed to agree with potentially restricting some of those uses within the corridor itself. He noted those ideas are being circulated around the business community to determine the right approach to balance how the corridor evolves over time. Chair Sass questioned whether there is any reason to worry about setting ODP guidelines when there is a potential shift in restrictions with the forthcoming Land Use Code commercial corridor updates. Commissioner Shepard commended the completeness of the packet, information provided, presentations, and work session information. He stated this seems like a fairly standard ODP given the fact that it is really an overall redevelopment plan. He stated the extent of improvements is surprising given the site is in the middle of town and concurred with the staff recommendation of approval. Chair Sass concurred and commented on the traffic issues along Drake Road. Commissioner Shepard noted optimization of signal time was discussed as being the only available solution at the work session, which is not surprising given the location. Commissioner York made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bruxvoort, that the Planning Zoning Commission approve the Southwest Corner of Drake and College Overall Development Plan ODP250002 finding that the overall development plan complies with all applicable Land Use Code requirements. This decision is based on the agenda materials, the information presented during the work session and this hearing, and the Commission discussion. The Commission adopts the information, analysis, findings of fact, and conclusions regarding this ODP contained in the hearing staff report. Yeas: Bruxvoort, Connelly, Shepard, York, and Sass. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. 5. WATER EFFICIENCY PLAN UPDATE This is a request for Recommendation to City Council for adoption of the updated Water Efficiency Plan (WEP). The Water Conservation Division, in partnership with other One Water Utilities teams and City departments, has updated the WEP, which is a State-required plan for the Fort Collins One Water Utilities service area. The updated WEP sets two new goals, and a variety of strategies intended to reduce risk and impact of water shortages by (1) lowering treated water use across the Utility service area and (2) building landscape resilience on City-owned properties. This update incorporated extensive community engagement, analysis of historical and projected future water use and efficiency savings under a range of climate and growth predictions, and alignment with City efforts including Our Climate Future. STAFF: Alice Conovitz, Water Conservation Specialist Staff Presentation Alice Conovitz, Water Conservation Specialist, provided an overview of the updated Water Efficiency Plan (WEP), long-term goals for water efficiency in the community, and strategies to meet those goals by 2040. She stated staff is seeking a recommendation to Council to adopt the updated Water Efficiency Plan, which is currently out for public comment, input from Boards and Commissions, and a review from the Colorado Water Conservation Board. Conovitz stated the WEP focuses on the Fort Collins Utilities water service area, which covers about 80% of the population and about 60% of the land area of the city. She noted the Plan is required by the State but is also an important tool as a guide for long-term water use and efficiency. She noted the last Plan was from 2015, and at that time a goal was set to lower demand to 130 gallons per capita per day by 2030. She stated progress has been made toward that goal, though the only year it was reached was the very wet year of 2023. Conovitz stated the goals and strategies for this update focused on minimizing the risk of water shortage and using conservation and efficiency as one way to do that. She noted growth and the warming climate drive demand, which in turn drives more risk for water shortage. She stated the updated WEP provides two goals that replace the existing goal. The first is a 4% annual reduction in treated water demand by 2040 to reduce the risk of shortages, which includes three targets: to lower the annual treated water demand by 320 million gallons below projected by 2040, double the volume of savings from efficiency strategies by 2040, and lower treated water use at City properties by 5 million gallons by 2040. The second goal is to improve water efficiency and build resilience on City-owned landscapes to benefit the community and the environment, which includes a target of implementing at least seven projects by 2040. Conovitz outlined the proposed strategies that will be used to help achieve the goals, including behavioral, economic, infrastructure, and regulatory strategies. She stated the strategies were prioritized based on water savings potential, cost, feasibility, equitable outcomes, and acceptance. She stated public input shows that people like incentives but are open to thoughtful regulation and noted conservation program savings are considerably cheaper than solutions such as acquiring more water rights. Conovitz noted staff is planning to take the final version of the WEP before Council in September for adoption. Commission Questions Commissioner Shepard noted a building permit requires a water supply requirement in addition to a tap fee and noted if the water supply requirement is based on the number of bedrooms and amount and type of outdoor landscaping. He asked if a price reduction would be offered on the water supply requirement to a developer who has a raw water or gray water system. Conovitz replied that capability does not exist currently as the City is not set up to be able to fully vet the longevity of a well for example. Mariel Miller, Water Conservation Manager, stated those incentives are not currently built in, but a broader look at opportunities for incentives to reduce the water supply requirement in exchange for less water demand on a property is included as a strategy in the WEP. Chair Sass commented on the large number of various plans in the City. Commissioner Shepard asked if peer cities have been examined regarding this Plan. Conovitz replied in the affirmative and noted peer water providers in Fort Collins have also been consulted. Commission Deliberation Commissioner York noted the Plan is required and stated the only consideration he may add is a more aggressive approach. Commissioner Shepard commended the level of detail in the presentation. Chair Sass suggested possibly including some references regarding alignment with Our Climate Future. Conovitz stated there are references to alignment with Our Climate Future and other plans across the City in various places throughout the WEP. Public Participation None. Commissioner York made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Shepard, that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that City Council adopt the proposed updated Water Efficiency Plan because the Plan meets the needs of the City and the State requirements as mentioned during the hearing. This decision is based on the agenda materials, the information presented during the work session and this hearing, and the Commission discussion. Yeas: Connelly, York, Bruxvoort, Shepard, and Sass. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. OTHER BUSINESS None. ADJOURNMENT a.Chair Sass moved to adjourn the P&Z Commission hearing. The meeting was adjourned at 11:22 PM. Minutes respectfully submitted by Krista Kidwell Minutes approved by the Chair and a vote of the Board/Commission on 07/17/25.