Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 02/21/2019Jeff Hansen, Chair City Council Chambers Christine Pardee, Vice Chair City Hall West Michael Hobbs 300 Laporte Avenue Per Hogestad Fort Collins, Colorado Ruth Rollins Jeffrey Schneider 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 February 21, 2019 Chair Hansen called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Roll Call: Hansen, Hobbs, Hogestad, Rollins, Whitley Absent: Schneider, Pardee Staff Present: Everette, Yatabe, Tatman-Burruss, Leeson, Van Zee, Mounce, Gloss and Gerber Chair Hansen reported that the Montava special hearing scheduled for March 7th is postponed to an undetermined date. Chair Hansen 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. Agenda Review Planning and Zoning Board Minutes Planning & Zoning Board February 21, 2019 Page 2 of 7 Development Review Manager Everette 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 spoke of the finalization of a municipal civil case. This case involved a development proposal for student housing, south of Creekside park. He and others wanted a trail from Creekside to the Max station. He feels that it is required by the land use code. He states he is going to appeal. Consent Agenda: 1. Draft Minutes from January 17, 2019, P&Z Hearing 3. Land Use Code PUD Regulations Amendment Member Rollins recused herself from this item. Public Input on Consent Agenda: None noted Chair Hansen did a final review of the items that are on consent and reiterated that those items will not have a separate presentation unless pulled from the consent agenda. Member Hobbs made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approve the Consent agenda for the draft minutes for the January 2019, Planning and Zoning Board hearing and the land use code PUD regulations amendment as originally advertised. Member Whitley seconded the motion. Vote: 4:0 Discussion Agenda: 4. Appeal of 1032 W. Prospect Road Extra Occupancy – BDR180033 Project Description: Appeal of the approval for extra occupancy in a single-family dwelling located in a High- Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood. Recommendation: Approval Secretary Gerber reported that there were no citizen emails/letters received and that there was a supplemental staff report, and memorandum submitted by Tom Leeson and Shawna VanZee. Member Hogestad recused himself from this item stating he is within the notification area. Staff and Applicant Presentations CDNS Director Leeson and Associate City Planner VanZee gave a brief verbal visual overview of this project. Appellant Cassie Ewan provided a brief presentation. Council Member Jerry Horak provided an insight into Terry Usery’s frustration and that he is not present to fight the current rules as they make sense. Terry’s frustration is regarding the potential non-compliance use of the property. Council Member Horak feels that it is not what is looked at currently but rather what should be looked at. He feels that City Council should investigate some of the code requirements. Public Input (3 minutes per person) Planning & Zoning Board February 21, 2019 Page 3 of 7 None reported Cassie Ewan provided a rebuttal to Council Member Horak’s presentation. It is her belief that the property was in proper zoning, HMN and that the bedrooms do meet all safety requirements. Staff Response CDNS Director Leeson provided further process information, stating that a permit inspection is required to complete the process. Planning Director Leeson confirmed to Chair Hansen that this was standard for any extra occupancy application. Member Hobbs questioned Mrs. Ewan, asking what compelled her to come forward. She did not realize that the property was not legal and due to a complaint received for violating the U+2 ordinance. Member Rollins questioned the trash cans and how the tenants would conceal them moving forward. Mrs. Ewan responded they would wheel it into the garage. Member Hobbs questioned the proximity of the driveway to the road and whether there have been any accidents. Mrs. Ewan responded that there have not been any accidents involving the tenants that she knows of. Board Questions / Deliberation Chair Hansen asked staff how long the U+2 has been in place. CDNS Director Leeson responded he was unsure of the actual time period but that it has been at least 50 years. Member Whitley asked CDNS Director Leeson when Prospect was widened and when the land was taken from the property. CDNS Director Leeson did not know. Mrs. Ewan responded she too did not know the exact date but that it was around 25 years ago. She stated that her parents had originally purchased the property as a rental property. Member Whitley questioned how many people the home was rented to at that time and if Mrs. Ewan had any other rental properties in town and if they were student rentals. Mrs. Ewan did not know how many at the time and yes to student rental properties. Member Whitley asked Attorney Yatabe how far he could push the questioning in relation to knowing the law because she owns multiple rental properties. Attorney Yatabe responded that we presume that people are aware of the law. How it relates to this particular property, we must look at the relevant information, which we have. Member Hobbs feels that the property has passed the test for extra occupancy. He will be supporting the original decision and not the appeal. Member Whitley asked Member Hobbs if this were a new proposal and not a conversion, would the traffic make any difference. Member Hobbs stated he would not feel any different. Member Rollins spoke about the traffic and how close the driveway is to the road. She does not believe that many people with high occupancy homes had a clue that they had to go through the process at least not until about 10 years ago. She will be supporting the original ruling. Chair Hansen will be supporting the original ruling. Member Hobbs asked Attorney Yatabe what the motion needed to be, to approve the original BDR or a motion to uphold or deny the appeal. Attorney Yatabe responded that it is both and that they are making the decision provided at both the work session and this hearing. Member Hobbs made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approve the BDR180033, 1032 W. Prospect Rd. Extra Occupancy request and that in doing so we are upholding the original decision made by the Planning Director and denying the appeal that has been presented to us tonight and that this approval is based upon the agenda materials, the information and materials presented during the work session, this hearing, the Board discussion and appellants discussion on this item with the following Planning & Zoning Board February 21, 2019 Page 4 of 7 findings; that the BDR complies with all applicable land use code requirements as stated in the staff report prepared for this hearing and contained in the agenda materials and the information analysis, findings of fact and conclusions contained in the staff reporting included in the agenda materials for this hearing are adopted by this board. Member Rollins seconded. Vote: 4:0. 2. City Council Appeals Code Amendments Project Description: The purpose of this item is for Planning & Zoning Board to provide a recommendation to City Council regarding updates and clarifications to the appeal rules and procedures in the City Code (Sections 2-46 to 2-55). Recommendation: Approval Secretary Gerber reported that Eric Sutherland submitted an email stating he does not agree with the process of the Council or Board and code updates will not fix the issues. Kathy Dubiel, Paul Patterson, Rory Schmidt and Eric Tamme submitted two letters requesting the Board delay their recommendations on this item, but still proceed with discussion. This will give citizens time to hear the item and provide written response. Liz Derbyshire requests that the board delay making recommendation to Council until the March hearing to give citizens time to study the proposal. Staff and Applicant Presentations City Clerk, Coldiron, gave a brief verbal visual overview of this item. Public Input (3 minutes per person) Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Current Blvd., spoke of the process flow and how the deliberative bodies put a focus on the conflicts of the terms of the provisions of the land use code. He feels it is difficult for those entering for the first time. He urges the Board to review the grand plan a bit more. Paul Patterson, 2936 Eindborough Dr., would like a continuance to get more citizen comment. Rick Hoffman, 1804 Wallenberg Dr., is concerned with changes tipping the scale favoring developers at the expense of the neighborhoods and citizens. He is concerned with combining appeals. He feels the real effort should be short stopping appeals to the City Council to being with and doing it at the P&Z level. Kathryn Dubiel, 2936 Eindborough Dr., feels that the radical changes look deleterious to her rights as a citizen. The P&Z Board should weigh in before going to City Council. She does not feel that the practice of combining appeals needs to be codified. Due process right should be observed if you are an appellant. Staff Response City Clerk Coldiron responded that they have been working on the change over the past 8 months. City Clerk Coldiron appreciates the comment regarding improvements on our part does not mean improvements for the residents. City Clerk Coldiron mentioned the April elections and asked that the Board push this further past the election time period to facilitate proper outreach. Board Questions / Deliberation Member Whitley asked City Clerk Coldiron to pull the timeline and wanted confirmation on the number of days, 20 or 28. City Clerk Coldiron responded 28. Member Hobbs asked if there was further opportunity after the initial filing date. City Clerk Coldiron deferred to Attorney Yatabe for clarification. Attorney Yatabe clarified that the new evidence requirement states that it must be submitted at the time of notice of appeal and that there are exceptions. Planning & Zoning Board February 21, 2019 Page 5 of 7 Member Hogestad asked City Clerk Coldiron if Council had the opportunity to consolidate appeals even if they are not similar. City Clerk Coldiron responded that if they were very different, we would work with the City Attorney’s office, but would present as separate items. Member Hogestad wanted to know if the City Attorney’s office would recommend not consolidating or if it was at their discretion. Attorney Yatabe gave an overview of current state and clarified wording. Member Rollins wanted to know if there was public outreach conducted prior to this hearing. City Clerk Coldiron responded no. Member Hansen explained that there should be discussion on. Member Hansen commented that the general mood is that this should be continued, and that discussion should be had regarding why and what goal or strategies should be implemented. Member Hobbs sought clarification as to whether the Board should discuss the code changes before making a motion to continue or not. Member Hansen would like a feel from the Board if the general notion is to continue to help him decide how to proceed. Member Whitley would like to continue this item as he would like to hear public comment. Member Rollins feels it would be useful for City staff if the Board has comments on certain sections, to hear those comments now. Chair Hansen commented that if the general sense is that this item will be continued, he would like to give specific comments as to what is in the proposed code as they see it now and what we have heard from public comment. Leading up to a motion to continue if there is enough information to provide suggestions as part of an approval to move forward or to deny and have a more in-depth deliberation and discussion. Member Hogestad feels that this should be continued as his concern is that there has not been enough public outreach and input. He wanted to know what kind of outreach and how it would be implemented. City Clerk Coldiron responded that it would be neighborhood meetings through notification. Member Whitley asked about the outreach schedule. City Clerk Coldiron responded that they could get to neighborhood meetings the latter part of April. Member Hobbs is in favor of continuance. His concerns lie in the areas of definitions excluding lease holders from the process and the fact that we would require all new evidence to be submitted at 14 days. For simple appeals this may be possible, for others it may not allow a person or group to put the evidence together in that timeframe. He would like staff to explore expanding. Member Rollins wanted to know if it would be difficult to search back a few years on anyone that has pursued an appeal and that you also notify them in the instance they are not in the neighborhood. She is also interested in input from individuals regarding consolidation of appeals. She appreciates all the work put in so far by staff. Chair Hansen does not feel encouraging more public input at P&Z hearings is the place for it. He feels that using neighborhood meetings for public input has not worked as hoped. He would like the process to be less bumpy, and that it would be beneficial for those that have appealed their projects also be contacted and involved when an appeal comes forward. Adjustments to the period for new evidence should be made to avoid an unnecessary information dump. 14 days is too short, but longer than that is a long time for an applicant to wait, maybe there is an interim step. Member Hobbs made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board to recommend to City Council regarding the appeals code amendments that were presented here tonight to a future date to be worked out by staff. Member Whitley seconded. Vote: 5:0. 5. City Plan Recommendation Planning & Zoning Board February 21, 2019 Page 6 of 7 Project Description: This is a request for the Planning and Zoning Board to forward a recommendation to City Council for adoption of the updates to City Plan, the City’s comprehensive and transportation master plans, and the Transit Master Plan, a new modal plan for transit developed concurrently with City Plan. Recommendation: Approval Secretary Gerber reported that there were no citizen emails or letters received and that there was a revised Attachment 2, Drat City Plan document (replaced in online packet). Staff and Applicant Presentations Planning Manager Gloss and Planner Mounce gave a brief verbal overview of this project. Public Input (3 minutes per person) Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Current Blvd., feels that it is an excellent, heads in the cloud, City plan. What makes the difference in outcomes is the policies, laws and where the money is getting spent. In these areas, he feels the City Plan is shallow and thin. The City needs to be and take a practical approach, have those discussion. Staff Response Chair Hansen thanked Mr. Sutherland. Planning Manager Gloss appreciates Mr. Sutherlands comments and concurs that the plan is very aspirational, but that the update is much more pragmatic with specific action items throughout the plan that are plausible. Transit will have a significant cost and at some point, the public will have to make that decision. Board Questions / Deliberation Chair Hansen wanted to know if there was going to be staff that will keep a high-altitude view of how they are fitting in the whole City plan. Planning Manager Gloss commented that there are a lot of layers to that starting with the creation of the Design Manuel and updates to the land use code. The process is collaborative and will not go away making coming to agreement a challenge. Member Hobbs wanted to know in terms of codes changes that will be coming with the new City Plan, if there will be support. Planning Manager Gloss confirmed. Member Hobbs supports and appreciates the support and vision documents. Member Whitley thanked the planning staff for the long hours spent on the plan. Chair Hansen also thanked staff and their foresight that went into it. He wanted to know about what future flexibility was in place, as 20 years is a long time. Planning Manager Gloss commented that they have tried to be forward thinking and tie in all aspects that they can to this point. Member Rollins thanked the team. She feels that it was extremely well done. Member Hobbs commented that this presentation is a review for the Board and wants to make sure the those watching knew how many hours planning staff has spent with the Planning and Zoning Board and how impressed the Board is with staff. Member Rollins made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board recommend to City Council the adoption of the City Plan Comprehensive Transportation Master Plans. This recommendation is based on the agenda materials, the information and materials presented during numerous work sessions, this hearing and the board discussion on this item. Member Whitley seconded. Vote: 5:0. Other Business