Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/17/2017 - Planning And Zoning Board - Agenda - Regular MeetingPlanning and Zoning Board Page 1 August 17, 2017 Jeffrey Schneider, Chair City Council Chambers Jeff Hansen, Vice Chair City Hall West Jennifer Carpenter 300 Laporte Avenue Emily Heinz Fort Collins, Colorado Michael Hobbs Ruth Rollins Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 & Channel 881 William Whitley on the Comcast cable system 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 17, 2017 6:00 PM • ROLL CALL • AGENDA REVIEW • CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Individuals may comment on items not specifically scheduled on the hearing agenda, as follows: • Those who wish to speak are asked to sign in at the podium. • The presiding officer will determine and announce the length of time allowed for each speaker. • Each speaker should state their name and address and keep their comments to the allotted time. • Any written materials should be provided to the Secretary for record-keeping purposes. • A timer will beep once and the time light will turn to yellow to indicate that 30 seconds of speaking time remain and will beep again and turn red when a speaker’s time to speak has ended. • CONSENT AGENDA The Consent Agenda is intended to allow the Planning and Zoning Board to quickly resolve items that are non-controversial. Staff recommends approval of the Consent Agenda. Anyone may request that an item on this agenda be “pulled” for consideration within the Discussion Agenda, which will provide a full presentation of the item being considered. Items remaining on the Consent Agenda will be approved by the Planning and Zoning Board with one vote. The Consent Agenda generally consists of Board Minutes for approval, items with no perceived controversy, and routine administrative actions. Planning and Zoning Board Hearing Agenda Planning and Zoning Board Page 2 August 17, 2017 1. Draft July 20, 2017, P&Z Board Minutes The purpose of this item is to approve the draft minutes for the July 20, 2017, Planning and Zoning Board hearing. 2. Off-Site Construction Staging Land Use Code Revision PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a Recommendation to City Council regarding revisions to the Land Use Code concerning Off-site Construction Staging. APPLICANT: City of Fort Collins • DISCUSSION AGENDA 3. Land Use Code Revisions – Short-Term Rentals PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a Recommendation to City Council regarding various revisions, and one new provision, to the Land Use Code regarding Short-Term Rentals. The affected sections are Section 3.2.2(K)(1)(k) – Parking; Section 3.8.34 – Supplemental Regulations for Short-Term Rentals; and to Section 5.1.2 - Definitions. APPLICANT: City of Fort Collins • OTHER BUSINESS • ADJOURNMENT Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 1 STAFF REPORT August 17, 2017 Planning and Zoning Board PROJECT NAME DRAFT JULY 20, 2017, P&Z BOARD MINUTES STAFF Cindy Cosmas, Administrative Assistant EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve the draft minutes of the July 20, 2017, Planning and Zoning Board hearing. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft July 20, 2017, Minutes (DOC) Jeff Schneider, Chair City Council Chambers Jeff Hansen, Vice Chair City Hall West Jennifer Carpenter 300 Laporte Avenue Emily Heinz Fort Collins, Colorado Michael Hobbs Ruth Rollins Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 & William Whitley Channel 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 July 20, 2017 Member Schneider called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Roll Call: Hansen, Heinz, Hobbs, Rollins, Schneider, and Whitley Absent: Carpenter Staff Present: Gloss, Yatabe, Wray, Frickey, Overton, Kleer, Everette, Simpkins, Hahn, Uhlman, Andrews, Langenberger, Tatman-Burruss, Hendrick, and Cosmas Agenda Review Chair Schneider provided background on the board’s role and what the audience could expect as to the order of business. He described the following procedures: • While the City staff provides comprehensive information about each project under consideration, citizen input is valued and appreciated. • The Board is here to listen to citizen comments. Each citizen may address the Board once for each item. • Decisions on development projects are based on judgment of compliance or non-compliance with city Land Use Code. • Should a citizen wish to address the Board on items other than what is on the agenda, time will be allowed for that as well. • This is a legal hearing, and the Chair will moderate for the usual civility and fairness to ensure that everyone who wishes to speak can be heard. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes Planning & Zoning Board July 20, 2017 Page 2 Planning Director Gloss reviewed the items on the Consent and Discussion agendas, stating that all items will be heard as originally advertised. Public Input on Items Not on the Hearing Agenda: Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, discussed his perception of the planning department and their development review procedures and court proceedings, saying there are systemic issues related to non- conformance to the Land Use Code (LUC) that should be addressed. Consent Agenda: 1. Draft Minutes from June 15, 2017, P&Z Hearing 2. Interstate Land Holdings Annexation 3. Newton First and Second Annexation and Zoning 4. 112 W. Magnolia – Wells Fargo Parking Lot 5. Interim Sign Code Updates Public Input on Consent Agenda: Chair Schneider requested that Staff provide a process review for the P&Z Board at an upcoming work session. He also had a clarifying question about the Crowne at Old Town North project that was heard in June; Planning Director Gloss stated that this project was appealed, so City Council will make the final determination on this project. Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the Consent agenda for the July 20, 2017, Planning and Zoning Board hearing as originally advertised, including the Draft Minutes from June 15, 2017, P&Z Hearing, the Interstate Land Holdings Annexation, the Newton First and Second Annexation and Zoning, the 112 W. Magnolia – Wells Fargo Parking Lot, and the Interim Sign Code Updates. Member Heinz seconded the motion. Vote: 6:0. Discussion Agenda: 6. Timbervine Second Filing Minor Amendment 7. Lakeview on the Rise - PDP #170014 Project: Timbervine Second Filing Minor Amendment Project Description: This is a request for a Minor Amendment to vacate the access easement and remove the associated path in a portion of Tract H. A 10-foot-wide blanket utility easement and access easement is currently recorded on Tract H, between lots 8 and 9, Block 7. A 5-foot-wide pedestrian path is shown in this area with understory planting on either side of the walk, as part of the approved Timbervine Second Filing. The path terminates at the intersection of Trappist and Altbier Street, both 20- foot private drives. Recommendation: Denial Planning & Zoning Board July 20, 2017 Page 3 Secretary Cosmas reported that an anonymous email was received from a citizen who is in favor of removing the fence and installing a public sidewalk for better access. In addition, a series of emails were received from Landon Hoover, President of Hartford Homes, all in support of removing the sidewalk (includes 14 residents, the HOA Master Assn Board, FR Development, Hartford Homes, and TimberVine Holdings, LLC). Staff and Applicant Presentations Senior Planner Wray gave a brief overview of the project, including a pictorial representation of the layout of the sidewalk networks, streets, and the connecting neighborhoods. Landon Hoover, with Hartford Homes, provided a more in-depth presentation, explaining the original intent of the connectivity of the pathways and the current safety concerns, including family usage and pedestrian access points that are inadequate for the area. He discussed similar conditions on the other side of the park, saying there has been overwhelming support from the community, all in support of removing that sidewalk. He asked the Board to consider the real risks and aesthetics of the walkway and to weigh that against the burden of additional travel distance to users. Member Whitley asked if an alley is not built, who owns the land; Mr. Hoover stated that the land is currently owned by the HOA, who has granted an easement to the homeowner who fenced and landscaped the area. Chair Schneider clarified that the land is still deeded to the HOA, meaning the easement transfers that right to use that space. Member Hobbs asked if the easement is a boundary between two landowners; Mr. Hoover responded that the property to the north has a use easement from the southern property to use the 5’ of their lot as a sideyard. Member Rollins asked if there is a condition for a 10-foot-high fence along the path; Senior Planner Wray responded that this is part of the access easement with no additional fence. Member Hobbs asked the history of the planning process regarding the connectivity for this neighborhood; Senior Planner Wray explained how it evolved, adding how the connections were meant to provide an alternative to the off-street connections. The process includes several phases and amendments to the original plan. Public Input (3 minutes per person) Devin Ferrey, 125 S. Howes, representing FR Development, stated that he has received overwhelming feedback from homeowners agreeing that the pathway didn’t make sense and is not aesthetically pleasing. Ray Henry, 386 Trappist Street, owns the lot in question. He stated that he fenced the area with the proper HOA approval, adding that the proposed path funnels people into an alley street that is unlit with close proximity to alleys and driveways. He explained the unsafe conditions, saying that he would like to have the pathway removed. Board Questions and Deliberation Member Rollins asked about the width of the sidewalks; Senior Planner Wray responded that this is a 5- foot sidewalk. He added that the access easement is 10 feet wide, and the pathway would be 5 feet wide. Nicole Hahn, Traffic Engineer, stated that, in general, crosswalks are not installed on local roads, adding that this alley would probably be used more often in the daytime; therefore, she doesn’t recognize this as a major safety issue. Member Whitley asked if lighting is required for a walkway; Senior Planner Wray confirmed that lighting was not included in the plans. Vice Chair Hansen asked about the nature of the path in Block 6; Mr. Hoover responded that these are “front-loaded” homes that are not intended to create street-like frontage. This scenario also applies to Lots 6-10. Member Rollins asked why there was no connectivity required across the park; Senior Planner Wray could not recall the reason for this scenario during project review, adding that there is always an option of walking around on the street. Planning & Zoning Board July 20, 2017 Page 4 Member Hobbs stated that, while the scale is important to consider, the detour is not significant if the trail is removed and shouldn’t really create a connectivity issue. Member Heinz said she thinks that this concept is not functioning well, so perhaps it isn’t necessary. Member Whitley is concerned with an unlit alleyway at night, but he is moved by the number of homeowners in favor of not having an alley. Vice Chair Hansen stated that he is not that concerned with the lack of connectivity, considering there is adequate access along sidewalks on Blocks 6 and 7. Member Rollins stated that, considering this situation from a future standpoint, she is in support of staff findings. Vice Chair Hansen agreed that there are no obvious safety concerns, and Member Heinz also stated that this is the only path that intersects the various housing types. Chair Schneider is also in agreement; while he doesn’t see specific safety concerns, he understands the rationale to remove the sidewalk. Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the Timbervine Second Filing Minor Amendment MA170054, based upon compliance with the LUC 3.2.2(C)(6) (direct onsite access to pedestrian, bicycle and building destinations) and the findings of fact contained in the staff report that is included in the agenda materials for this hearing and the board discussion on this item. Member Heinz seconded. Vote: 5:1, with Member Rollins dissenting. Project: Lakeview on the Rise - PDP #170014 Project Description: This is a request for a Project Development Plan to construct 180 multi-family units in a mix of one, two, and three bedroom configurations in 17 buildings. The proposed development will include 338 parking spaces. The development will also feature a community building, pool, and playground. This site is located in the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) zone district. Recommendation: Approval Secretary Cosmas reported that 8 citizen emails have been received with concerns related to traffic safety, ecological impacts, density, zoning, and land use code. In addition, a Land Bank Property Disposition Study was also submitted. Another email was received containing 71 signatures of 65 different addresses in Pelican Ridge Subdivision (Pelican Ridge) who oppose the extension of Stoney Brook Rd. to the proposed Lakeview on the Rise (Lakeview) multi-family housing project; they are not opposed to the Lakeview project itself. They also submitted a map of applicable routes to illustrate their position. Finally, we received an email from the PEDCOR neighborhood that is opposed to the project and includes neighborhood meeting notes from March 24, 2016. Staff and Applicant Presentations Planner Frickey gave a brief overview of the affordable project proposal, explaining the “affordable” qualities and criteria. The Board took a short recess at 6:57pm to allow some audio difficulties to be resolved. They reconvened at 7:10pm. Ryan Rogers, developer for PEDCOR Investments, gave an overview of the project, including the history of his company as a developer of affordable, multi-family housing developments. He explained the difference between this particular type of affordable housing versus the low-income type. He showed pictures of similar development projects, and he discussed how the project will be financed (4% tax credits and tax-exempt bonds). Because 100% of the units are “affordable housing”, there are no competitive state funds or federal tax credits available, and the required Area Median Income (AMI) will not be as low as some similar developments. He stated that this project be a huge benefit to the Planning & Zoning Board July 20, 2017 Page 5 community and will fill a real need in Fort Collins. PEDCOR is partnering with Housing Catalyst, and the project will be financed thru HUD221 D4 loans, which have stringent requirements. Based on the normal 98% occupancy rate, studies have proven a huge market need for this type of housing, including the need for housing developments offering larger, family-friendly units (3-bedroom units). Terence Hoaglund, Vignette Studios, discussed in detail the requested modifications and the related justifications. He described the impacts to surrounding neighborhoods and communities, reiterating that the project meets the development standards and City codes. He reviewed the road connections, parking options, storage unit and garage space availability, bedroom configurations, bicycle parking availability, and traffic impacts. He also explained the reason for each modification request: • Mod 1 - Streets, streetscapes, alleys and easements; • Mod 2 - Variation among buildings; • Mod 3 - Mix of housing types; and • Mod 4 - Maximum floor area. He concluded by saying that granting these modifications will not be detrimental to the public good and will promote the general purpose of the code standards in a manner equal to or better than a compliant plan. Staff Analysis and Board Questions Planner Frickey gave a detailed presentation of this project, focusing on each modification and its compliance with standards, adding that this affordable housing project meets the definition of the LUC and the City’s goal of 6% of overall housing stock being offered as “affordable”. He stated that this project also meets the City requirement of having smaller homes, saying that using a strict interpretation of the standard could be detrimental to the City goals. He recommended approval of the project. Member Hobbs asked for clarification on when this site and surrounding neighborhoods were annexed into Fort Collins; Planner Frickey stated that this parcel was annexed in 1987, and the surrounding neighborhoods were also annexed sometime in the 1980s. Member Heinz asked if all units are “affordable”; Planner Frickey clarified that all units are “affordable” and the project would be deed- restricted for at least 20 years, depending on the financing. Member Rollins asked if this project exceeds the density limit for this zoning; Planner Frickey stated that this project properly meets the density requirements. Vice Chair Hansen asked whether modification 2 allows for building style and/or color variation; Planner Frickey responded that there is a separate LUC that governs color requirements (this standard deals only with the building footprint). Public Input (3 minutes per person) Christine Lesperance, 212 Gary Drive, is concerned with the current noise levels, saying that she has had noise testing performed and the current decibels, including traffic and housing, are above legal limits. She suggested that perhaps a barrier or additional traffic lights could be installed. Linda Silvy, 359 Stoney Brook Rd, is opposed to this project, saying she supports affordable housing but doesn’t think this particular location makes sense. She cited the 2015 Land Bank Disposition study, which scored this site poorly in terms of zoning, transit, potential saturation, proximity to schools, and proximity to grocery stores. She also feels this site would not be livable, which would not contribute to quality of life for its residents. Planning & Zoning Board July 20, 2017 Page 6 Dennis Guenther, 216 Pitner Drive, has a concern with the potential traffic issues concerning Debra Drive, especially during peak usage times. He suggested that a stop light be installed along with widening Trilby. Amie Schissler, 552 Coyote Trail Drive, supports affordable housing but thinks this particular area is already saturated, adding that she doesn’t think a third-party developer should be able to develop this project here. She also has concerns about the current state of congestion in terms of safety. Edward Wranosky, 439 Bow Creek Lane, has a concern with the current saturation related to affordable housing. He also discussed the public transportation options and bicycle safety. Marilyn Anderson, 1026 Indian Trail Drive, has a concern with the higher levels of traffic and diminishing options for parking, also noting future plans to build a thoroughfare. Aubrey Otzenberger, 427 San Juan Drive, asked the Board not to make Stoney Brook Road a “through” street, saying she is afraid of the traffic impact on children in the neighborhood. She is also concerned about the impacts on the wetland habitat on the lake. Alison Hade, 2812 Dundee Court, is in favor of this project, saying that she appreciates the other PEDCOR projects that she has been involved with and how difficult it can be to find affordable housing. Danielle Vernelson, 421 Stoney Brook Road, is concerned with the saturation of low-income housing with respect to maintenance of property values and traffic impacts. She is interested in influencing the other similar projects that are slated for development in this area, specifically requesting that houses be built. Andy Smith, 2012 Sheffield Court, has been involved in affordable housing within Fort Collins and is in support of this project, especially in light of the housing crisis in the community. He supports the proposal, saying it will provide adequate parking, has lower density than is normally allowed, and the 3- bedroom configuration will create more family community. Scott Berg, 241 San Juan Drive, asked when Stoney Brook Road will be extended as a thoroughfare and what the process will be for questioning that extension. Applicant and Staff Response Planner Frickey addressed some citizen questions, explaining the Land Bank process and its original intent. This parcel does not meet all of the Land Bank criteria, so the City decided not to develop it; however, this parcel allows housing per the current zoning, and the fact that a developer is interested in building affordable housing is a bonus. Planner Frickey clarified that the City can no longer apply the Land Bank criteria to this development. He also discussed the street connection, which will result in more transportation options. Once the connected neighborhoods begin to develop, the City will provide public notice of this so that residents can meet and discuss the street connectivity. Eco District has not submitted a pre-application with the City of Fort Collins, so no analysis can be provided at this time. Nicole Hahn, Traffic Operations, spoke about the connectivity concerns, saying that there will be opportunities to discuss this with future developments. Regarding the traffic congestion, the City of Fort Collins has obtained a grant to improve that intersection, which will include more turn lanes. She stated that Traffic Operations will analyze the condition of streets to the north when future neighborhood connections are proposed. She described the bus routes to the adjacent elementary school, saying that there is a bus stop approximately ¼ mile away, so there is no current need to add another one. City policy is to add bus stops as needed. Planning & Zoning Board July 20, 2017 Page 7 Rebecca Everette, Environmental Planner, addressed the concerns about the lake and wetlands impacts, saying that a standard buffer of 50-100 feet would be applied, depending on the size. Since this is considered to be a concentration area, a buffer of 300 feet would be applied. An Ecological Character Study was performed to determine the proper buffer to adequately protect these resources. Other enhancements have been added to provide additional protection, such as an open rail fence. Regarding saturation of multiple affordable housing in this area, Mr. Rogers stated that there are several affordable housing developments and land parcels owned by the Land Bank that haven’t been developed. He reminded the Board that the affordability of this project is different, because the rents target a higher income base rather than the lower incomes of many affordable housing projects. Planner Frickey clarified that mobile homes are not part of the affordable stock for meeting City goals. Planning Director Gloss also addressed the noise ordinance and restrictions, saying that Police Services is responsible for noise enforcement under the Nuisance Ordinance. Board Questions and Deliberation Member Hobbs asked Ms. Hahn why there was no level of service analysis for Stoney Brook or Debra Drive; Ms. Hahn confirmed that traffic distribution would not be applied at this time because those roads are not part of the neighborhood connections. When the affected parcels are considered for development, those streets and other infrastructure will be analyzed at that time. The developers will pay their proportional share of the costs to develop the intersection at College and Trilby. Member Heinz asked whether there could be additional curb cuts on College Avenue for better neighborhood access; Ms. Hahn responded that the access spacing requirements won’t allow more curb cuts, and there would also have to be coordination with the State to obtain additional access points on College Avenue. Ms. Hahn clarified that, based on the proximity to Trilby and if traffic continues to grow, there would eventually be a right-in, right-out access point. She stated that Debra Drive is not a candidate for signalization. Member Rollins asked about traffic merging onto College Avenue and whether that curvature will reduce the speeds through the area; Ms. Hahn feels that the curve will be helpful in calming traffic speeds. Member Heinz asked if Stoney Brook could connect directly to College Avenue. Sheri Langenberger, Engineering Development Review, stated that College Avenue is still a State highway and there is an access control plan in place with access points already located along the roadway; there is a ¾ access point at this location, so trying to move it south would create a conflict and other limitations. Member Hobbs asked about the size of Stoney Brook and Debra Lane (both designated as local streets) and whether either is undersized for proposed future volume. Ms. Langenberger explained that, when the driveways are factored in to the street flow, streets may not be adequate to handle traffic flow and parking. Both Stoney Brook and Debra Lane were originally built to standards at that time. Vice Chair Hansen asked how the 24-foot drive aisle relates to a typical street cross-section; Ms. Langenberger responded that this dimension is more generous than normal, providing a wider drive aisle. Member Rollins asked about the modification that includes the turn-around and why a cul-de-sac was not considered; Planner Frickey responded that this proposal functions like a turn-around and won’t infringe on the natural habitat buffer zone. Vice Chair Hansen asked whether elevation variations were considered in trying to keep the buildings from being identical; Rick Shively, with PEDCOR, offered to make that modification, but he questioned whether architectural variations are required if the building footprints are different. Vice Chair Hansen restated his point, saying that he thinks some architectural features could be modified to achieve more variation, since massing and scale is almost identical on all buildings. Member Heinz asked if varying the roofline to achieve more variation/articulation would be possible; Mr. Shively explained that, because there are variations in building types, the necessary variations in roof lines and massing exist. Chair Schneider asked how these architectural features will be guaranteed to be included in the final plan; Planner Frickey suggested that a condition of approval for Planning & Zoning Board July 20, 2017 Page 8 those, and he reiterated that the items in question were already presented in the staff packet. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe suggested that the Board impose conditions on the modifications if needed. Member Heinz asked the significance of the building numbers; Mr. Rogers responded that this is the most efficient way to label the units (based on bedroom categories of units). She also asked if this particular site is not considered ideal for affordable housing; Planner Frickey responded that that was only in reference to the Land Bank properties. Mr. Rogers also added that the saturation of affordable housing in this area is still within the acceptable levels as enforced by HUD. Planner Frickey showed the Board the exact location of the Land Bank properties in proximity to the proposed project. Member Hobbs asked about the land use of the surrounding parcels; Planner Frickey described them saying the parcels to the north and east are both residential and are considered “legacy farm lots”. Member Hobbs also asked about anticipating downstream compatibility of future projects; Assistant City Attorney Yatabe counseled the Board to consider only this project, rather than trying to anticipate future events. Member Rollins asked if modification 2 is necessary, based on the fact that the buildings will have differences in appearance; Planner Frickey responded that this would be a Board decision. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe reviewed the relevant portion of standard 3.8.30(F)(2) (variation among buildings) to remind the Board of the main points requiring similarity. Vice Chair Hansen explained what the modification is requesting, while it doesn’t strictly meet the letter of the code; Planner Frickey explained the differences between buildings 12B and 12C: roof types and elevations, adding that he expected the differences to be minimal in keeping with the spirit of maintaining affordability. Mr. Shively stated that he is willing to modify the units to ensure more variability. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe advised the Board that that either a condition could be added or this project could be continued to a later date; City staff would then follow up with the developer to ensure any conditions are accomplished. Member Whitley stated that he understands the importance of the intent to keep such housing affordable; overall, he supports this project. Member Hobbs has a concern about traffic impacts, and he empathizes with citizens; he is in favor of requiring a cul-de-sac, so he does not support the first modification. In addition, Member Rollins does not support modification 1; she would prefer that a cul-de-sac is developed. She would like to see a condition put on modification 2, and she supports modification 3 and 4. Member Heinz supports the PDP overall, although she would like to have a condition on modification 2, and she supports 3 and 4. Vice Chair Hansen supports modification 1, modification 2 (with conditions), 3 and 4. Chair Schneider is also inclined toward requiring a cul-de-sac with consideration to emergency vehicles; he supports modification 2, 3, and 4. Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board deny modification 1 to Lakeview on the Rise PDP#170014 (concerning streets, streetscapes, alleys and easements), based upon the findings of fact contained in the staff report that is included in the agenda materials for this hearing and the board discussion on this item, because it does not promote the general purpose equally well or better than a plan without this modification, citing non- compliance with LUC provision 3.6.2(E) (requiring that a temporary turn-around is provided at the terminus of streets); the Board finds that granting this modification could be detrimental to the public good. Member Rollins seconded. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe suggested a friendly amendment to this motion: he added that this design could impair the intent of the LUC, that it would diverge in more than a nominal and inconsequential way, and that there are no physical constraints limiting the ability for that standard to be applied. Member Hobbs accepted this amendment to his original motion. Vote: 4:2, with Members Whitley and Hansen dissenting. Member Hansen made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve modification 2 of Lakeview on the Rise PDP#170014 (variation among buildings) to standard 3.8.30(F)(2), based upon the findings of fact contained in the staff report that is included in the agenda materials for this hearing and the board discussion on this item, on the condition that the applicant works with staff to develop unique character to the four buildings in question (6, 7, 8 and 9); this Planning & Zoning Board July 20, 2017 Page 9 modification complies with all applicable land use requirements as stated in the staff report regarding modifications of standard and their criteria. Member Hobbs seconded. Vote: 6:0. Member Heinz made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve modification 3 to Lakeview on the Rise PDP#170014 regarding standard 4.5(D)(2) (mix of housing types), based upon the findings of fact contained in the staff report that is included in the agenda materials for this hearing and the board discussion on this item, finding that the modification complies with all applicable land use requirements as stated in the staff report regarding modifications of standard and their criteria. Member Whitley seconded. Vote: 6:0. Member Heinz made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve modification 4 to Lakeview on the Rise PDP#170014 regarding standard 4.5(E)(4)(i) (maximum floor area), based upon the findings of fact contained in the staff report that is included in the agenda materials for this hearing and the board discussion on this item, finding that the modification complies with all applicable land use requirements as stated in the staff report regarding modifications of standard and their criteria. Member Hansen seconded. Vote: 6:0. Mr. Rogers agreed to the proposed conditions on the modifications. Member Heinz made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve Lakeview on the Rise PDP#170014, with the condition that the developer comply with all LUC requirements with the exception of section 3.6.2(E) (streetscapes, alleys, and easements), for which the condition of approval was imposed, and based upon the findings of fact contained in the staff report that is included in the agenda materials for this hearing and the board discussion on this item. Member Hobbs seconded. Vote: 6:0. Other Business Chair Schneider told the audience that the hearing will be posted online tomorrow, since there were some audio difficulties earlier in the hearing. Member Heinz asked for follow up comments on Mr. Sutherland’s comments about the bike parking discrepancy and the status of City Plan. Regarding Member Heinz’ request, Assistant City Attorney Yatabe stated that he would review Mr. Sutherland’s statements, since the related case is currently under appeal. Chair Schneider moved to adjourn the P&Z Board hearing. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00pm. Cameron Gloss, Planning Director Jeff Schneider, Chair Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 Page 1 STAFF REPORT August 17, 2017 Planning and Zoning Board PROJECT NAME OFF-SITE CONSTRUCTION STAGING LAND USE CODE REVISION STAFF Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning PROJECT INFORMATION DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a Recommendation to City Council regarding revisions to the Land Use Code concerning Off-site Construction Staging. APPLICANT: City of Fort Collins STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval. BACKGROUND Infill development is usually limited in space for construction activity. It is typical to see properties within the vicinity of infill development to be used for construction staging. Vacant lots are especially susceptible to this use and may be used for multiple development projects. The Land Use Code is silent on the ability to use property as a staging area for construction activity. This use has occurred in past, however its impacts are increasing as the amount of infill projects increase. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Proposed Solution: Establish Off-Site Construction Staging as a use in the Land Use Code permitted in all Zone districts through a License. Revision Highlights: Four sections of Land Use Code change: • Article 2 - Update public Notification section • Article 3 - Addition of new standards for the license • Article 4 - Include Off-site construction staging use to each Zone District • Article 5 - New definition for Off-site construction DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND REVISION Proposed Code Additions and Revisions: Article 2… 2.2.6(D)… Article 3… 3.8.35 – Off-Site Construction Staging (A) Off-site construction staging. Off-site construction staging shall be permitted in each zone district as listed in Article 4 and a parcel shall be issued a license of approval provided that the following conditions are met: (1) Submit for review and approval a Site/Grading Plan which shows the following: 1- Existing grade contours of the site and adjoining properties 2- Locations of different activities of the site 3- List of materials and equipment to be stored on the site, include the means and methods to safely store any hazardous material or dangerous equipment 4- Any proposed grading necessary to stabilize the site 5- Proposed erosion control measures to prevent wind and water erosion and tracking mud onto streets 6- Flood ways and flood plains 7- Natural habitat and facilities 8- Fences 9- Restrooms 10- Existing trees 11- Existing easements 12- Existing underground utilities 13- Other information necessary to describe the site 14- Traffic control plan reflecting means of ingress and egress to be used 15- Restoration or Final Site Condition plan (2) The location is within a quarter (.25) of a mile of the construction or development site. (3) The Director finds the request not to be detrimental to the public good with or without conditions to mitigation any adverse impacts. (B) The Off-site construction staging license mention in sec 3.8.35(A) shall expire after eighteen (18) months unless an extension is granted. 1. A six (6) month extension may be granted by the Director if he finds the extension request is not detrimental to the public good. Minimum Notice Radius Sign Size Off-site construction Staging 500 feet 12 square feet DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND REVISION 2. After 24 months the Director may extend the license up to an additional twelve (12) months if a neighborhood meeting in which the neighborhood is notified in compliance with sec 2.2.6(D) is conducted and the Director determines the extension is not detrimental to the public good and that the license conditions in 3.8.35(A)(1), including any conditions to mitigate adverse impacts, have been and continue to be maintained. (C) After expiration of the license at least four (4) consecutive months shall lapse before a new license is issued for the same parcel. (D) The Director may modify or revoke any off-site construction staging license issued by the City for any of the following: 1. After issuance of the license, the site and its operations are found to be out of compliance with the approved application, including any conditions to mitigate adverse impacts. 2. An adverse impact is identified not previously anticipated at the time the license was issued that cannot be adequately mitigated and is detrimental to the public good. The License holder shall be entitled to the administrative review of any such revocation under the provisions contained in Chapter 2, Article VI of the City Code. (E) Within fifteen (15) days after expiration of the license, the License holder must restore the site consistent with the approved Restoration or Final Site Condition Plan. Article 4… 4.1(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 5. Off-site construction staging 4.2(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 5. Off-site construction staging 4.3(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 4. Off-site construction staging 4.4(B)(1)(b) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 4. Off-site construction staging 4.5(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 4. Off-site construction staging 4.6(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND REVISION 4. Off-site construction staging 4.7(B)(1)(b) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 5. Off-site construction staging 4.8(B)(1)(d) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 5. Off-site construction staging 4.9(B)(1)(d) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 5. Off-site construction staging 4.10(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 3. Off-site construction staging 4.12(B)(1)… (c) Notwithstanding the other provisions contained in paragraphs (a) and (b) above, a property in the T District can be used for Off-site staging in compliance with Section 3.8.25 of this code. 4.13(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 4. Off-site construction staging 4.14(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 4. Off-site construction staging 4.16(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 2. Off-site construction staging 4.17(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 6. Off-site construction staging 4.18(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 6. Off-site construction staging 4.19(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 6. Off-site construction staging 4.20(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 4. Off-site construction staging DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND REVISION 4.21(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 2. Off-site construction staging 4.22(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 6. Off-site construction staging 4.23(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 6. Off-site construction staging 4.24(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 2. Off-site construction staging 4.26(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 6. Off-site construction staging 4.27(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 6. Off-site construction staging 4.28(B)(1)(a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses:… 6. Off-site construction staging Article 5 5.1.2 Definitions… Off-site construction staging shall mean the use of land or building or portion thereof for those activities commonly associated with the construction or development, when such activities are located on or in a separate land or building not located on or in the land or building being constructed or developed. Such activities included but are not limited to construction material and equipment storage, parking limited to those working on the construction or development, temporary restrooms and construction offices. Agenda Item 3 Item #3 Page 1 STAFF REPORT August 17, 2017 Planning and Zoning Board PROJECT NAME LAND USE CODE REVISIONS - SHORT-TERM RENTALS STAFF Ted Shepard, Chief Planner PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a Recommendation to City Council regarding various revisions, and one new provision, to the Land Use Code regarding Short- Term Rentals. The affected sections are Section 3.2.2(K)(1)(k) – Parking; Section 3.8.34 – Supplemental Regulations for Short-Term Rentals; and to Section 5.1.2 - Definitions. APPLICANT: City of Fort Collins RECOMMENDATION: Approval EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The primary purpose of these revisions is to extend the deadline, as codified in Ordinance 044, 2017 (effective on March 31, 2017), that established June 30, 2017 as the date by which existing Short Term Rentals, both Primary and Non-primary, in zone districts where such uses would become non- conforming, could apply for the Short Term Rental License and Sales and Lodging Tax Licenses to be grandfathered-in. As this deadline passed, City Council was contacted by a number of host providers who neglected to obtain the proper licenses in time. This grandfathering provision is common in cases where existing uses become non-conforming by passage of new Zoning regulations. The proposed revisions are accompanied by changes to Chapter 15 of the City Code which describes the licensing procedures and are attached for reference. Bottom line: the deadline is proposed to be extended to October 31, 2017. In addition, a new provision is recommended to allow an owner of a Primary Short Term Rental, who also owns the abutting property, to reclassify this abutting property from a Non-primary to a Primary. Agenda Item 3 Item #3 Page 2 Problem Statement: The City of Fort Collins passed and implemented a Short-Term Rental (STR) licensing program on March 21, 2017. These regulations were put into effect following a two-year process involving public engagement, six City Council work sessions, a Planning and Zoning Board recommendation and two City Council hearings. Since STR’s were up and running prior to the adoption of the new licensing program (March 31, 2017), the City contracted with Host Compliance, a vendor capable of scrubbing and analyzing over 20 on-line websites. This firm was able to capture details, including listing location and owner information, on approximately 75% of all listings. The result was a verifiable data base for a public notice regarding the new regulations. Based on the data gleaned from Host Compliance, the City issued its first notification letter in late April informing 299 STR operators of the following: • STR’s are now only permitted in certain zone districts; • Licenses are required to be obtained from the Finance Department; • STR’s in zone districts where not permitted could be grandfathered-in; • Legal and non-conforming STR’s must have been operational prior to March 31, 2017; • The deadline for all STR’s to obtain necessary licenses and for non-conforming STR’s to be grandfathered-in was June 30, 2017. Soon after the first notification mailing, however, staff and Council began to hear from numerous STR hosts who were unaware of the regulations and/or the STR license and the sales and lodging tax licenses. As a result, a number of providers missed the June 30, 2017 deadline. The bulk of these contacts fall into the following categories:  Those who have been operating STR’s long before March 31, 2017 and were completely unaware of the community’s regulatory conversation and outcomes until they received the notification letter.  Those who were operating prior to March 31, 2017 and who believed they were collecting City sales and lodging tax (due to language on the listing sites) but who did not have City licenses and were only paying State taxes. • Those who had started either purchasing or remodeling homes with the express intent of operating a STR without becoming aware of the on-going the regulatory conversation or the June 30, 2017 deadline and continued forward without obtaining the STR license and the sales and lodging tax licenses prior to the deadline. (Please note that a number of these cases involved residents completing separate dwelling units and duplex units in zones that do not allow this use. This is a separate issue unrelated to the STR license regulations.) In summary, a sufficient number of host providers came forward after the June 30, 2017 deadline seeking to obtain the necessary licenses in order to (1) be properly licensed in allowable zone districts and/or (2) be grandfathered-in, and properly licensed, as legal non-conforming uses. But since the deadlines were codified in Ordinance 044, 2017, there was no procedure by which to respond. Consequently, these parties were caught in a bind and would be forced to give up their STR or take the risk of operating illegally. Agenda Item 3 Item #3 Page 3 Proposed Solution Overview: A. Extending the Deadline to October 31, 2017 Staff recommends extending the deadline to October 31, 2017 but, as noted, only for those that were operational prior to March 31, 2017 and collecting back taxes on previous stays. This rental history must be documented. Requiring that the STR’s be operational prior to March 31, 2017 is consistent with the original intent of Ordinance 044, 2017 and prevents a rush of last minute filers. This option allows operators in those zone districts where they are now prohibited to apply for the necessary licenses and be grandfathered-in but without opening the program to new STR’s. B. The New Abutting Condition as a Primary Staff recommends that if two abutting lots are under single common ownership, then both lots may be eligible to be classified as a Short-Term Primary Rental. This recommendation was part of Staff’s original recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Board and City Council. It did not get codified in Ordinance 044, 2017 primarily due to omission, not for substantive reasons, as decision makers were focused on larger, controversial issues. Allowing the abutting lot (under single common ownership) to be considered a Primary is similar in scope to the existing allowance for one of the duplex units and carriage houses to also be Primary even though the owner does not reside in that particular unit. With the owner either on the premises (duplex and carriage house) or next door (abutting lot), issues related to compliance are as capable of being remedied as with other Primary operations. The abutting lot provision was included in the public outreach efforts that preceded recommendation and adoption of Ordinance 044, 2017. Proposed Code Revisions: See Attachments. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Land Use Code Revisions (DOCX) 2. Draft City Code Revisions (DOCX) DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY Attachment 1 Page 1 FORT COLLINS LAND USE CODE SHORT TERM RENTAL AMENDMENTS 3.2.2 - Access, Circulation and Parking . . . (K) Parking Lots - Required Number of Off-Street Spaces for Type of Use. . . . (k) Short term non-primary rentals and short term primary rentals: The minimum number of off- street parking spaces required are as follows: Number of Bedrooms Rented Number of Off-Street Parking Spaces 1—2 1 3—4 2 5—6 3 The number of additional off-street parking spaces required for more than six (6) bedrooms rented shall be calculated in the same manner used in the above chart (e.g. 7-8 bedrooms rented requires four (4) off-street parking spaces). Short term rentals licensed pursuant to the Code of the City of Fort Collins § 15-646 and for which the license application was submitted prior to JuneOctober 310, 2017, are exempt from compliance with these parking requirements so long as such license remains continuously valid. Subsequent licenses issued pursuant to § 15-646 shall comply with these parking requirements. . . . DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY Attachment 1 Page 2 3.8.34 - Short Term Rentals (A) Applicability. These standards apply to short term primary rentals and short term non-primary rentals. (B) Purpose. The purposes of these standards are to mitigate the impacts of short term rentals on the neighborhoods in which they are located, to maintain and enhance neighborhood livability, to ensure the health and safety of renters of short term rentals, and to ensure the compatibility of short term rentals with the allowed uses in the applicable zone districts. (C) Location. Subject to subsection (F) below, the allowable locations of short term primary and non- primary rentals are determined by the zone districts and their respective list of permitted uses as described in Article 4. (D) Off-street Parking. Refer to § 3.2.2(K)(1)(k) for minimum off-street parking space requirements. (E) Licensing. The licensing of short term rentals is governed by the Code of the City of Fort Collins Chapter 15, Article XVIII. No dwelling unit shall be used as a short term primary rental or short term non-primary rental unless a license is first obtained pursuant to Chapter 15, Article XVIII. (F) Nonconforming Use. A dwelling unit utilized as a short term primary or non-primary rental that is located in a zone district where such use is prohibited, and such short term rental was a lawfully established use as defined in (3) below prior to March 31, 2017, is considered a nonconforming use. Such nonconforming use shall correspond to the type of short term rental conducted, either primary or non-primary, prior to the above date. (1) In addition to complying with the nonconforming use regulations in Land Use Code Division 1.5, the owner of the dwelling unit must obtain a license pursuant to the Code of the City of Fort Collins § 15-646 and continuously maintain such license to maintain nonconforming use status. Failure to apply for such license by June October 310, 2017, shall be considered abandonment of the nonconforming use. Should such license be revoked, not be renewed, or lapse for any period of time, the nonconforming short term rental use shall be considered abandoned or otherwise terminated. (2) Should ownership of a dwelling unit owner issued a licensed pursuant to § 15-646 be transferred ownership of the dwelling unit, or should a dwelling unit renter issued a license pursuant to § 15-644 cease renting the dwelling unit, and such license was continuously valid until the transfer of ownership or end of the rental, the new owner or renter must comply with the following in order to continue the nonconforming use: (1) apply for a license pursuant to § 15-646 within thirty (30) days of the transfer of ownership, or if a renter, apply for a license within thirty (30) days of the last day of the rental by the previous renter who held the license; (2) comply with the parking requirements contained in § 3.2.2(K)(1)(k) of this Code; and (3) continuously maintain any license issued pursuant to § 15-646. Should any license issued to the new owner or renter be revoked, not be renewed, or lapse for any period of time, the nonconforming short term rental use shall be considered abandoned or otherwise terminated. (3) To be considered a lawful use, a dwelling unit must have, prior to March 31, 2017, been actually utilized as a short term primary or non-primary rental prior to March 31, 2017, and pursuant to valid sales and use and lodging tax licenses issued for such dwelling unit were obtained prior to October 31, 2017, in accordance with Chapter 25, Art. IV, of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY Attachment 1 Page 3 5.1.2 . . . Short term primary rental shall mean a dwelling unit that is a primary residence of which a portion is leased to one (1) party at a time for periods of less than thirty (30) consecutive days. The term party as used in this definition shall mean one (1) or more persons who as a single group rent a short term primary rental pursuant to a single reservation and payment. A carriage house that is not a primary residence is deemedeligible to be a short term primary rental if it is located on a lot containing a primary residence. A dwelling unit of a two-family dwelling that is not a primary residence is deemedeligible to be a short term primary rental if the connected dwelling unit is a primary residence and both dwelling units are located on the same lot. A dwelling unit located on a lot abutting another lot containing a dwelling unit that qualifies for licensing as a short term primary rental is itself eligible to be a short term primary rental so long as both dwelling units are owned by the same owner. The term short term primary rental shall not include the rental of a dwelling unit to the former owner immediately following the transfer of ownership of such dwelling unit and prior to the former owner vacating the dwelling unit. Short term primary rental is a distinct use from short term non-primary rental under the Land Use Code. . . . DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY Attachment 2 Page 1 CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ARTICLE XVIII. SHORT TERM RENTAL LICENSING AMENDMENTS . . . Sec. 15-641. - Definitions. . . . Abutting shall mean touching. An abutting condition shall not be affected by the parcelization or division of land that results in an incidental, nonbuildable, remnant lot, tract or parcel. . . . Short term primary rental shall mean a dwelling unit that is a primary residence of which a portion is leased to one (1) party at a time for periods of less than thirty (30) consecutive days. A carriage house, as defined in the Land Use Code, that is not a primary residence is deemedeligible to be a short term primary rental and may be licensed as a short term primary rental if it is located on a lot containing a primary residence. A dwelling unit of a two-family dwelling, as defined in the Land Use Code, that is not a primary residence is deemedeligible to be a short term primary rental and may be licensed as a short term primary rental if the connected dwelling unit is a primary residence and both dwelling units are located on the same lot. A dwelling unit located on a lot abutting another lot containing a dwelling unit that qualifies for licensing as a short term primary rental is itself eligible to be a short term primary rental and may be licensed as a short term primary rental so long as both dwelling units are owned by the same owner. The term short term primary rental shall not include the rental of a dwelling unit to the former owner immediately following the transfer of ownership of such dwelling unit and prior to the former owner vacating the dwelling unit. . . . Sec. 15-644. - Licensing requirements. (a) The following are the minimum requirements that must be satisfied by the applicant for the issuance of a short term primary rental license. (1) Subject to § 15-646, Tthe applicant must provide documentation satisfactory to the Financial Officer that the applicant is the owner of the dwelling unit and that the dwelling unit is his or her primary residence. (2) The applicant must have valid sales and use and lodging tax licenses issued pursuant to Chapter 25, Article IV, of the Code of the City of Fort Collins for the dwelling unit to be utilized as a short term primary rental. (3) The dwelling unit must comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws including, but not limited to, the Code of the City of Fort Collins and Land Use Code, and in particular, Land Use Code § 3.2.2(K)(1)(k) which sets forth applicable parking requirements. (4) The applicant shall certify that the dwelling unit proposed to be licensed as a short term rental complies with specific sanitation, mechanical, electrical, structural, and fire safety requirements in Chapter 5 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins and listed in administrative regulations adopted pursuant to § 15-651. The Director may inspect the dwelling unit proposed to be licensed for purposes of verifying compliance with such requirements and refusal by the applicant to allow such inspection shall be grounds for denial of the issuance of a license. (5) The applicant must provide proof of liability insurance sufficient to compensate renters for injuries that may be sustained in the dwelling unit proposed to be rented within the coverage limits established in administrative regulations adopted pursuant to § 15-651. DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY Attachment 2 Page 2 (6) No applicant shall be issued a license if marijuana is cultivated or processed, or marijuana products are processed or otherwise produced, in the dwelling unit proposed to be rented. (7) The applicant must identify one or more persons who will be available to respond within four (4) hours at all times during which the dwelling unit is rented to any issues raised by the renter or the City. Any such person must have access to the dwelling unit and be authorized to make decisions regarding the dwelling unit. (8) The dwelling unit must be located in a zone district that allows short term primary rentals as specified in the Land Use Code. Alternatively, the dwelling unit must satisfy the requirements contained in § 15-646 for short term primary rentals established in restricted zone districts prior to March 31, 2017. (9) The applicant must specify which portions of the dwelling unit will constitute the licensed premises available for use by renters. (b) The following are the minimum requirements that must be satisfied by the applicant for the issuance of a short term non-primary rental license. (1) Subject to § 15-646, Tthe applicant must provide documentation satisfactory to the Financial Officer that the applicant is the owner of the dwelling unit. (2) The applicant must have valid sales and use and lodging tax licenses issued pursuant to Chapter 25, Article IV, of the Code of the City of Fort Collins for the dwelling unit to be utilized as a short term non-primary rental. (3) The dwelling unit must comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws including, but not limited to, the Code of the City of Fort Collins and Land Use Code, and in particular, Land Use Code § 3.2.2(K)(1)(k) which sets forth applicable parking requirements. (4) The applicant shall certify that the dwelling unit proposed to be licensed as a short term rental complies with specific sanitation, mechanical, electrical, structural, and fire safety requirements in Chapter 5 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins and listed in administrative regulations adopted pursuant to § 15-651. The Director may inspect the dwelling unit proposed to be licensed for purposes of verifying compliance with such requirements and refusal by the applicant to allow such inspection shall be grounds for denial of the issuance of a license. (5) The applicant must provide proof of liability insurance sufficient to compensate renters for injuries that may be sustained in the dwelling unit proposed to be rented within the liability coverage limits established in administrative regulations adopted pursuant to § 15-651. (6) No applicant shall be issued a license if marijuana is cultivated or processed, or marijuana products are processed or otherwise produced, in the dwelling unit proposed to be rented. (7) The applicant must identify one or more persons who will be available to respond within four (4) hours at all times during which the dwelling unit is rented to any issues raised by the renter or the City. Any such person must have access to the dwelling unit and be authorized to make decisions regarding the dwelling unit. (8) The dwelling unit must be located in a zone district that allows short term non-primary rentals as specified in the Land Use Code. Alternatively, the dwelling unit must satisfy the requirements contained in § 15-646 for short term non-primary rentals established in restricted zone districts prior to March 31, 2017. Sec. 15-645. - Issuance of licenses. Upon compliance with the requirements of this Article, the Financial Officer shall issue a license to the applicant authorizing the short term rental of the licensed premises. The license issued shall allow only the short term primary rental or the short term non-primary rental of the licensed premises. Licenses DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY Attachment 2 Page 3 issued for short term primary rentals shall specify the areas of the dwelling unit that may be rented. Each license shall be applicable to a single dwelling unit and no license issued shall be transferable. A license shall terminate upon transfer of ownership of the licensed premises or in the case of a renter issued a license pursuant to § 15-646, upon the ending of the rental occupancy of the renter holding the license. Sec. 15-646. - Licensing of short term primary and non-primary rentals existing prior to Land Use Code restrictions. (a) A dwelling unit used as a short term primary or non-primary rental that is located in a zone district in which the Land Use Code prohibits such use is eligible for a license pursuant to this Article provided that prior to March 31, 2017, such dwelling unit was actually utilized as a short term primary or non- primary rental prior to March 31, 2017, and pursuant to valid sales and use and lodging tax licenses issued were obtained prior to October 31, 2017, for such dwelling unit in accordance with Chapter 25, Art. IV, of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. (b) In addition to satisfying (a) above, the applicant must satisfy the requirements set forth in § 15-644 in order to be eligible for a license. As an exception to §§ 644(a)(1) and 644(b)(1), the applicant for a license may be a person other than the owner of the dwelling unit provided written permission from the owner allowing such person to utilize the dwelling unit as a short term rental is provided to the City upon application. License applications submitted pursuant to this Section on or before JuneOctober 310, 2017, do not need to comply with the parking requirements in Land Use Code § 3.2.2(K)(1). (c) In order to be eligible for a license pursuant to this Section, subject to (e) below, the applicant must submit an application for a license pursuant to this Article on or before JuneOctober 310, 2017. No application submitted after JuneOctober 310, 2017, shall be eligible for a license pursuant to this Section unless submitted pursuant to (e) below. (d) Any license issued pursuant to this Section shall expire at such time that the ownership of the licensed premises changes or the renter holding the license ceases renting the dwelling unit. Should a license issued under this Section be revoked, not be renewed, or lapse for any period of time, the owner or renter shall no longer be eligible for a license for such dwelling unit pursuant to this Section. (e) Should a dwelling unit ownership of issued a dwelling unit licensed pursuant to § 15- 646 be transferred ownership of the dwelling unit, or should a dwelling unit renter issued a license pursuant to § 15-646 cease renting the dwelling unit, and such license was continuously valid until the transfer of ownership or end of the rental, the new owner or renter is eligible for a license identical in scope to the previously issued license provided: (1) the new owner applies for a license within thirty (30) days of the transfer of ownership or, if a renter, the license application is made within thirty (30) days of the last day of the rental by the previous renter who held the license; (2) the dwelling unit complies with the parking requirements in Land Use Code Section 3.2.2(K)(1)(k); and (3) any license issued pursuant to § 15-646 is continuously maintained. Should a license issued to the new owner or renter under this Section be revoked, not be renewed, or lapse for any period of time, the new owner or renter shall no longer be eligible for a license for such dwelling unit pursuant to this Section. . . .